HomeMy WebLinkAboutM100780October 7, 1980
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
SS.
COUNTY OF BUTTE )
S0_ The Board of Supervisors met at 9:00 a.m. pursuant to adjournment.
b Present: Supervisors Dolan, Wheeler, Winston and Vice Chairman Mosel~y..Clif
Nickelson, administrative officer; Dan Blackstock, county counsel; and
Clark A. Nelson, county clerk, by Cathy Pitts, assistant clerk to the Board.
Absent: Chairman Lemke.
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
Invocation by Clay Castleberry
1562 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Winston
and carried, the minutes of September 30, 1980 were approved as mailed.
1563 APPROVE ADMINISTRATION ITEMS
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, the following items were approved:
1. Approved the agreement with the University of California to
ermit placement of public health education intern trainees in the Health
epartment and the Personnel Director authorized to sign.
2. Waived the first ;resding~of ordinance to authorize amendment
f the county's retirement contract with the Public Employees` Retirement
ystem (PERS) to provide highest year computation for retirement.
3. Authorized acquisition of up to eleven compact and subcompact
ars that were approved in the budget on negotiated basis rather than through
he bid .process.
4. Authorized the purchase of a 1954 GMC Van Pelt 1,000 gallon
er minute pumper equipped with hose and radio for sale to the county for
1 from the Town of Paradise with the proposed assignment of the unit
eing to the Stirling City Volunteer Fire Department.
5. Approved the agreement with the Bidwell Nature Center in the
unt of $1,500 for construction, supplies, medicine, etc. for birds and
mals at the center that would contribute to the propagation and conservation
game within Butte County and the Chairman authorized to sign.
1564 OPT RESOLUTION 80-210 SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR WYANDOTTE AVENUE
SLAND ANNEXATION TO CITY OF OROVILLE
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
nd carried, Resolution 80-210 setting a public bearing date of November 18,
980 at 10:00 a.m. for consideration of Wyandotte Avenue island annexation
o City of Oroville was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
1565 OPT RESOLUTION 80-211 APPROVING ANNEXATION TO COUNTX SERVICE AREA 21
OAKRIDGE SEWER DISTRICT)
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
nd carried, Resolution 80-211 approving the annexation of the Skansen
ubdivision Unit ~~3 to County Service Area 21 (Oakridge Sewer District) was
dopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
1566 (AUTHORIZE RE VEST FOR PENALTY ABATEMENT
On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
and carried, the following requests for penalty abatement were authorized:
Page 284.
October 7, 1980
~'
_' ~ - . _,
October 7, 1980
80. _ 1. Belinda J. McAbee, AP 035-42-0-012-0 -
a
2. Bruce .john & Susan Lee Broderick, AP 061-31-0-031-0
3. Nile E. Parka and Wayne Mohle, AP 044-70-016-0 & AP 044-70-0-018-0
4. Edward A. Keith, AP 013-26-0-053-0
5. Donald A. and Diane M. Vasco, AP 012-03-5-004-0
6. Leland S. and Patricia A. Lancaster and Clinton D. Lancaster,
AP 044-68--0-056-0
1567 DENY RE VEST FOR PENALTY ABATEMENT
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, the following requests for penalty abatement were denied:
1. Sheppard Brothers, et al, AP 029-12-0-002-0
2. Carol A. Foster, AP 050-22-0-032-0
3. Roberta L. Carreau, AP 064-48-0-027-0
4. Atlen N. Allred, AP 055-35-0-019-0
5. Carol A. Foster, AP 050-07-0-045-0
'1568 APPROVE BUDGET TRANSFER
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
and carried, the following budget transfer was approved:
B-21 - Public Guardian. Transfers $200 from the reserve-: to
transpartation and travel in order to increase the travel account to
enable tfie Public Guardian to attend out-of-county conferences.
1569 APPROVE BUTTE COUNTY'S PARTICIPATION IN HOME OWNERSHIP AND HOME IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE ADffiNISTRATIVE OFFICER TO EXECUTE PROGRAM APPLICATIONS
AND AGREEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY (HCD
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, Butte County's participation in the home ownership and home
improvement program was approved and the Administrative Officer was authorized
to execute program applications and agreements on behalf of the county.
1570 APPROVE TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR'S ITEMS: ADOPT RESOLUTION 80-212
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
-and carried, the following items were approved:
1. Authorized the request for penalty relief for Chico Tractor,
Inc., Account X190-000002-O1.
2. Authorized the request for penalty relief for Kenneth F.
Rogers, AP 36-24-2-008-0.
3. Denied the claim for refund for Evelyn A. Hayes, AP 44-03-0-113-0.
4. Denied the claim for refund for The Lutheran Church, Missouri
Synod Foundation, AP 47-23-078-0.
5. Adopted Resolution 80-212 giving notice of intention to sell
34 parcels of land at various minimum bids in accordance with Revenue
and Taxation Code Section 3693 for tax deeded property.
Page 285.
Octibbex 7, 1980
80-1571
b
1572
1573
1574
October 7, 1980
DISCUSSION: SALEh: OF TAX DEEDED PROPERTY
Discussion of the method used for sale of tax deeded property held
at this time.
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated that state law
regulates the sale of tax deeded property and puts the county into the
real estate business for people wha have not paid their taxes. The
county holds the auction and the person can make a claim for excess
proceeds from that sale. There are companies going around and purchasing
the property that has been tax deeded and then coming in for the tax
excess proceeds.
Supervisor Winston stated that the property owner can redeem the
property until the hammer goes down for the auction.
Vice Chairman Moseley stated that the county goes to the trouble
to place this property at auction and are not reimbursed for the trouble.
She felt there should be a charge added for the county costs.
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, stated the requests for
excess proceeds come to the Board if there is only one claim. If there
is a claim by two or more people, the Superior Court makes the decision.
ACCEPT WORK ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION AT EAST AVENUE AND ESPLANADE,
PROJECT X656191-79-1
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, the work of Harold Smith Electric Construction was accepted
for the traffic signal modification at East Avenue and Esplanade Project
4656191-79-1; the Public Works Department was authorized to sign the notice
of completion and instructed to record said notice with the Recorder.
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
-and carried, Resolution 80-213 accepting the apportionment of federal
aid secondary funds, $423,871 and state highway matching funds, $100,000
to be added to the anticipated 1981-82 FAS and state revenue along with
the county's participating share for construction of the next Skyway
FAS project for 1980-81 was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
ADOPT RESOLUTION 80-213 ACCEPTING THE APPORTIONMENT OF FEDERAL AID SECONDARY'
FUNDS AND STATE HIGHWAY MATCHING FUNDS FOR 1980-81
Clay Castleberry,, public works director, stated that the next
two or three years would be spent on the finishing of the Skyway. There
will be $523,000 plus next year 's $523 ,000 in additional to additional
funds that will be used to take the Skyway to the Town of Paradise
limits.
DIRECTED COUNTY COUNSEL TO STOP PROSECUTION OF THE QUIET TITLE ACTION
FOR AP 3k-19-06
On motion of Supervisor Aolan, seconded by Supervisor Winston
and carried, County Counsel was directed to stop prosecution of the
quiet title action for AP 34-19-06 and to try to sell the property.
1575 REJECT CLAIM OF SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, ET AL
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Winston
and carried, the claim for Southern Pacific Transportation Company, et al
in the amount of $500,000 was rejected and referred to Counsel and Risk
Management Coordinator.
1576
CONSIDERATION OF ELECTING FINANCIAL CONSULTANT FOR THE CHICO AND GRIDLEY
LIBRARIES REFERRED TO AUDITOR FOR REPORT RACK ON OCTOBER 14, 1980
~' Consideration of selecting financial consultant for the Chico
and Gridley libraries held at this time.
Page 286.
October 7, 1980
October 7, 1980
80-
1577
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, set out the background of the
proposals. A proposal was received from Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc. He.
had been somewhat negative with regard to this proposal as it requires a
minimum $40,000 payment. There was a proposal received from Bank of America
which appears to have a $25,000 fee. A proposal was received from Stone and
Youngberg Municipal Financing Consultants, Inc. The county used this firm
for CSA 26. The fourth proposal is from Bartle Wells Associates, which
is in the same general area in terms of costs as the Stone and Youngberg
Municipal Financing Consultants, Inc.
Stone and Youngberg Municipal Financing Consultants, Inc. proposal
would be based upon a $2-1/2 million construction cost. The cost for their
services would be about $25,000. Bartle Wells Associates will be in excess
of that amount.
Supervisor Winston stated that he had had experience with Bartle
Wells Associates. They have been very satisfactory.
Mr. Blackstock felt both firms were competent.. _He was inclined
to suggest Stone and Youngberg Municipal Financing Consultants, Inc. only
because the county has used their services in the past. Bartle We11s
Associates proposal is that the fees commencing for all services will
be 120 days before continuing for up to 60 days following the sale of the
bonds. The county would have the use of their services for a limited amount
of time. The fee is $12,500 plus 1/4 of one percent of the total bond
issue, If the total bond were $2-1/2 million, the fee would be $6,200
and that would be a total of $18,700. There would probably be additional
oillings at the rate of $30 to $40 per hour needed in addition to the
above figures. He felt all the proposals were satisfactory. On the
face of the proposals Bartle Wells Associates is about $5,000 less than
the other firms. He could not tell the Board that Bartle Wells Associates
would be less because of the limited time frame for the services. Stone
and Youngberg Municipal Financing Consultants, Tnc, would be charging the
county at a rate of $50 per hour not to exceed $5,000, A fee would be
charged prior to the securities. There would be another charge of one
percent up to $1 million and 1/2 percent to $3 million. They will cost
a maximum of approximately $27,000.
The proposals were referred to the Auditor for a report back
on October 14, 1980.
DISCUSSION AND POLICY DIRECTION: CLAUDIA NORMANDIN - USE PERMIT FEES
Discussion of the letter from John W. Fry relative to the
Claudia Normandin use permit fees held at this time.
Supervisor Winston felt that Mr. Fry~s letter was right on point.
He felt a new project should have the fees charged.
Bettye Blair, planning director, felt that was correct. She
had sent the Board a memo. She recommended that any time there is an
appeal, there should be appeal fees charged. The rezone fee has a built
in mechanisim to cover tfie costs involved before the Board. The use
permits and variances do not.
Supervisor Dolan felt the Board should consider an appeal
fee. She was concerned if the Soard required a fee for the Claudia
Normandin use permit that it would be contrary to what Mr. Reeves was
told at the Board meeting. He had been told there would be no new fees.
Ms. Blair asked the Board if they intended for a new fee to be
charged.
Page 287.
October 7, 1980
80-
d;
1578
1579
_ _October 7, 1980
Supervisor Winston felt that appeals were the democratic process.
The people were entitled to the process. If a fee for appeals was established,
it might have an adverse effect on an individual that could not pay the
fee and the individual would be denied that appeal process. He was in favor
of imposing new fees when a project change takes place.
:Vice Chairman Moseley stated Mr. Reeves came before the Board
and there was a completely new project. When there is this type of
change, she felt there should be new fees.
Supervisor Winston felt the appeal procedure was established.
He felt it would be a matter of intrepretation of the existing ordinance
rather than a change. He stated the Planning Director should be directed
that when there is a completely new project substituted in lieu of the
one on the appeal, that new fees would be required.
Supervisor Dolan stated that the memo refers> to the fact that
use permits and variances are approved at the Planning Commission level.
If they are appealed to the Board there was recommended an additional
fee. She felt this was a good idea.
Vice,Charman°Moseley felt that if the project had not been
changed there should be no additional fees, but this project was completely
changed dnd is a new project, and therefore there should be fees charged.
Ms. Blair stated it was her understanding that in the event
an appeal comes to the Board then there is a modification, their office
will require new fees in .order to hear the matter at the Planning Commission
level,
Planning Director was instructed to obtain copies of the ordinances
of Glenn, Colusa and Plumas Counties relative to the charging of appeal
fees.
REPORT TO THE BOARD - BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - EIR AND PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM GRAZING AND OPEN LAND
TO AGRICULTURAL - RESIDENTIAL, PROPERTY LOCATED 200 TO 3,000 FEET EAST OF
HWX 32, APPROX. FOUR MILES SOUTH OF FOREST RANCH, IDENTIFIED AS AP 63-O1-101
& 102 FOREST RANCH - CONTINUED TO LATER IN THE MEETING
Report to the Board on the Butte County Board o£ Supervisors EIR
and Planning Commission's denial of General Plan amendment from grazing
and open land to agricultural - residential, property located 200 to
3,000 feet east of Highway 32, approximately four miles south of Forest
Ranch, identified as AP 63-01-101 and 102, Forest Ranch was held at this
time.
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background of the
report. This General Plan amendment refers to the James Parr and Robert
Terrill rezone appeal to be heard later in the meeting.
The report was continued to later in the meeting to be considered
at the time of the James Parr and Robert Terrill rezone hearing.
REPORT ON COSTS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVE
Jim Johansen, auditor, gave a report on the costs of the law
enforcement initiative at this time.
Supervisor Winston stated he had received a call from a gentleman
interested cYr the-initiative.The question asked by the gentleman was that
under Proposition 13 this initiative could conceivably increase the taxes
if the county were to maintain the level of services in other areas. He
wanted to know if this would tat~'a~two-thirds vote.
Page 288.
October 7, 1980
80-
a
October 7, 1980
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, stated the initiative would only
require a majority vote. This cannot be an ad valorm»~tax increase. If there
is going to be a tax election, it must be specified.
Mr. Johansen stated his office had prepared the projected annual
cost for Measure B on the ballot. The initiative would require the Board
to increase the number of law enforcement officers to the level of one
per one thousand population in the county. There would be an increase
in pay and benefits for most of the employees of the Sheriff's Department
and District Attorney's Office to a level of the average of the three most
highly paid departments in the county with a certain level of retirement
benefits. The estimated costs including the actuarial study that determined
the cost of the retirement as well as the legal determinations that will
have to be made on the drafters' intent. He had attempted to identify
subject to interpretation what the range of cost would be chosing the
highest and lowest assumption. They have determined from PERS that the
cost for benefits projected in the study would be $1,200,000 additional that
would be required according to the assumptions they have made. The worse
case that would occur would increase the benefits by $956,000 or decrease
them by $550,000. They made no attempt to calculate the related costs
to the other law enforcement and county programs that will be increased as
a result of the increased personnel in the Sheriff's Office. It was their
opinion that the annual cost would be approximately $4.4 million for the
initiative. They have assumed that the annual cost increase will be based
on the existing staff level and does not include the 27 additional deputies
that were tentatively approved by the Board. If the assumption is showing
the positions that had been provided then the figure would be down to
$3,400,000.
Mr. Johansen stated that the unencumbered reserve for the county
is $2,250,000. The jail bill was defeated. One of the more difficult
assumptions was what the definition of law enforcement officex was.
They used the definition of peace officer, which excludes jail personnel.
Exhibit B on the study shows additional staffing as 69 deputies. If
it were determined that the jail personnel was included there would only
be 41 staff persons needed. The figures in the report were based on the
average of the maximum salaries and not on the average of the average.
If they were dealing with the average of the average the salary estimate
would then be decreased by about $500,000. The estimates are based on
a population ratio of one to one thousand population throughout the
county. They did not estimate for the unincorporated area only.
Mr. Johansen set out the percentages at this time. The percentage
for PERS on exhibit C is 42.57 percent. There would be 64 percent
retirement benefits. They could end up with a situation where the entire
employee benefit package could reach a level as high as 90 percent of the
salary. In talking to PERS, it was his understanding that Long Beach
,included 5 percent for all benefits. They have Figured three percent
Icost of living for retirement. The retirement rate is 52 percent.
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated the 64 percent
did not include the total factoring as it relates to salaries and overhead.
Mr. Johansen stated that through exhibit C the current deputy
Sheriff at the top step would be making $20,878. The total benefits
are 40 percent of the salary. Under the initiative they are projecting
67 percent benefits of the salary. The compensation has been included
but not the uniforms, etc.
Supervisor Dolan stated the study figures did not include
the increased workload in the Probation Department, District Attorney
and the courts. Page 289•
October 7, 1980
80-
~'',
1580 !
1581
1582
1583
October 7, 1980
Mr. Johansen stated that PERS estimates were for the single highest
hear would cost about one percent of the salary. When the actuarial study
came in the cost was 1.15 percent. In some cases they used the highest
end o£ the range but dfid not do so in every case.
DISCUSSION: LETTER FROM BUTTE COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT pFFICERS ASSOCIATION
RE: REQUEST FORA MEETING WITH BOARD MEMBERS TO RESOLVE QUESTIONS WITH
REGARD THE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVE
Supervisor Winston stated he had received a letter from the
Butte County Law Enforcement Officers Association with regard to the
request for a meeting with the Board members to resolve the questions
with regard to the law enforcement initiative. He wrote a letter to
the association stating he could personally see no way the Board could
sit as a committee without violating the Brown Act. His attitude was
that the matter would have to be diacussed 3n public. His attitude wasL
this would be a waste of time. At anytime, anyone can coma before the
Board and the Board will give them an opinion.
Letter to be written to the Association advising them that
the Board cannot sit as a committee and they are welcome any Tuesday.
RECESS: 9:55 a.m.
RECONVENE: 10:10 a.m.
PUBLIC HEARING DATE SET FOR CONSIDERATION OF SOUTH OROVILLE ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, a public hearing date of October 21, 1980 at 10:00 a.m. was
set for consideration of the South Oroville Assessment District formation.
PUBLIC HEARING DATE RESCINDED AND RESET FOR NAOMI SCHILLING APPEAL OF
DENIED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
The public hearing date of Octolier 14, 1980 at 10:15 a.m. for
consideration of Naomi Schilling appeal of denied negative declaration and
tentative parcel map, AP 22-202-01, two parcels, property located on the
northeast corner of Hasting Avenue and Azevedo Avenue, Biggs area was
rescinded and reset for October 21, 1980 at 11:15 a.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: JOSEPH L. BURRELL - PETITION FOR VARIANCE TO SECTIONS 19-10
AND/OR 19-12 OF THE BUTTE COUNTY CODE FOR PLACEMENT OF A MOBILE HOME ON
AP 42-05-39. NORD AVENUE, ROUTE h BOX 483A, CHI CO ,_ ZONING: "A-5"
The public hearing on Joseph L. Burrell petition for variance to
Sections 19-10 and/or 19-12 of the Butte County Code for placement of a
mobile home on AP 42-05-39, Nord Avenue, Route 1, Box 483A, Chico, zoning:
"A-5" was held as advertised.
Lynn Vanhart, environmental health director, set out the background
of the petition. It is in order.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: Joe Burrell.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
'and carried, the petition for variance to Sections 14-10 and/or 19-12 of the
.Butte County Code for placement of a mobile home on AP 42-05-39, Nord
Avenue, Route i, Box 483A, Chico, zoning: "A-5" for Joseph Burrell was
approved for a period of one year.
Page 290.
October 7, 1980
October 7, 1980
80- 1584 PUBLIC HEARING: JAMES ROBERSON - PETITION FOR VARIANCE TO SECTIONS 19-10
3 AND/OR 19-12 OF THE BUTTE COUNTY CODE FOR PLACEMENT OF A MOBILE HOME ON
AP 72-42-004 WAYMAN LANE OROVILLE AREA ZONING: "M-R"
The public hearing on James Roberson petition for variance to
Sections 19-10 and/or 19-12 of the Butte County Code for placement of a
mobile home on AP 72-42-004, Wayman Lane, Oroville area, zoning: "M-R"
was held as advertised.
Lynn Vanhart, environmental health director, set out the
background of the petition. It is in order.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Dolan, seconded by Supervisor Winston
and carried, the petition fdr variance to Sections 19--10 and/or 19-12 of
the Butte County Code for placement of a mobile home on AP 72-42-004,
Wayman Lane, Oroville area, zoning: "M-R" fox James Roberson was approved
for a period of one year.
1585' PUBLIC HEARING: VICKI WONACOTT - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL
OF REZONE FROM "TM-10" (TIMBER MOUNTAIN - 10 ACRE PARCELS) TO "TM-5"
(TIMBER MOUNTAIN - 5 ACRE PARCELS) OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE
OF DOE MILL ROAD, APPROX. 1/4 MILE NORTH OF SCHOTT ROAD, IDENTIFIED AS
AP 63-07-03 EAST OF FOREST RANCH - CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 14 1980
The public fiearing of Vicki Wonacott appeal of Planning Commission's
denial of rezone from "TM--10" {timber mountain - 10 acre parcels) to "TM-5"
(timber mountain - 5 acre garcels) for property located on the west side
of Doe Mill Road, approximately 1/4 mile north of Schott Road, identified
as AP 63-07-03, east of Forest Ranch (item on which an EIR was previously
certified) was held as advertised.
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background of the
rezone. The Board must take action before October 19, 1980 or the rezone
is deemed denied.
Supervisor Wheeler asked that the hearing be continued for
one week. She will be talking with the property owner. The applicant
was unable to attend the meeting.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one
The hearing was continued to October 14, 1980 at 10:00 a.m. to
be listed first on the hearing agenda.
1586 PUBLIC HEARING: BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION -AMENDMENT TO BUTTE COUNTY
GENERAL PLAN, HOUSING ELEMENT (FINAL DRAFT OF HOUSING ELEMENT APPLICABLE
TO THE UNINCORPORATED PORTIONS OF THE COUNTY) - CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 3,
1981
The public hearing on the Butte County Planning Commission amendment
to the Butte County General Plan, Housing Element (final draft of housing
element applicable to the unincorporated portions of the county) was held
as continued.
Bettye Blair, planning director, recommended that the hearing
be continued. She and Counsel will be meeting with HCD on Thursday
regarding new legislation that could have an effect on the element.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
The hearing was continued to February 3, 1981 at 10:00 a.m.
Page 291.
October 7, 1980
October 7, 19.80
80- 1587 COMMUNICATIONS
3 Bachman and Associates, Chico. The engineers, on behalf of Dr. Kenneth
Lange, appeal the Advisory Agency~s condition 6, 8, 9, 14,
17 and 21 on a tentative parcel map, AP 43-29-21, two lots,
property located on the south side of West Sacramento Avenue,
between Oaklawn and Glenwood Avenues, Chico. Set for hearing
October 28, 1980 at 10:15 a.m.
Paula J. Terry, Chica. Ms. Terry writes submitting her resignation as a
member of the Personnel Appeals Commission. Letter to be sent.
Butte County Arts Commission. The commission writes thanking the Board
for their support in establishing the Arts Commission in Butte
County. Tnformation; no action taken.
Gayle Guynup, attorney at law. The attorney, on behalf of Roy Reynolds,
forwards a revised claim for personal injuries in the amount of
$3,000,000 as a result of various allegations relating to
incarceration in the jail. See motion following communications.
Butte County Committee for Employment of the Handicapped. The committee
writes regarding the need fox local policy affecting the enforcement
o£ and designation of handicapped parking places. To be considered
later in the meeting.
Butte County Law Enforcement Officers Association. The association
writes requesting a meeting with Board members to resolve
questions with regard to the law enforcement initiative.
Considered earlier in the meeting.
Town of Paradise. The town writes supporting the request for space in -
the Paradise branch library to house the library of the Paradise
Genealogical Society. See motion following communications.
Lawrence B. Stack, Oroville. Mr. Stack writes requesting that the abandoned
Wyandotte Creek Road right-of-way through his property be declared
surplus and sold under the provisions allowing direct sale to
adjoining owner. Referred to Administrative Office to follow
procedures and report back to the Board.
City of Stockton. The Mayor writes requesting that Butte County oppose
the Pacific Gas and Electric Company`s application 4659902 for a
rate increase, PG&E to be asked for their comments.
'1588 REJECT REVISED CLAIM - ROY REYNOLDS
On motion of Supervisor Doian, seconded by Supervisor Winston
and carried, the claim of Roy Reynolds for personal injuries in the amount
of $3,000,000 as a result of various allegations relating to incarceration
in the jail was rejected and referred to County Counsel and Risk Management
Coordinator.
1589 ACCEPT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE RECOMMENDATION RELATIVE TO TOWN OF PARADISE
SUPPORT OE REQUEST FOR SPACE IN PARADISE BRANCH LIBRARY TO HOUSE LIBRARY
OF THE PARADISE GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Aolan
and carried, the Administrative Office recommendations relative to the
Town of Paradise letter of support for the request for space in the Paradise
Genealogical Society were~.~accepted.
page 292.
October 7, 1980
i _ ~~
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ =October 7, 1980_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
80- 1540 DISCUSSION: ,FAIL CONSTRUCTION AND DEFEAT OF LEGTSLATIVE BILL RELATIVE
~ TO FUNDING FOR JAIL CONSTRUCTTON
1591
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated they were
planning to continue with the architectual services and drawing of the
plans and specifications for the jail facility. When these have been
completed, his. off ice will be coming back to the Board relative to whether
the Board wants to finance the jail construction this year or next year
or how.
COMMUNICATIONS CONTINUED
Tom Rogers, Oroville. Mr. Rogers appeals the Planning Commission's
revocation of the use permit to allow two duplexes on property
zoned "A R," AP 36-71--1 and 2, property located on the north side
of Oro-Bangor Hwy., approximately 300 feet east of Foothill Blvd.,
Oroville. Set for hearing October 28, 1980 at 10:30 a.m.
Department of Transportation. The department writes granting the 45-day
extension to November 21 1980 far final responses to the proposed
freeway route rescissioc~for Route 99 north of Chico. Planning
Commission to hold public hearing. Copy to be 'forwarded to
City of Chico.
1592 (ADDITIONAL MATTERS PRESENTED BY BOARD MEMBERS
Vice Chairman Mose]~+ stated~:the Boaxd had received a report
from Ed Brown, assessor, relative to the redevelopment agency in Chico.
Clif Nickelson, administrative officer, stated the Assessor
has asked that the Board ignore his report. The Auditor has given a
report to the Board on this matter. His office will be meeting with the
Auditor and Counsel relative to this matter and will be attending the
Chico City Council meeting to be held this evening.
Supervisor Wheeler stated that the county can be faced with
ed demands for services without receiving a share of the increased
Mr. Nickelson stated that was correct. The aspect that concerned
was that this is for the elimination of blight. He could not see how
me could decide that 50 acres of open space was blight.
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, asked how a person could call
California Park a blighted area?
Supervisor Dolan stated she planned to attend the meeting of
the City Council. The other redevelopment area is the Village. Chapmantown
is not being included at this time. The city is planning on using the
money in Chapmantown.
Mr. Blackstock stated he did not think the city could use the
outside the redevelopment area.
Administrative Office to report back to the Board on this matter
Vice Chairman Moseley appointed as the Board member for the Butte
Pentz Fire Station.
Letter from Welfare Director relative to Title XX Social Services
ds acknowledged. Report to be received from Welfare Director as to
long he can operate on the funding that is available from the state.
is to also report on the amount of funding remaining and available.
Page 293.
Octoiier 7, 1980
October 7, 1980
80- 1593 ACCEPT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS RE: INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF THE
'v DISABLED
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
and carried, the Administrative Office recommendations relative to the
International Year of the Disabled ware accepted.
1594 ADDITIONAL MATTERS PRESENTED BY BOARD MEMBERS
Letter from Drake Homes accepted for information.
Letter from Syndey B. Gordon to be considered later in the
meeting.
Letter from CSAC relative to Title XX funding referred to the
Welfare Director for a report back to the Board.
Letter from SETU xelative to a grievance to be considered on
October 14, 1980.
1595 ADOPT ORDINANCE 2146: PUBLIC HEARING: JAY D. PLUMMER - PROPOSED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND REZONE FROM "SR-3" (SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL,- 3 ACRE PARCELS)
TO "M-1" (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL), PROPERTY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET EAST
OF COHASSET ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1-1/2 MILES NORTH OF EATON ROAD, IDENTIFIED
AS AP 48-01-09, NORTH OF CHTCO
The public hearing on Jay D. Plummer proposed negative declaration
and rezone from "SR-3" {suburban residential - three acre parcels) to
"M-1" (light industrial), property located approximately 300 feet east
of Cohasset Road, approximately 1-1/2 miles north of Eaton Road, identified
as AP 48-01-09, north of Chico was held as advertised.
Bettye Blair, plannning director, set out the background of the
rezone. The Planning Commission recommended for approval.
Earl Nelson, envizonmental review director, set out the background
of the negative declaration. There will be some mitigation measures added
to the parcel map. He recommended a negative declaration.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Winston
and carried, finding the project could not have a significant effect on the
environment, a negative declaration was recommended.
*~
On motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Winston
and carried, the rezone from "SR-3" (suburban residential - three acre
parcels) to "M-1" (light industrial), property located approximately
300 feet east of Cohasset Road, approximately l-1/2 miles north of Eaton
Road, identified as AP 48-01-09, north of Chico for Jay D. Plummer was
approved; noting a negative declaration has been considered and the
project is in conformity with the General Plan; Ordinance 2146 was
adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
RECESS: 10:47 a.m.
RECONVENE: 11:05 a.m.
1596 APPEARANCE: ELLIS ROLLS
Mr. Ro11s, representing Drake Homes, stated they were planning
to install sewerline along Howard Drive. This is a county road and the
work will be done under a county encroachment permit. They are being
required to seal coat the entire length of the street. He felt this will
be an_added cost and would be cosmetic only. He asked that the condition
be deleted. Page 294.
October 7, 1980
October 7, 1980
80_ Mr. Rolls spoke regarding the Oakway Estates Subdivision conditions
3 at--this tame. The tentative map was submitted and approved in 1.978 or
1979. After Mr. Drake purchased the property fie submitted a revised map
which was submitted and approved November 20, 1979. They received a list
of the conditions from the Advisory Agency. In 1480, when the final map
was submitted for approval to the -epartment of Public Works an additional
condition of a storm drain maintenance district be formed was added to the
project. He did not feel that a condition could be added after the
tentative approval on the map. He asked that the Board delete the requirement
of this condition,
Clay Castleberry, public works directdr, spoke regarding the
requirement to seal coat Howard -rive. There will be heavy equipment down
that road during the project. Years ago the county did minimum maintenance.
He felt that with the heavy equipment on this road it would cause not only
inconvenience but there was some coneer~that the street is not adequate
to support this type of work. There was sealing and chipping done on the
road about five years agQ. This is a city sewer that will be going into
the trench. He had required originally that the street should be asphalt
plant mix overlay and backed down to the chip and seal. He felt it was
necessary for the full side of the road. The other solution would be
for the city to annex the street.
Mr. Rolls stated the outfall line would not service the people
on Howard Drive at this time.
Supervisor Wheeler asked that she be allowed to talk with Mr.
Ro11s and Mr. Castleberry regarding this matter and bring it back to the
Board.
Mr. Castleberry spoke regarding the condition for formation of
a storm .drainage maintenance district. He set out the development in the
area. He felt that Oakway, Walnut Woods and Big Chico Creek Estates should
be is a storm drainage maintenance district to pay for the drainage. Big
Chico Estates Subdivision have written requesting the formation of a county
service area. He felt the storm drainage system should be done by a district.
Del Siemsen, deputy county counsel, stated as he understood it
the approval of the tentative map was made without the condition. To his
knowledge the Soard cannot require an additional condition. Another
condition cannot be added unless it was considered at the time of
approval of the tentative map.
Mr. Rolls stated the condition was not imposed on the tentative
map. The only condition was provide permanent solution to drainage.
The condition has always meant construction of adequate fadlities to drain
water from the subdivision. He did not know of any instance where the
formation district had been part of the condition to provide permanent
solution to drainage.
I597 APPEARANCE: NANCY JONAS
Ms. Jonas, representing BCEA/SEIU, requested that the matter
regarding the grievance be considered on October 14, 1980 at a specific
time.
1598
Consideration of the grievance scheduled for October 14, 1980
at 10:00 a.m. to be placed first on the list of hearings.
I'APPEARAI3CE: PATRICK PORGANS
Mr. Porgans, representing Red Tape Abatement, Ltd., spoke regarding
the State Water Project. He presented a letter and report relative to
Page 295.
October 7, 1980
October 7, 1980
80- he State Water Project. The water project is heavily subsidized with
b axpayers money. The project will have long term economic impacts on
he north Sacramento Valley by giving the water to the people in San Joaquin
nd southern California. We are paying for them to take the water. Fie
et out how the State Water Project is in financial trouble and how it
i11 effect tfie north state. There are three sources of funding:
eneral obligation bonds liaeked by-th~ fate of California, the sale of tideland
it and the sale of revenue bonds. He was concerned about the first two
eons of funding. Tfiere will be about $L billion of money in the project
y the year 2000. The people will get about $.18 back on the $1 if the
oney is paid back to the state as it is to Fie paid by the year 2015.
e contractors are to pay the principal and interest. What is happening
s that the interest being earned on the principal, to pay off the other
ebts, is being put into the perzpheral'. canal and drainage for the delta.
e felt the county must take a position to protect not only the surface
ater but the subterranean water of the county.
1599 PEARfaNCE: MRS. PALMER
Mrs. Palmer spoke regarding the request for a county license for
ursing home facilities. She has been a residential care home operator for
any years in Butte County. She has been advised that she should come to
he county for liceua3ng of a board. and room home. She would be happy
o pay the fees for such a license.
Mrs. Purer was referred to the Planning Director to see if her
roperty is zoned for a room and board type facility.
Mrs. Palmer was advised there was no license needed for roam
nd board facilities.
1600 PEARANCE: ELIZABETH METZKER
Mrs. Metzker spoke regarding the problem people are having on
states Drive relative to speeding cars and big trucks traveling
n the road. She submitted two .petitions asking that the Board post
igns and do something to help alleviate the problem. She has been in
ontact with the CHP regarding the speeding matter.
The petitions were referred to Public Works to meet with Mrs.
etzker and report back to the Board on October 14, 1980.
CESS: 11.15 a.m.
CONVENE: •1:32 p.m.
1601 OPT ORDINANCE 2147: PUBLIC HEARING: LOUISIANA PACIFIC CORPORATION - REZONE
ROM "TM-40" (TIMBER MOUNTAIN - 40 ACRE PARCELS) TO "TPZ - 160" (TIMBER
RESERVE ZONE - 160 ACRE PARCELS), PROPERTX LOCATED APPROX 1/2 MILE WEST OF
UMPKIN LA PORTE ROAD AND LUMPKIN ROAD INTERSECTION, APPROX. 1/2 MILE NORTH
F FEATHER FALLS IDENTIFIED AS AP 71-04-10 EAST OF OROVILLE
The public hearing on Louisiana Pacific Corporation rezone from
'TM-40" (timber mountain - 40 acre parcels) to "TPZ-160" (timber preserve
one - 160 acre parcels), property located approximately 1/2 mile west of
umpkin LaPorte Road and Lumpkin Road intersection, approximately 1/2
ile north of Feather Falls, identified as AP 71-04-10, east of Oroville
item not subject to California Environmental Quality Act) was held as
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background of the
Hearing open to the public. Appearing: No one.
Page 296.
October 7, 1980
October 7, 19.80
80- Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
3
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Dolan
and carried, the rezone from "TM-40" (timber mountain - 40 acre parcels
to "TR'Z-160" (timber preserve zone - 160 acre parcels), property located
approximately 1/2 mile west of Lumpkin LaPorte Road and Lumpkin Road
intersection, approximately 1/2 mile north of Feather Falls, identified
as AP 71-04-10, east of Oroville for Louisiana Pacific Corporation was
approved finding it in conformity with the General Plan; Ordinance 2147
was adopted and the Chairman authorized to sign.
1602 ADOPT RESOLUTION 80-214: PUBLIC HEARING: BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION -
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTTAL AND GRAZING ANB OPEN LAND
TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AGRICULTURAL--RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCTAL AND
PUBLIC, LOCATED IN THE UPPER LIME SADDLE AREA ALONG ANA NEAR PENTZ-
MAGALIA HIGHWAY FROM KUNKLE RESERVOIR TO THE TOWN .OF PARADISE
The public hearing on Butte County Planning Commission General
Plan amendment from low density residential and grazing and open land to
low density residential, agricultural-residential, commercial and public,
located in the upper Lime Saddle area along and near Pentz-Magalia Highway
from Kunkle Reservoir to the Town of Paradise (item on which a previously
certified EIR will be used) was held as advertised.
Bettye Blair, planning director, set out the background of
the General Plan amendment. She had posted two maps: one an exhibit from
the General Plan showing the existing de;i:gnatdon and='th~ther map showing
the proposed designations.
Earl Nelson, environmental review director, set out the background
of the EIR. There is an error in the memo sent to the Board. He made
reference to the fact that this would be environmentally superior to what
is existing. He asked that this be deleted from the memo. The proposed
project would be more dense than the development presently allowable.
The EIR was written for the southern half of the proposed project. The
northern half has the same concerns.
Hearing open to the public. Appearing:
1. Jay Garner. Mr. Garner owns property north of Chico. He
was concerned as this was the last General Plan amendment allowed for this
year. A hearing date was set for consideration of General Plan amendments
for November 18, 1980. He was trying to meet the November 18 date so that
his project could be heard at that time.
Ms. Blair:stated:;:the Board had received a letter from Sid Gordon
relative to this property. She understood that this project was a private
project that was in the environmental review process. Indications have
been that the project is about to come out of Environmental Review.
On October 15, 1980 the Planning Commission will hear a General Plan
amendment for the Gridley-Biggs area. If there is action on the General
Plan today, then they will hold the amendment until after the first of the
year.
RECESS: 1:42 p.m.
RECONVENE: 1:45 p.m.
Mr. Nelson stated he had checked with staff as to the status
of the Garner and Gordon property. There is an initial study in process
and it should be completed within the week. This project has 350 dwellings
on 47 acres where other projects of that type have required impact reports.
Page 247.
October 7, 1980
80-
October 7, 19.80
2. Sid Gordon. Mr. Gordon stated there was a project across
the ~treetfrom his groject that is of the same magnitude. He felt they could
use the findings from that EIR for their project. The first time he heard
of the hearing scheduled for today was last Thursday. He wanted to know
why he had not been notified of the change 3n the hearing date. He was
objecting to the procedure that was carried out. The cost of the project
he is working on would be increased by $9,000 each for 376 homes. He
understood that staff advised against moving the hearing date forward.
He wondered 3f the hearing was being advanced to be before Measure A on
the ballot has been considered.
Del Siemsen, deputy county counsel, stated that the question of
whether Measure A would effect these General Plan amendments would depend
on the Board as they have to implement the procedures because the measure
deals with the General Plan.
Supervisor Dolan stated it coula very well effect the change
in the General Plan amendments. Every project would have to be reviewed
at that time. She felt the measure would effect the amendment.
Supervisor Wheeler stated the project being considered today
was ready to go where there is a possibility the Gordon and Garner
project might require an EIR.
Mr, Gordon stated his engineer had advised him that yes possibly
an ETR would be required. There has been an EIR done on the property
next to theixs.
Mr. Nelson advised that the determination of whether the previous
EIR was suitable would be made by the county. They would have to review
the facts and see if it meets the criteria.
Supervisor Wheeler asked how Measure A would effect the General
Plan amendment, if a decision was not made today and the amendments
were allowed to be considered on November 18, 1980.
Mr. Siemsen stated Measure A might or might not have an effect
on the actions taken by the Board on November 18, 1980. The Board might
find themselves at the point of undoing something that was changed or
they may not.
Supervisor Dolan felt the issue was that the Board had one
General Plan change that could be considered for this year. There have
been requests from property owners that believe they could have their
projects ready by the end of the calendar year and would like action taken
on them.
3. Bill Geddis. Mr. Geddis stated they started this project
in January, 1977. The EIR and tentative map were submitted in April, 1979.
In October, 1979 the General Plan was changed and they had been assured
by Planning that this are was going into the recommended one acre area.
Someone at the hearing asked for higher density. As a result the text was
changed to open and grazing far 40 acre parcels where before the open and
grazing would have allowed one acre parcels. The Planning Department
took the General Plan change forward. He asked that the Board take action
on the General Plan amendment at this time.
4. Larry Brooks, planning director, Town of Paradise. Mr.
Brooks stated he was not opposing or in favor of the project. He was
here to let the Board know the Town was concerned with this area,
The property along the northern border would be amended that has parcels
both in the Town limits and thef~enunty. He recommended at a staff level
Page 298.
October 7, 1980
_ _ October 7, 1980
80- that consideration Fie given to encourage annexation to the town when there
v is development in that area. There is an overlap of services in that area.
The town ~s ready to work with the developers in this area.
**~
5. Carl B'isher. Mr. Fisher spoke for Lime Saddle Community
Services District. At the Board's request, they waited for the Board to
see whether the community of Paradise would incorporate. He would like
to see the Board take action on the General Plan amendment.
'6. Tillman Daley. Judge Daley stated the zones of benefit pay
for the payment on the loan. This is the reason they are requesting low
density to make the difference in the gayment of the loan. Harrison and
Breuer will put in their own wells and if they are successful they will
turn them',over to the district for operation. There is another developer
3n the area with twelve lots the district can furnish water to. They can
only furnish water to 199 parcels. They cannot furnish all the water that
people would like furnished.
'',Supervisor Winston stated both Mr. Garner and Mr, Meline raised
questions ', as to why the applicants had not been notified•of the change
in the hearing date. He wanted to know how many General Plan changes
were in~~pi?ocess. -'
'Ms. Blair stated they=ap~rmached°ttce-Brrard:and;asked°dvor the
November Z8, 1980 hearing date. At that time, they did not have a project
before the Board. There was a project coming before the Planning Commission.
There were projects that were not near the hearing process and were not
contacted': The Gordon and Meline project is~a private project and in the
Environmental Review Department. They would not be notified until they
were in a'',hearing posture.
'',Supervisor Dolan stated that the same time when the Board did
change the General Plan hearing date, the Board was aware the Gridley-
Biggs change would be ready. There could be any number of projects
waiting for that change.
'Ms. Blair felt there were three private applications for
General Plan amendment since the last General Plan amendment.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
'',,Supervisor Dolan felt it was unfair to approve a General Plan
amendment'', at this time when there 3s the Oroville and Gridley-Biggs
General Plan amendments that would be ready before the end of the
year, which includes 6,000 acres.
'Ms. Blair stated the Gridley-Biggs project will be heard by
the Planning Commission on October 15, 1980. The south Chico°project
will be heard by the Commission on October 29, 19.80.
'Supervisor Winston stated Measure A is coming up before the
public inlNovember and the language is pretty plain. The measure is
talking about coming into conformity within six months. There is going
to be an 'agricultural committee making decisions about many things
relative to the agricultural nature of the land and talking about area
surrounding and next to urban development. Any action the Board took today
could be wiped out.
contents
thereon,
It was moved by Supervisor Winston that having reviewed the
~f the draft environmental impact report, the comments received
and the responses to those comments, the final environmental
Page 299.
October 7, 1980
October 7, 1180
80-
~'
impact report was to be certified as having been completed in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State ETR Guidelines
and the Butte County Environmental Review Guidelines; finding the EIR is
applicable to this project.; finding the project will have a significant
effect on the environment and reviewing the alternatives that appear in
the environmental report; finding that the alternatives af.e1 not reasonable,
being; 1} a project witfi smaller lot sizes; 2) a groject with larger
lot sizes; 3) a no project; 4) a project with cluster of multi-family
housing units: and rejecting those alternatives fiecause a cluster of
multi-family housing units as pointed out in the EIR are not in keeping
with the rural setting of the project site; a greater density would result
in a greater consumption of domestic water, as the Board has already
heard as to the limitations in the water; increased density would require
a waste water treatment plant; a project with larger lot sizes would not
be representative of the most efficient use of the land; finding that
the overriding considerations which justify the project approval in the
face of the environmental concerns is that at the present time the current
General Plan designation is not conforming to the General Plan policies;
being a general type zoning; finding that the project is in conformance
with all elements of the Butte County General Plan.
Motion withdrawn.
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Sugervisor Wheeler
and carried, having reviewed the contents of the draft environmental
impact report, the comments received thereon, and the responses to those
comments, the final environmental impact report was certified as having
been completed in compliance with the Ca}3farnia Environmental Quality
Act, the State EIR Guidelines and the Butte County Environmental Review
Guidelines.
On motion of Supervisor Winston, seconded by Supervisor Wheeler
and carried, finding the ETR is applicable to taxis project; finding
the project will have a significant effect on the environment and reviewing
the alternatives that appear in the environmental report; finding that
the alternatives are not reasonable being: 1) a project with smaller
lot sizes; 2} a project with larger lotssizes; 3) a no project; 4) a
project with cluster of multi-family housing units; and rejecting those
alternatives because a cluster of multi-family housing units as pointed
out in the EIR are not in keeping with the rural setting of the project
site; a greater density would result in a greater consumption of domestic
water, as the Board~as already heard as to the limitations in the water;
increase density would require a waste water treatment plant; a project
with larger lot sizes would not be representative of the most efficient
use of the land; finding that the overriding considerations which justify
the project approval in the face of the environmental concerns is that
at the present time the current General Plan designation is not conforming
to the General Plan policies, bring a general type of zoning; finding that
the project is in conformance with all elements of the Butte County General
Plan; with additional overriding considerations o£: the project area
is on the boundaries of an established community, being near Paradise and
appearing to be a local extension of that community; the site does not
appear to have any significant value as agricultural land; mitigations
are available at the time of tentative map approval to minimize environ-
mental damage; the General Plan amendment from low density residential
and grazing and open land to low density residential, agricultural-
residential, commercial and public, located in the upper Lime Saddle
area along and near Pentz-Magalia Highway from Kunkle Reservoir to the
Town of Paradise was approved; Resolution 80-214 was adopted and the
Chairman authorized to sign. AYES: Supervisors Wheeler, Winston and
Vice Chairman Moseley. NOES: Supervisor Dolan. ABSENT: Chairman Lemke.
Page 300.
October 7, 1980
__~_.
====T-_=====-October 7, 1980_____________ _____
80- Supervisor Dolan stated she could not vote for the motion because
~i all projects in the greatest number should be considered at one time.
Supervisor Wheeler felt it was necessary for. the Board to set
General Plan amendment dates for a specific time to amend the General
Plan and announce those dates. She asked that staff come back with a
proposal. She would like to be made aware of all the projects in the
Environmental Review Department relative to General Plan amendments.
She would like to know the number of amendments that are at the hearing
stage.
Supervisor Dolan stated she thougfit that was what Planning
was saying when tfie November 18, 1980 hearing date was set. In September
the Board changed the hearing date that had been set for November 18, 1980.
The Board has now said tfie end of yggp is October 7, 1980. She would like
to know how many projects could have been accomplished by the end of this
calendar year.
1603 ADOPT ORDINANCE 2148: PUBLIC HEARING: JAMES PARR AND ROBERT TERRILL -
APPEAL OF DRAFT EIR AND REZONE FROM "TM-40" (TIMBER MOUNTAIN - 40 ACRE
PARCELS) TO "TI~10" (TIMBER MOUNTAIN - 10 ACRE PARCELS] FOR PROPERTY'
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 200 TO 3,000 FEET EAST OF HIGHWAY 32, TWO MILES
SOUTH OF FOREST RANCH IDENTIFIED _.AS AP 63-01-101 & 102 FOREST RANCH
The closed public hearing on James Parr and Robert Terrill
appeal of draft environmental impact report and Planning Commission's
denial of rezone from "TM-40" (timber mountain - 40 acre parcels) to
"TM-10" (timber mountain - 10 acre parcels) for property located approximately
200 to 3,000 feet east of Highway 32, two miles south of Forest Ranch,
identified as AP 63-01-101 and 102, Forest Ranch was held as continued.
Bett}~e B1air,planning director, stated the closed hearing on
this matter had been originally scheduled for December 9, 1980. Because,
of the time of the Planning Commission's report to the Board, the code
provides the Board must react within 90 days and therefore the hearing
was rescheduled for this time.
', Supervisor Dolan stated this hearing was continued pending
the General Plaa change. Now the Board has the report on that hearing.
RECESS: 2:31 p.m.
RECONVENE: 2:36 p.m.
Supervisor Wheeler asked that the engineex for the project
be allowed to speak to the contours of the area.
Russ Cxoninger, Ringel and Associates, set out the map that
had been in the report. He had the map blown up. He set out the findings
after the map had been bbwn up. The reason he asked to speak today was
because of the Planning Director's report relative to conditional zoning
and criteria. In all other meetings they discussed the site designation.
He had met with Jon Anderson who is doing a water resources study for
that area. There is a well in this area that is located at 100 feet
with a 20 gallon per minute flow. There have never been studies done in
this area in the past. There is adequate soil on the site for septic
disposal. The fire response times were goad: 13, 28 and 29 minutes.
Road access required is 16-foot wide traversable road. There axe
portions of the road that are crooked, but it is not a windy road. This
area is ten to twelve minutes from Forest Ranch. The project is within
fifteen minutes of downtown Chieo.
Hearing closed to the public and confined to the Board.
Page 301. October 7, 1980
October 7, 1980
80-
~.
Supervisor Dolan stated she understood and appreciated the site
specific analysis. The other major factor is tfie growth inducive
impact of the rezone like this. There are a whole series of rezones in
the Forest Ranch area that came before the Board that iaere denied:This
is the single largest proposal to come before the Board.
Mr. Croninger stated that regarding page 27 it depends on the
public understanding the adopted standards of county policies and land
uses. On page 44 relative to agricultural--residential the development
criteria is shown. He felt there was criteria and the project met
that criteria.
Supervisox Dolan understood that. She was uncomfortable
because this was not an advertised public hearing.
RECESS: 2:50 p.m.
RECONVENE: 3:02 p.m.
It was moved by Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor
Winston, that the rezone from "TM-40" (.timber mountain -•40 acre parcels)
to "TM-10° (timber mountain - 10 acre parcels) for property located
approximately 200 to 3,000 feet east of Highway 32, two miles south of
Forest Ranch, identified as AP 63-01-101 and 102, Forest Ranch for
James Parr and Robert Terrill be approved; finding that the project
does conform and is adjacent to agricultural-residential property and
is surrounded by similar existing uses; further noting that the EIR has
already been certified on August 26, 1980; finding that this project will
have a significant effect on the environment; and finding mitigation
measures ass< shown or stated in the impact report as suggested mitigation
measures as so outlined as items on.e through, seven and should be considered
at the time of subdivision tentative map consideration; suggested mitigation
measures include: a) streambed alterations be approved by the Department
of Fish and Game permit process; b) any constxuction or earth removal
will be revegetated to reduce sedimentation in Little-Chico Creek; c) Any
construction or earth moving which uncovers archaeological site contacts
the Society and preserve the area; further rejecting the alternatives
listed in the EIR and they are being rejected on the basis of the
overriding considerations: 1) it doesn't accomplish the objectives of
the proposal, which is to create rural homesites of ten acre density;
2) because there is a need for housing in this county; 3) it allows
geople to live in the open free space, ten acres.; finding the proposed
project consistent with the Butte County General Plan and the elements and
referring to the land use element for the basis; Ordinance 2148 be approved
and the Chairman be authorized to sign.
Supervisor Dolan did not agree. The land when purchased was
zoned 40 acre minimum. This property is in the middle of 40-acre minimum
lots. There are sites within Forest Ranch. area that are ten acre parcels.
There will be created lots allowing for public services where the
requirements for these services falls on all the county. She felt this
would be precedent setting and will create a situation where the county
will not be able to serve the aural homesites. She could not see how
it conformed to the General Plan.
Supervisor Wheeler felt that once again Supervisor Dolan was
glacing services and requirements before people. She felt that when people
impact areas, people who require those services will have to pay for those
services and assume the cost. The people who live in that area choose to
live in that area because they want that type of lifestyle.
Page 302.
October 7, 1980
80--
October 7, 1980
J ~ Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Wheeler, Winston and Vice Chairman Moseley
NOES: Supervisor Dolan
ABSENT: Chairman Lemke
Motion carried.
CONTINUED HEARING: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 & 24 OF THE BUTTE COUNTY
CODE REGARDING REGULATIONS AND CONTROL OF SUBDIVISIONS AND TO ZONING
REQUIREMENTS
The continued hearing and discussion of ordinance amending
Chapter 20 and 24 of the Butte County Code regarding regulations and
control of subdivisions and to zoning requirements was held as continued.
1604
Supervisor Dolan asked that the Board consider pulling the
zero lot line change out of the large ordinance and considering it by
itself so that the matter could be handled.
Del Siemsen, deputy county counsel, stated there was one
other part of the ord~iance the Board had notccovered deals with the Board's
authority to impose drainage fees where drainage studies have been
completed. He would also like to see this portion pulled out and done
as a separate ordinance.
The entire ordinance was continued to October 14, 1980 to
be discussed.
REPORT BY COUNTY COUNSEL RE: LAMA _C_ON$ERVATTON ACT AGREEMENT MAINTENANCE
1605
Dan Blackstock, county counsel, reported to the Board regarding
Land Conservation Act Agreement maintenance procedures throughout the
county. In looking at the way some of the agreements had been prepared,
he did not think the county could effectively bring a couple of these to
action because o£ the actual provisions of the agreements at that time.
It was strictly a means to try to keep the land from developing.
ADJOURNMENT
There being nothing further before the Board at this time,
the meeting was adjourned at 3:24 p.m. to reconvene on Tuesday, October 14,
1980 at 4:00 a.m.
ATTEST: CLARK A. NELSON, COUNTY CLERK~-
RECORDER and ex-officio Clerk
of the Board of Supervisors
Chairman, Board of upervisors
By
Page 303.
October 7, 1980