HomeMy WebLinkAbout77-47B 4� �• _t �. e " r r �r ppp tiA� l t i, f !t,ir
I1i�t)i,itl:�
1. Host of the Cold t v has a
irni:tiritI fire il,i z rare. of rat
Wast Imdur, Lv farveri Lv,
lonrly irll ot• tho faothi11
and mountain areas have
Mardi of hioh or nxtramc
itavc?I^i tv,
HOL1CY
1. We orntertion from fi rn, 1
hazards a cnnsidurnti n in
till Illann Illr1, r",Iulntnrg$
and calm Leal i11111rovoill of
nrorlrnms, with snocial concern
for nrrras cf "hinh" and
Ouxt:rown" fire !ia7.ard,
l MPLI-VE tTATIOii
Consider fire haze °FIs in all
land use and nn'inn Winner s,
enviraalarntaI r`rrviLm rmAdivinrion
reviell and Lh,o nroviriiiar, of
nuhl i c; scarvi ccs
TO hholbpr n1` fl rp occurroncos
2,
I"rlcnur[ano atlfrruntp -fire
r. vn-
2.
1CtWi fY prosenL and ruturt, 1100i
is iilcreasi`n'n alono with t>h'o
taction servlcPs in
all areas of
of tnduOtIdto,, f1rt, Irr"ra1,�',r.�11I)1
increafiinn numbers of visitors
nnnulatinn mrogth and
hinh
services, Guidn develonmont to
and residents in the County.
rvcrnHtinn uip
thosts ureas through zoninn, anti
develnnnrent review nrocesgns,
a
"
Vinetation is the critical
3,
Pse ff.ltxlhrr.ab.r, ralona
tha edge
3
ttonuire fuNbreaks whore fea' blu
fnct'or in Pira stlrwad.
of dnvral'nninq ,aren5
in "`Iinh''
within "hiah" anti "extrawo" firQ
and "extreme." fire
hazard areas
hazard areas. [nforcr ruouIatians
r.
on vrnatation clearranc"n around
i.,
S t i'Ut" tf1r�'
r•�
"
r1rc, nrotnetinn facilities are
4.
Att'emnt to unarnde
Piro s a r v i co
4
i'romnte formation of vol unLary Lira
marninal. in some areas of the
where economical 11,
feasibloi
companies in remote arang. Inn -
County.
struct additional facilities unci
services as desired by area
rosidontr4 rind a, (,cnnornicall
feasi sale,
Devnlonme, n't in reso'rvoir w 4tor-
5,
Carefullv evaluate
the effect
5.
Pronare land ke plans for
sheds can affect community water
of rievelonme,nt on wafer
supplies.
critical waterYrnd areas. Consido r
sun`71i01
nossihle damanes to watershed in
environmental review.
f
Fire control and sunnressinn
6,
laeterminn th'o level
of )dater
C,
Develon fireprotection standards
is often restricted lry
suno liras nocessary
for no*,
for individual and ca.mmunity ,dater
iradenoate water sunplies.
doveloomont 'far fire nrntection
systems Arvino new Avelnnllont.
nitrr�ASnS,
lall'1c C- 1° If C IIPZARDL`UNIC11"I (con17`rluorl)
lhtf L CHUIT11TI Ott
�� �aL.d:t',r; n 1'l l°►?5 1r"; lit? NI(IncV
r! P la 1 ►� nIq rl ��; 'I � Q �' tatl l i II) i to cf 1);v
i.
rn yt41' tlr�il, r~0 rt t1 v�r�crar� for new
a r r
devc to
r gtanrl�; r(it; ►
7 Ucvc,l0jl r rb r
�r t rl i.11'
inadequato Voter sulllllies.
7
1ment i x ade juat(i for fire
Protection nurnose5.
rtrarl(+,, ilY1Cl cUi"Vt'�i of
y
now i"n�tdr
to nermi t a►1d
0f
manoliverinn
onierDency vo11iclosr
f7ctrtuir'
tiro and
ntul t i n 1 e ncrosla whorl,
f0asihle
renort response times are
often dolaved by inconsistencies
.
ltc'nuire or n -
routnto the cr7sv
identification
D. Dcvolon incl j►ltrilelrtr,nt
;� 00.115fstortr
and deficiencies in street naming
and house
of streets and
developed nronorties,
street nantinrl and l►ouse
nuftlaer nrl
numborinrt�
s/stoin for the entire
PPnuiro
County.
all names and
numher, t0
be c1e�ar1�� vi;�ible:
D. Some human activities and land
use"
sos have za hiall potential for
9.
1?enulato as nd usthose
�. 1101 ► h0ai•*inris to ari0nt
tho
Causinn fires.
esti vi ti es anti uses t��i th a
Birth fire Potential
fire Code 0r Modification,
Jni form
thereof,
extent,
Uses regulated I)v tho 17orr t
Practice, Act.
than avera ne fire
in and areas,
hazard areas, certain i;vnes
1�1.
CMIIate US 0 0f certain 1.1U 1dinrj
materials in
10 Ado hLiiId111n code rF�'nu1rlti0ns
ra
r.a
of build1nn ma toria1s are less
fIamahIo.
arms Of hirlher than
average fire hazard.
for roofing and sidinn
matorilis
in fire hazard areas.
I^
11 Manv residential areas of Prirth
me f ro rill; have
11.
Ren0re Water con noction to n0o1
1T. Adont huildino ca�le r-ruir
s�i7ntlj►inh naols.
for fire nttrnosos,
for such connections,
t ci►ents
Tat.ln IV - C "toisr f°t_rMr,l.r
FINDINIS
tlhiectio,nahlo noise from trans-
nortati(in ftic iIitIos and
stationary sources can have a
sih►lificant imnact on public
heal th and wol fare
Sume asnects of transportntion
rclated noise can be control led
fav the County,
3. bevelonment contiguous to rail-
roads
ailroads and highways can create-, cl
;innificant noise problem..
1. Cndnavor to maintain an acceptable
not n environment in all areas of
the County.
2. Where possible, control the
sources of trans►'aorta ti on noise
to maintain acceatahle levels.
3. nPocial consideration should be..
rtiven to residentil development
and other nui aensrns i ti ve activities
near railroads tinct highways
l tif'C.Ch QNTATIOtt
1. (Adopt a County noise ordinance.
Consider Win lovals recortmand d
in fiauro IV -7, Land tlsp Cmmndti-
hility for Community ,tniso
Environments durinp environmental
nevi ev.
2, Consider noise in the loci► ;.on and
design of County road-,. Loratc,
aircraft f 1 i nht na ths away from
develoned areas where feasible.
3. Ansider noise sources in rr.view
of roninn and Subdivision oro-
nosals.
4, gevelooment near aircraft flight
4, flan for airnort development and
4, Locate noise -sensitive uses away
naths suhlects neonle to objection=
discourage noise -sensitive
from airnorto. nronarc snecific
able noise and threatens future Air-
acti vi tion near ai rnorts.
Airport Environs rons plans for Chico
port onerati ons.
and Orovi l l e ai rnorts. Cncourne
compatible uses nrount► airports.
, Some tvneo of recreational
5. Cantrol recreation activities
M. Place limits on the levels of
activities make objectionable
that have the 'r.otential to
amplified sound and the time and
noise,
cause objectionable noise,
location of outdoor concerts, auto
and motorcycle races, and similar
noisy activiti`as., Idantifv
locations for such activities that,
are c'omoatihle with the nublic
health, welfare anti safety,
n, State legislation requires
6. Provide. bq d9 noise contours
G. ►Jevelon 60dB"noise contours
,noise insulation of new multi
around all major sources.
around major sources wbarn this
famill/ dwellings constructed
information is not-oresently
within the 60 dB noise- exposure
available.
contours.
r
IN
i
!
Figure
LAND USE COMPATAB;ILIT't` FOR CO: ,1LNITy NOISE ENrVZP.fl,N�g:tiTS-
COtii11; -ITY NOISE EhPOSU.RE INTERPRETATION
LAND L SE C.ATErORY OR C,NEL, dB
s5 60 65 70
75 S4
RESIDENTIAL - LO%1 DENSITY _ I
10RMALLY ACCEPTABLE
�
SINGLE FA;NIILY, DUPLE(, f % `� 'P;." �'
Specified land use is satisfactory. based
MOBILE HOMES l
I
upon the assumption that an buildings
gs
Involved ate of normal conventional
r. Y
( misiruction,without any special noise
RESIDENTIAL— �itlLTl, FAMILY `'' x`727
( insulation requirements,
x
I
l
TLODGING - f,l,,./•riFi
CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE
MOTELS, HOTELS j
New construction or development should
[
be undertaken only alter a detailed: a iafvsis
SCHOOLS. LIBRARIES,
of the noise reduction requirements: is made
CHURCHES. HOSPI.ALS.
and needed noise insulation features included
NURSING HOMES
in the design_ Conventional construction„ but
with closed windows and fresh air supply
AUDITOFtJt1ti1S, CO iCERT t t
t systems or air conditioning will normally
HALLS.. Ali1PHITHEATRES lfiir%i
[ suffice.
SPORTS ARENA. OUTDOOR' i
NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE
'
SPECTATOR. SPORTS
New construction or development should
�
generally be discouraged. If new construction
or development does proceed, a detailed analysis
PLAYGROUNDS,
of the noise reductiorz requirements must be
�
J
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS I
made and needed noise insulation features
included in the -design -
GOLF COURSES, RIDING
`
STABLES, WATER R ECREATION,
i
#
CEMETERIES
' CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE
}
,
Mew construction or development should
genera!!y_tot be undertaken
OFFICE BUILDINGS. BUSINESS '
CO' MERCiAL A
PROFESSiONAt
1,NDUSTRIAL,.NIAtiClFACTURING
UTILITIES, AGRICULTURE
CONSi'DERATIONS IN, DETERt4lNAT1ON OF NOISE—COMPATIBLE, LAND USE
A. NOWAAL12ED NOISE EXPOSURE INFORMATION DESIRED
manicy Noise Ezpasue,>reas greater than 65 dSsltau;d Le discour--
Where sufficient data existsevaluate laud' Ise suitabitit} withreipect
"normalized"
age and considered Joeared within normally urraccrptable areas.
to a value ofCNEL or ! dn_ -Normalized values are
obtained by adding or subtracting the constants described
;t
in T2b1-1
to the,measurcd or caiwlated value of CNEL or Ldn.
C. SUITABLE INTERIOR ENviRONMEhTS
One objective of locating; residential tient, rdati.e to a known noir"_•e
B: NOISE SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS
source is to maintain a suitable interior noise, environment at no
I
The land use rose compatibility recommendation shoutd be viewed
-treater than 4S dS -CNEL of Ldr Tlris:eguircment, coupled witb
the measured or catculated no-ic induction p rformance Df:he lupe
in relation: to thesprc sotTcc of the ntii<r Forrxamp:e, airs zri
andrailroad noise isnorrralivmdeupafhigher
ofst:ucture under consideration, should govern rSe mint -tum accep -
zbledi"'ncetoa
single no. evens
thaa auto 'traffic but occurs .rss frequenil1, Therefore, different
noise sourcc
sources yiel&;g the samewmpositcnoise capasure do not necessarily
create the str.,e naisr environment. The 5ta:e Aer.roautic; ,pct uses
65 d8 CNEL as the criterion wlit[4 airrnrr
c
`D- ACCEPTAELE OUTDOOR Er'VIRONM NTS
l
i
n z Iver*uri;y evert :a
prosect existing residorriai eommun..ies from _raccep ab - eagoe .
- to aircraft nose. In order io facii:zate
Anor6r cersideretioa, v hic4 in so. it, cor.mnunities h-arra.err;di ng
factor„ is Ere dc�ire iur a:_.rrcepra! re c_rdea na;se irstro�eaert
the purposes of, he Act, o.=:cuf
which is. to encourage land uses compatible sr zh trtr 35 es 04EL
Wbcn this is the case, morexrst':r:"—ia-e s::nda-ds fcr tang. t;sr rotFs.
'car
criterion -hereser possible, ard`in wd.r °o a r h
- e t :ct..e aSi:it of
airports to comply with the Act,reside'tral
atibdit w
p y. �1Pr v _dose fr niaxi. ur.- Considered llv
o red " Pore
- ' ;or hat'
a.cepra$+r rand arse c .e tr ', may be appropriate
u.es located "t Corr
t
i
V
Tablo V-1, SCEMI r HIMAY r4.1'ME"T
L'1f4La.ltlrliC�f7l.l
CY
Ir'I') UrurrATIO((
1.
Cotte County has many areas of
1.
Protect valoahlo scenic areas
1.
Consider development of a wthnt
ni ctu'res joe natural landscapes.
For Oniovmr_n t Iry resi dvn is and
of scapi c i ncludinq
visi tears.
llinhway 32 nnrth of rarest On
and llinhwny 7n north of Deniz-
i'1anal i a Highway
?.
Scenic corridor boundearies
should include
2.
Delineate scenic cnr"ridors
2.
Consider State criteria. My/
areas visible
with careful consideration of
scenic corridors. Solicit citizen
from hinhways and out tandinq
all factors.
narticiPation throunh nublic
-
natural or man-made features,
herarinns.
i,
fevelonment within a scenic
3.
Consider acenic value, in the
3.
nenuire Planninn Commission annual
highway rinht-of-way can have
dasinn and ionrovement of scenic
review of major road nrojws to
a significant imnact an view,
l ir',.Iiav rinlats-of-oau;-
include concern for sCenic YOUCS.
^.
'lumo'rous vehicle access paints
4
Control access to scenic h nh-
4.
Utilize existinn acceis where
Wnn scenic hinhways can imnact
ways to maintain safety,
feasible. Limit encroachment
r
N ivor safety,__
permits for safety.
unsiohtly annearan co,
5.
Locate and dosinn utility
5,
Review the locration and de5irin nF
ut lit,v lines and structures
structures to minimize visual
major future transmission lines.
be mitioa'ted by incon-
imnact where economically
Kenuire the loast consnicuous
. 1ruous sitinn and pleasinn
feasible,
location of distribution lines,
i!osion-
there there is reasonable choice.
r.
of scenic rlocals
isolargely
G.
cinoscenicicorridore land
G.
zoningvordinarice to iFinlement
dKendent onction
patterns s
CountyAmend pnalolc,.
land use renu'lations.
7.
An effective scenic highways
7,.
Promote the County's scenic
7,
Indicate�loutes on nubl c mans and
nrogr�am roquires active local
hinhways nrooram,
ace Binns on adopted
involvement and sunnort.
routes. Encourage advertisinq by
Ci?amhers of Commerce a6d others.
Seek citizen -participation in all
aspects of program,
}
' itM i W 01' SEISMIC SAFETY ELEMENT IN CITY Alit) COUIITY
GENERAL PLANS By THE CAL I FOAN IA DIVISION OF Mi ILLS, AND GCUI,OGY
,a
city P1an � �..:...._._ M_.�...�. ._ lip,,,t awed by �Porlry Y,gym r;rato 3/7/77
+ ngrncering Geologist Da County Plan 3uttc County Roger• S'horburnc
Flle No. S ismo og st Det.
REVIEWD
OF REPORT �, To be
NN required
SUPPORT I ATOS THAT o< �� . 1.�` oy �� b local
DATA ` -ordinance �-... �,ae, as �- COMMENT
yes no
1. P9, 11;-7 Regarding
Identification ima S where a pro ."
siGall N -MV trend fa -C,
riatc of seismic Hazards
near Chico --question
statement that these
A Surface Faulting,
faults are not acti.
1. Location of active and potentially
❑
❑
❑
if reported earthqus..
are associated with
active faults.
2. Past displacement and history of
them. May have to
active faults;
_
1:1
❑
❑
wait until Woodward-
Clyde report regard'
_ _
B.� Grotmd Shaking — —_. — — — — —
--;-,
ry
the Auburn Dace is
1.y Tabulation of all earthquakes of
available.
magnitude- 5.5 and above within
100 kilometers of the study
i '1
2:
i I
❑
2. Map IT -1: Ort�ville
earthquake o 1 A+.tY
boundary.
LJ
L�1
❑
�.
2,* Maximum credible and maximum
1975 generally acce-
Richter magnitude 5.'.'
PPobable bedrock accelerations❑
LX1❑
❑
Earthquake
and a discussion of the risk or
shown ye ..
probabilities for damagingg events,
Carvel Peak fault 1,
3. Outline of area of amplifying or
damping effects
❑
❑
❑
❑
the new Berkeley
of unconsolidated
solution 1.975 moves
.1maae..r.i a La._ _ ._ t
this epicenter 717 as
C Areas with the potential for,
X
❑j
�❑
a
s`r3o,vm to coordinate;
ground failure due to.-
1. Landslides.
1
❑
❑
8 February 1940
40 Pl
3. Seismic2.
❑'
❑
j❑jtion.
'•—u
❑
IN
�2P1,,,• 5. �,�
settlementand di fr
� 5.7
feren t i al compa-t ion,.
❑
❑
❑
❑�
14.*_Lurchin
:Earthquake shown S;
— -- — .� —, -
D Earthquake Induced Flooding (failure
--.,.
t "1
-µl _
C❑
�
_ _ .�
n
� —
Chico Chico reported
5 5.91 Bos
_ �f dams: ori l evees
LJ
U
- ,however
_
IW. Tsunamis (location) —
❑
j j,
`�'
`,--�-
ley reports Pd- 4.7
'earthquake
-_ _ _. . _ _,� r_ .. _
_ +�--� _'
lJ
_L J
(date of
F. Seiches (location)❑
h
❑�
❑�
ti�as 29 April. 1;966).
G.* References
n
❑~
❑
(-'j
3. T}re possibility that
'future geologic stud -
Ni.* Geologic Report Prepared or Signed
may establish a rei-
by a Geologist Registered In the
State
❑
t"I
tJ
❑
j`�
L
tionship between
of Ca Ifort! la
_1
reservoir -induced eu-
sed on criteria suggested by the COMG and
quakes and the Clev.
ire nf)t included in 'rG`n��,r�j 1 P l :a, Gu i '4�
land hill fault shy,.
Cva 1'+ C lon for Po l 1 c 1 es andrams
A.'` Criteria fou Identifying ,and
abtrting eXistlnq structural hazards.
n rr N 'r. •.w' r...• , +•M .•�. �...� wn�r r.. ..+w M w. .e
'
I3. itelailan of se srnrc hazards to all
mandated elem„nts Including housing'
�,,,,�.land use one, circulatian. patterns _.,
C. Levels of risk defined for all seismic
hazards and implementation.
p. Local government policy on dev-
elopments or structures in
"Special Study" zones (Alquist-
Pr i.ol o Act) . ,
.0
�
Ely
17,7
�.,.
/
.�• �pw..•.•�.l+M
❑
El
�
r--•=
..
�
.y„ firuf UVUYda,�
uRr Wjg11,al:ct ►nary old
btt ldingo Were daiwti,,,
The ("Ae3Ci, QE��`l;hgU�,il:G 1,
otruce compl("':
1:tLil.uto of tho buil.0
•r )
1 l,a t i{s, 1/liM �M�r/4� �:1
*the s�t.Coty of 1;hclao ,
ptructUrect'?
Implementation of Seismic safety
Element
A. Updating the building code to
❑
5`
Q
❑
i
5 Because most carthquu:t.:
damages ar. due to
reflect changes in technology.
;
ground shaking effect,,
B., Inclusion of appropriate
it is recommended that
requirements and procedures in
buildings should be
zoning, subdivision and site
designed according to
development regulations and
5.
the provisions of UBO
building codes,. Designation of
❑
-(tsice
special zones with special land
active fault ohes),
Zone e fault
e
development regulations such as
"seismic hazards management
adjacent to active w,'.
zones).
zones".
C Building inspection program to
identify unsafe structures and
F]❑
I !
instigate necessary corrective
measr.'res.
D. Inclusion of potential earth-
quake destruction in contin-
gency plans for major disasters
and emergencies. Review and
F -71
❑
o
liaison with Emergency Prepared -
R
ness Organizations and Police
Department of overall plans and
-
major ,public facilities proposals; ,
as to their adequacy in emergency'
situation.
E. Preparation of 'renewal plans for
areas where a change in use and
development pattern is necessary
because
EJ
❑
i
of major seismic damage
.orextreme hazard:
F. Educational programs to develop
community awareness of seismic
ElEl
F-1hazards.
'
EDMUND 0, [BROWN J9,
aav Ilr4on
March 10, 1977
ooVraNas�"5 OFFI�1:
OFFICE OF PLANNING; AND RESEARCH
1400 TENTH STRrET
SACRAMENTO nsLi 1 a
MG) S22-2318
t� o
�r
Mr. Bernard Ri.cht(rr, Chairman
Butte County Board of Supervisory
County Administration Building
Oroville,, California 95965
Dear Smpervisor Richter:
Thank you, for the opportunity to comment an the draft, Butte Count General
Plan, January, 1977. in general, this craft repr_esen�s a significant
improvement oven: the earlier elements. There are, however, certain
areas which we feel deserve attention. These comments were developed
in cooperation with the State Seismic Safety Commission and the Office
of Noise Control and are organized by each specific general plan element
and appear below.
Seismic Safety Element.
!` The draft seismic safety element focuses on a discussion of the seismic
history and a brief evaluation of fault zone activity in Stitte: County.
Several deficiencies have been identified and are summarized below.
1. The draft element does not adequately consider structural. hazards.
8xisting structures such as hospitals, public utilityfacilities,
dams,Pirehouses, schools, and other city buildings should be
identified and evaluated in order to develop policies and programs
to reduce structural hazards.
2. Tt is suggested, in view of recent earthquake activity, that
the County undertake detailed studies in conjunction with the
State Division of Mines and Geology of all potentially active
fault zones north and south of the Cleveland Kill Fault. Since
the fault is active, its extent should be known.
3. There is no indication as to whether the County has adopted the
model ordinance or a reasonable facsimile for the Cleveland Hills
Fault as required under the Alqui.st-Priclo Special. lane, Act.
Information on the model ordinance and the Flquist-Priolo Special
Studies Zones Act is provided in the Division of dines toad Geal.ogyt s
Fault fia-+ard Zones in CaLi.eornia, Special Publication 42, January,
1976,
1 h 101 1977
y .. -.he- Policy and imp emonta,l"Ion
11Z eXtremely weak and an nF4ed i r w<: �Fl:ZFa.wl G:r.k«For example,
.4'.11.Cilemt nt ,Alon Action # it�,C;�;�F �, =nzil.,°�":...'", anon oFtheMost
recent sAsmic hazard in•Cormati!tw I.r all4. 2oaitz;t r'Io siOna
Smch an implementing action shout,_ rr ro><IM :,pacifac �-nd positi
in indicating haw this information t -III be cansirlered and used.
5.
it is sugge,ted that the County cot ider 4wvelopmcnt, of policies
to deal with such areas as groundah::ktng, landslides, open space
zoning in hazardous areas, consideration of adopting Chapter 70
of the Building Code, review of critical facilities for potential
hazards, establishment of a seismic Safety revIew and monitoring
program, and consideration of seismic hazard aspects in the
environmental review process.
The text of the report indicates that there is ansu;6facient
information to develop findings on groundsh.aki.ng :in areas of
potentially active faults (page 11-»2_,7) However, in view of
the fact that the area did experience x moderate earthquake in
1975 and now has an active fault, _z=r;h ground motion should
have occurred to at .least furnish A fa.ndin; and policy on ground -
shaking and seismic compaction.
Safetv Element
The dramft safety element; in general, _ ^ood identification
of geologic and fire hazards. Fire deficianzies have been identified,
that Mh�ruld be addressed in the final eletTsnt.
1. Mhz text of the geologic hazards Su^le,n is limited to a
discussion of the characteristics and distribution of the si-,
major forms of geologic hazards in the County. No attempt: in
the tent is made to ,specify potential geologic hazards and
define an acceptable level, of risk.
2. As in the seismic safety element, both the geologic and fire
hazard subelements are deficient in identicying and evaluating
existing structural hazards and determining acceptable,levels
of risk:
The revised element should discuss and evaluate the
adequacy of dams, public` utility facilities, water, storage
and transfer facilities, hospitals, and other public buildings
thought to be substantial structures.
y. Both the geologic and fare hazard subel::ments are deficient
in discltn8ing the regulation of 1_nd use in areas of potential
hazards. The text of the revior--d 'Sl. a!M.t should discuss appro-
ariate land uses and restrictiol-&3 4a ;: e,a of dt.-it,ignated .100
year flo6o' 'plains,dam irarr inri. iii an .a -,: , cratid; l fire areas,
pQtdntially active fault zone3. tr,
k
Supervivor Rlchtr r
0
T3_ Wirrh 10, 1977
4 '.Ohn safety =.lrment cant , nz, an inadviq,:i ito of poJJ.cJ o,,,s
;,nd progr-unG to ensure: th; nr.w comnty dtw l.o�);rion>: is devlejned
to control n.;l ttiral anrl t",'.n(;,t)d--a to ;:v:c pt-ibl 1 've;l.s o;E
risk. At a minimLuii, th.a Count:yv s ta'rilding regulal;ions should
be reviewed and ,revis,ad f,,a J.ncorpor;, to new minimum safety, rr!qu.i.re..
ments regarding seismic rrezisLance, flood -proofing, and f1ce
proofing
5. One of the ceribi7a,l purp:5:ies of 'Lbe. saiety element is an analysis
of the ability of people to respond to expected geologic and
fire hazards. The draft safety, element contains no evalu;;ition
of the County's emergency preparedness program to respond to
such hazards. In evaluating emergency preparedness, the revised
safety element should specifically consider the adequacy of
its: (`1) emergency response organizations (civil defense, ambu.
lance $ and police); (2) communication system; and (3) emc,rgency
medical care. system.
Noise Element
The noisy: element appears to meet all of the necosssry requirements pro--
vided in California Government Co -ie Section 65?.32(9). Thera are, however,.
two improvements that• we recommend be constdtirei.
i.; The element does not pn)vi'e :in indication of noise corrosUb"Le
land use sLondards. 13aa._oally, such standard, are an effective
means of determining how ;much noise i:� too much for a given
land use in a community. It is xecot.mended Lh-:t the CounL-y
consider adoption of standards similar to masa provided on.
pr.�ge 25 of the Guideline.: foo the Preparation :ind Content of
Noise Control, February, 1876.
2 The policies provided on page IV -25 should provide mitigating
measures to deal with other identified noise sources. These
should include measures to insure that public buildings and
private homes are sufficiently insulated for noise, that noise
emission limits are placed on county construction projects,
and that the County adopt low noise specifications for purchase
of new trucks and automobiles,.
Scenic Highways Elorient
Thq sc--nla highways Ac-.MwenL iti fo';nd to gen,:Wally meet all of the require-
ments provided in Government Cori:. ;;action 6530—e(h) , with 'thp follows nj
tr6's dr�Ei�a�dncie5.
I . M_ 't�Ixt not ids n "Ir; r.�;. any of scenic high-
t�»y corrt6--r 8 el,iglb1v: :war tisrt , Lha ctniw hi.ii��:ak^
� i� 'F'W
J.a, dt.��j�,,,��
d
,syph j•.#
F{�� EYI� Lt ✓i`
dr(,rlt��`.�y
/ / / Y
• d
� � / 1 d / ,"1�'Y�Fi614'{r
�t12
•
•
tt.{iys 1t r7;
4
4T
• •
• • • 1
1 ,Ra4P ad
�b � 1i5�
I� ? 11 I Fi
1 •
l l • �
l bx° � t � 1
nM
1A
tet��y t
1 it f,
� /
/
/ • ie,�ya �
L;fa t al'
R[
3`� t xt11r
qf1/}}
� I tsfl
1u��
AJ 'F
yip
i$ IS i
,�l fi tAtf
i
t' ✓ Fd.
1� r A'r t5
�,rS;rlAylf F4{r
bfF, "A tit
1f Ji C�t;�
t r+li
•
x r .
rxyY, ,.
Ari J.
IF^'Sr y IJY!
Lf'! i'I FAA
nn
�;k PSA ff° Y
rj 1 i
�vVti��dS'�'�S
�i�r �r
"UW iC •�
91 'Iti(Mtff
'It�r1�1Y � Y�
11 r
r
c
1
8 rI
r
/,
f Id' T
51 M tri
iA 1 4 �
5
�titbry ��}�.;
a i
S.., r.. ,�.. . ,: .,,o,., �` ,.. .±..,. , ,,'�,,. r t r 1111
yr,>. ,r
1 a'l4A . ..:."..r,�. f�1 r...� . 4..i, � .R.'i . rSIL� .ri_. ,�G.t.y•... tip�,.J.�p .. fh. r Yd Ji . ]'„ .d.a.,. �.1:e�.+.�.... .F,r.,LJ..��.�_��h..vwA...y.. ,„.... ,x . .(Ar�,v.Ai,li,i.2 .�,. p...p.r:,?..'AIN.... .1A.V.f..x.In
I"t i..A A'%, Xr.a. ,r� 1 .,. 'n X.�i lr,g r.J N,�4♦
x�?l.Ta d.r�rt.r1,...,� {„F rd+•k Yt � ,'Tr :VA, YAA
w A,,.. � ...., 5. a.. I r . ,... rw
i !ri{-u.,,... d, c. .�:A. i Fi. rI . f./.. x r M,C,,..l i'.x.�,i:.�,1,,1,. Y11 � v. �a,,C ,. . ttA//....,N.�...�.... .�.$'a. �A.'Mi
'•n^' .,. N.rt f2A(, ,l$..vdd�'`r
� bk ..... ! �1F1,�
Ax.l I:rp
..
.,
h.,:, r
�.. C „.... � r .,v. o-, .s v „�.. hf t
.A.lf.4r 1:lp'..1Y�.. .{,.F,-K,..,-�',.4, . h .1hu.,t +..jy�,A, .r. �.r,.S. :.. �:ii.:X. ,. A ,f f5Sl�,i.Y..r �i.},.....»!. i't.. ��. r..c.-..;i:,1{r♦ /t .y� ypi�.r . da.�+..,.�. .,.�.u,., .T //.. .�1..rn�,kIr 1
i>v, ..-,.. 1,.., Yti rm ,
,,,G.RI 4.,� 5'A r. x.;dY RY
itltlt�d^a
i
YbYt�t1.
H
��,AWa 2 A�i21
�r p
n
t;
t 4 1Ar
•. yl S
4 ..
Jr1
it r t31 it
�
k•�t n.
.11 Y Y I,i CY r Y
,'4. ,... r;, ,P,,.JrA wj .. G++',r 7 ..vo r .et; •, wl� A ! 1��,
,.„ -;r .l .•C r ., ..t.. t. f J, .,, t r.1 .. � � t ;l � x r ;t,.
rf C!.�C.k�.ri t.(.,4 j , ti.,:i�fn�. .A,5fi•.1.:. .%�,. r (d ... .5!..�..rrx.f . .e:3,,,�..;.. P. f YaIl 1r.' �t:.b' �.:�M' r" ? ] ��'..,..'YA` Y J A i '.�:.�'.�..14 , tI� 7.rxF.. 4i, .rbi:A,:.p. ., %y .�. pps�.::t�,A r
1:, ;� it",. .t :T.i JA Il.A .r1.. r ,::" I i� b5
r ., �,�. .{ n! �;,,.. ��,�� ' Y Y,
r ^' x.b
I, ADDITIONAL IMPACTS RESULTING FROM MODIFICATIONS
TO THE UNDERLYING PROJECT
Proposed changes to the text and policy ''tatements
of the four general plan elements under consideration
have been reviewed by the Environmental Review
Director to verify that the proposed changes are
adequately discussed in the environmental impact
report... As a result of this review, three proposed
changes were identified for which additional
discussion in the Environmental Impact Report is
required. They are the following_
(1) The proposal to include in the Fire Hazard -Sub
Element a policy of promoting controlled burning.
(p.III-23) The impacts of wildland fires are described
n the text of the Fire Hazard Sub -Element beginning.
on page 1II-15. Controlled burns produce the same
impacts except some adverse impacts, particularly
hazards to life and structures, are reduced or avoided
by
a. Careful selection _of the site to be burned
b. Site preparation (fire breaks, etc.), and
c. Provision of fire suppression equipment for
contingency use
(2) The proposal to change the Geologic Hazard Sub-
Element (Implementation Measure No, 5) to include
support for canal projects to bring surface waters
into Butte County wherever possible. Depending on
the source and destination of the water and the type,
size and route of the canal, a number of potential
impacts can be anticipated. Generally: speaking,
effects of canal construction could include altered
,and use patterns, changed vegetative characteristics,
Anged land forms due to construction, altered soil
sture content in certain areas due to seepage and
i cation, changed visual appearance of the landscape,
is on wildlife, deposit of salts in irrigated
and effect on groundwater tables. It is
,,.ummPnded that detailed environmental analysis be
conducted on a project by projectbasis.
(3) The proposal to change the Geologic Hazard subs
element (Implementation Measure No. 7) to recommend
use of iii prap and other devices to halt river bank
erosion. These activities could affect scenery,
riverside vegetation, and riparian wildlife habitats.
Critical habitats should be identified and protected
by, an ,appropriate means.
-C
C1 1
72.
hA
LL
engineers 23 June '1977
pl,xntiers
economists R10425.Ap
scientists
Mr. Darr Blackstock
County Counsel
County of Butte
Butte County Courthouse
Oroville, California 95965
Dear Dan:
Enclosed is a draft of the response to the Office of Planning
and Research letter of 10 March. Copies were also sent to Supervlsor
Richter, Jim. Lawson, and Bob Galser.
think the response is comprehensive enough to satisfy OPR.
You will notice that there are several references to legal require-
ments contained in the response. These references should be
carefully checked for language and accuracy. There are also state-
ments concerning actions the County has taken or will take that
should be confirmed.
After researching and writing the response, I formed three main'
Impressions about OpR's letter: (1) their tone is one of enforcement
rather than advice, (2) they do not seem to research Local conditions,
and (3) they are prone to freely interpret the law and cite requiremen`-;
not in the law. In my opinion, most of their letter was unnecessary
and served little in helping Butte County merit its obligations.
Working with you, the Supervisors, the planning commissioners,
the planning staff, and all of the other people on the County's
staff was very rewarding to me and to the others at CH2M HILL..
Now that the County Is no longer under the gun,, we hope the
County will be free. to continue its planning programs in a more
unhurried and methodical manner.
Because of our involvement in, preparing the elements, we developed
a special feeling of attachment to the County., its problems and
opportunities, and its people we met and worked with. If we
can please Ilst et usutte kn w. We would lin anike t benin durig t lveduaga nour ftureplanning,
Sincerely,
Bradford Blandin
Manager, Planning Division
vm
Enclosure
cc: BernardRichter, Chairman
Board of Supervisors ,Ufa Co. PtanningComm,
Jim Lawson "SUN is 1 ? `
Bob Gasser
Gcovilla, C:nll4ornitt,
sacrallivilta offico K 555 Capitol Niall, Suite 1290 5acranionto, California 95814 916/441.1955
Bul+o Cou0y Cnun"l
C IM I I LL
JUN /. 4 1/
en ineePS 23 June 1977 Urovillo, Califam:
planners
economists R1
sciendstS
Mr, pan Blackstock
County Counsel
County of Butte
Butte bounty Courthouse
Oroville, California 95965
Dear Dart:
Enclosed is a draft of the response to the offlr<e of Planning
and Research letter of 10 March. Copies were also sent to Supervisor
Richter, .liar Lawson, and Bob Gaiser,,
think the response is comprehensive enough to satisfy OPR.
Your will notice that there are several references to legal require -
merits contained in the response, These references should be
carefully checked for language and accuracy. 'f here are also state-
ments concerning actions the County has taken or will take that
shou!d be confirrried.
After researching and writing the response, I formed three main
impressions about OPR's letter; (1') their tone hs one of enforcement
rather than advice (2) they do not seem to research local conditions,
and (3) they are prone to freely interpret the law and cite requirei'rients
not in the law. In my opinion, most of their letter was unnecessary
and served 'Tittle in helping Butte County meet its obligations,
Working with you, the, Supervisors, the planning commissioners,
the planning staff, and all of the other people on the County's
staff was very rewarding to me and to the o" x8 at CF12M HILL,
Now that the County is no Longer under the gun, we hope the
County will be free to continue Its planning programs in a more
unhurried and methodical manner,
Because of our involvement ire preparing the elements, we developed
a special feeling of attachment to the County, its problems, and.
opportunities, and its people we met and worked with. If we
ran assist Butte County in any way during your future planning,
please let us know, We would like to be involved again.
Sincerely,
Bradford Blandin
Manager, Planning Division
vr
Enclosure
Cc : Bernard Richter, Chairman
Board of Supervisors
Jim Lawson
Bob Gaiter
Sacramento Office n 55t, cipitol stall. Suite 1290 wain entu. Co lirornia 9181 k)MI.1 11)-3411
D R A F T
(BUTTE COUNTY LETTERHEAD)
Duffo Cd. Planning Comm,
OrOY1110, C0410rnfq
Ms. Vivian Kahn, Chief
Community Assistance
Office of Planting and Research
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Ms. Kahn
Thank you for the evaluation of Butte County's draft Seismic
Safety, Safetyr Noise, and Scenic Highways elements. Your
comments and suggestions were thoughtfully considered.
Unfortunately, your letter arrived in Oroville the day after
tie close of the 6 week public hearing period., As you are
aware, our agreement with the State called for completion of
the four elements by 15 March. The Board of Supervisors
took final action to adopt the four E.aments with certain
revisions on that date A copy of the adopted document has
been forwarded to your office.
Attached to this letter are responses to your comments; We
feel this letter,'along faith the responses will satisfy
most of your concerns about the status of Butte county's
planning program and related development and public safety
regulations.
Your comments were considered mostly constructive but certain
parts lead to questions about OPR's role in the. planning
;;process. The County understands OPR's role in the administra-- '
tion of the Stat.,,;, planning law to be advisory in nature and
primarily to a583,*,t local government. With this in mind,
the County, questic' ns ` the to se of the words "deficient" and
"'inadequate" in your evaluation if an element is thought
to he inadequate according to the'OPR staff's interpretation
of the law and the purpose of the Gpneral 'flan Guidelines,
then it would be most helpful if 'the- inadequacy could be
x
q
��rrr'4
referenced to specific requirements of the law`an' sections
of the Guidelines. In several cases it seems that the
requirements you cite do not originate in t1Ye law or in the
Guidelines
The evaluation of the adequacy of the County's policies and
the measures to be taku-n to implement those policies would
have been ,even more helpful if local conditions had been
considered. These policies and implementation measures
which were developed within the framework of time, place,
resources, and public input serve as Butte County's current,
statement of direction, priorities, and goals,. The Guide-
lines point out that planning is effective only to the
extent it serves the local government's decision makers."
Clearly, it remains the local legislative body s responsi-
bility to develop and implement a_ coordinated set of plans
and programs suited to local conditions.,
To quote from the General Plan Guidelines again, the plan-
ning process calls for a ". realistic, on-going program
for implementation The four elements are but a few of
the documents utilized in preparing a comprehensive General'
Plan and in developing consistent ordinances. The County
has already taken steps to prepare follow-up General Plan
documents. Following adoption of a comprehensive Genera]
Plan, the County will, as the General Plan Guidelines state;
0 "Investigate and make recommendations regarding
implementation.'
0 'Consult and advise (with others) on ways of
carrying out the plan,'
2
Vii,
0 'Review referrals as to conformity with the
General Plan (all real property acquisition and
dispositions, construction of buildings and other
structures).
a 'Develop and adopt regulatory programs (zoning and
subdivision ordinances, building and housing codes
and other devices) which will implement the
polities described in the General Plan."
The County will proceed steadily with these activities as
guided by local priorities and fiscal resources,
(Complimentary Close)
Bernard Richter, Chairman
Butte County Board of Supervisors
Enclosures
cc Bill: Press, office of Planning And Research
Peter Stromberg, Seismic Safety Commission
Jack Swing, office of Noise Control
Brad Blandin, CH2M HILL
Jim Lawson
Dan Blackstock
D R A F
3
D
jJFT'
ATTACHMENT
RESPONSE TO SPECQTFXC COMMENTS
SEISMIC SAFETY ELEMENT
Comment 1
The draft element does not adequately consider structural
hazards. Existing structures such as hospitals, public
utility facilities, dams, fire houses, schools, and other
city building's should be identified and evaluated in order
to develop policies and programs to reduce structural hazards.
Response to Comment 1
On two occasions, one by telephone to our consultant and the
other in conference with our staff and our consultant, a
responsible OPR staff person stated that the County's develop-
mont of the four elements need only consider the particulars
of activities, programs, and conditions within the unincorpor-
ated areas of Butte County. Each of the four elements was
developed with this guidance in mind.
On page II -21 of the draft report it is clearly stated that.
"The Division of Safety of Dams has no knowledge of any
dam within the County that could presently be considered
y ion`'s seismic evaluation
a safety hazard under the Diva
criteria.„
It is not up to the County to judge otherwise without question
ing the 'Division's evaluation. To consider, 'such would
l
M1 w
require the County to develop extensive data and conduct
conclusive analyses showing dams, or a dam, to be unsafe -- a
,,pursuit hardly worth consideration.
The Field Act)as amended Pertains to the structural safety
of California's schools. According to the law, each public
school building was to be analyzed dor structural integrity
by 1970. All public schools in the unincorporated County
have been: inspected and have been found safe, repaired, or
reconstructed to meet the safety requirements A similar law
applies to the construction, alteration, or reconstruction of
hospitals'(Section 15000 of the Health and Safety Code)
Comment 2
It is suggested, in view of recent earthquake activity, that
the County undertake detailed studies in conjunction with
the State Division of Mines and Geology of all potentially
active fault zones north and south of the Cleveland Hill
Fault. Since the fault is active, its extent should be
known.
Response to Comment 2 -
Butte County should not be expected to equip and staff in
order to participate in detailed studies of potential fault
zones when the State Geologist is already doing so. The
California Division of Mines and Geology has published several
reports on the 1975 Oroville earthquake and is probably the
most qualified agency Ito judge the extent of the Cleveland
Hill. Fault and nearby potentially active fault zones.
Furthermore, the Special Studies Zones Act requires the
State Geologist to "continually review new geologic and
seismic data in order to revise existing zones and identify
v;
new Zones. The Chief Geologist for the Division has assured
our consultant that as new information becomes available,
the location and length of the Cleveland Hill Fault,may
changet but as of now, the fault is well mapped and not
likely to be redefined in the near future.
Naturally, Butte county is concerned about the extent and
activity of the Cleveland Hill Fault or other fault zones,
active or inactive, related or unrelated to th.e Cleveland
Hill Fault, and certainly encourages studies in this area to
continue. The County does not feel,however, that the County
should judge the adequacy of the work done by the Division
of Mines and Geology nor should the County actively undertake
on-going earthquake studies in conjunction with the Division
of Mines and Geology or any othetr agency.
comment 3
There is no indication as to whether the County has adopted
the model ordinance or a reasonable facsimile for the Cleve-
land Hill Fault as required under tha� A.lquist-Pziolo special
Study Zones Act. Inform.- on on the,,.mPdeJ ordinance, and the
AlqUjst_Pxjolo Special Study Zones Act Is provided in the
Division of Mines and Geology's Fault Hazard Zones In
4 4 4 d7, 'tA n 77.P r 17 _ 797A_
and Code) Section 2621.5 of Chapter 7.5 does state,however',
that the purpose of the Act is
".., to provide for the adoption and administration of
zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by
cities and counties in implementation of the general:
plan that is in effect.
Now that Butte County's Seismic Safety Element is adopted
and in effect, the County will, as stated in the policy
contained in the element, follow the policies and criteria
of the State Mining and Geology Board and exercise review
and approval authority over all development within the
Special Study Zones as required by law. This clearly
implies that the County will draft, adopt, and implement any
ordinances, regulations, and procedures such as those in the
Model Ordinance and Code necessary to carry out the policy
and provide for public safety.
Comment 4
The Policy and Implementation Section, provided on Page
II -22, is extremely weak and in need ,of substantial work.
For example, implementation Action #2 suggests consideration
..for the most recent seismic hazard information in all zoning
decisions. Such an implementing action should be more
specific and positive in indicating how this information
wl. be considered and used.
It is suggested that the County consider development of
policies to deal with such areasas groundshaking landslides,
open ,space zoning in hazardous areas, consideration of
adopting Chapter 70 of the Building code, review `of critical
facilities for potential hazards, establishment of a seismic
safety review and monitoring program, and consideration of
seismic hazard aRpects in the environmental review process.
Implementation Measure #2 need not be more specific.
Adoption clearly serves as a directive to the County planning
Commission and the Department of Planning Staff that all
available seismic data will be used in the evaluation of
each zoning proposal.. Further, this implies that seismic'
information be current and that the Planning Department
Staff review the information before recommending appropriate
action to the Commission„ As a matter of procedure, the
Commission's findings and recommendations are forwarded to
the Board of Supervisors for a decision. To protect the
public safety and to deal fairly with applicants, this
process is not haphazardly administered..
As part of its responsibility to the public, the County is
always ready to consider the development of policies to
protect the public welfare. Recently adopted policies
relating to groundshaking are.included in the Seismic
Safety Element; those relating to landslides are included in
the Safety Element. The Seismic Safety Element is but one
part of the comprehensive county -wide General Plan. The
Open Space Element is another and the Land Use Element
another. Each of these elements, as well as six others,
must be fully coordinated and integrated before consistent
zoning can be developed for hazardous areas or any other
area for that matter. The.County is proceeding with a
comprehensive integration and updating of all the required
elements
The County has already adopted Chapter 7.0 of the Uniform
Building Code.
Review of critical facilities and 'seismic review and monitor-
ing are discussed in the responses to Comments 1 and 2. The
5
R
14
FT
County does not plan to duplicate the work nor assume the
function of qualified agencies already established and
funded for these 'purposes
Consideration of seismic hazards is an integral part of the
County's environmental review procedures which were adopted
according to the State's MR Guidelines (Item 11-1g, Ap-
pendix I, Chapter 3, Title 14)
Comment 5
The text of the report indicates that there is insufficient
information to develop findings on groundshaking in areas
of potentially active faults (Page Tz-17J. However, in view
of the fact that the area did experience a moderate earth-
quake in 1975 and now has an active fault, enough ground
motion should have occurred to at least furnish a finding
and policy on groundshaking and seiw is compaction.
Response To -Comment 5
The text of the draft report does not state the above. It
does say on Page II -17 that: "There are not enough geologic
and seismic data available in Butte County to accurately
estimate seismic or ground response at a particular site."
Examination of the Seismic: Safety Element, and Table II -1
in particular, will show that ground motion data from -the
1975 Orovi,lle earthquake was used in the analysis. The
Oroville earthquake was local in nature and, considering its
moderate magnitude and ;relatively low intensity, it is not
thought to' be a typical seismic event to` be dealt with in
Butte
County in view of other seismic activity outside of
the County with potentially greater magnitude.
s,.
generally respond to questions of risk as they saw it. The.
policies and implementation measures adopted by the County
At the end of this period take into account the public view
and are in themselves statements of relative acceptability.
Where the level of hazard was found to be acceptable no
mitigating action was formulated while if a hazard was
judged to be unacceptable a mitigating action was formulated
and adopted. Simply put, the mere presence of a responding
policy and implementation measure means that the level of
risk involved ,in a particular hazard was unacceptable to the
County (see definitions, of risk levels on Page IV-37 of the
Guidelines) To have set up a quasi-technical definition of
risk, levels in advance of public review would have been
presumptuous by those who drafted the element and it would'
have served, in effect, to lead the public and the decision-
makers to conclusions not of their own making. Butte County
does not subscribe to this method of establishing public
policy.
Comment 2
As in the seismic safety element, both the geologic and fire
hazard subelements are deficient in identifying`and evaluat-
ing 4xisting structural hazards and determining acceptabl
levels of ,tisk. The revised element should discuss and
evaluate the adequacy of dams, public utility facilities,
water storage and transfer facilities, hospitals and other
public buildings thought to be substantial structures.
Response to Comment 2
The County's interpretation of the law and the General Plan
Guidelines differs in this regard.,, it was assumed +:hat
a purpose of the Safety Element is to plan for the protection
8:
lit Tof :y t 4'uctur es (as well as people and the .natural environmont )
from natural: or man -caused hazardous events, not protection
from st7-u' _>ures. We also wonder if OpR considers the evalua-
tion of all substantial public structures in the County to
be an essential or even .a required part of a General Plan
Safety Blement. It is as though there are no other avail-
able mechanisms such as regulations on clearances, design
standards, building code enforcement, fire code inspection,
etc,, for the protection of the public safety.
Risk levels are discussed in the Response to Comment 1
above, 0i
Comment 3
Both the geologic and fire hazards subelements are deficient
in discussing the regulation of land use in areas of potentia.
hazards. The text of the revised element should discuss
aPPZopriate Land uses and restrictions in areas of designated
100 year flood plains, dam innundatioh areas, crxti;<1 fire
areas, potentially active fault zones, and other hazards.
Response to Comment 3
The policies adopted by Butte County relating to both geo-
logic and fire hazards clearly state that: these hazards are
to be considered (along with all other significant and
related factors) in the determination of appropriate uses
during the planning and development review processes_. As
mentioned previously, tj,,a County will, subsequent to the
adoption of these elements, rLView, update, integrate, and
-
revise the Other General Plan elements toincorporate.
contributing safety findings and policies, The Land Use
Element will present detailed land use prOpo�-als and policies
a
The law does not require, and therefore the Safety Element
does not include, an evaluation of 100yearfloods and
inundation from dam failure. (Also see response to Coj?)
ment Jj Seismic Safety Element)
Seismic hazards are discussed in the Seismic Safety Element
and "critical fire areas" are thoroughly discussed in rela-
tion to land uses and development restrictions in the text
of the Fire Hazard Sub -Element.
Comment 4
The safety element contains an Inadequate discussion of
policies and programs to ensure that new county development
is designed to control natural and manmade hazards to accept-
able levels of risk. At a minimum, the County's building
regulations should be reviewed and revised to incorporate
new minimum safety' requirements regarding seismic resistance,
flood-proofiny, and fite-propfing.
Response to Comment 4
ane County has already adopted the Uniform Building Code
(UBC) as the County's building regulations. The UBC re-
gu,lations cover both seismic design and fire resistive
construction standards. A building cannot be made fire-
proof and it is not likely that a building can be made
flood -proof by 4 building regulation. (The U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers' recommendedI 'practice for flood protection is
to elevate the base Eloorlino of a,building at least 1 foot
above the 100 -year flood plain.)
Comment 5
one of the central purposes of the safety element is an
analysis of the ability of people to resp,,-)nd'to expected
10
geologic and fire hazard,,- The draft safety element contains
no Ova2uati,on of the County's emergency prepax6dnesa program
to respond to such hazards. Xn ev4Juat1n9 emergency propaxpd-
noss, the revised safety element should sPOcifica2ly consider
the adequacy of Its:(1) eMergeilcy response organizations
(civil defense, ambulance, police); (2) communication system;
and (1) emergency medical care system.
Response to Comment 5
If "One of the central purposes of the safety element is an
analysis of the ability of people to respond to expected
geologic and fire hazards," then it is not clearly spelled
out in the Code or in the Guidelines. Furthermore, neither
the law nor the Guidelines call for an evaluation of the
County's "emergency preparedness program." Even so, the
information and policies contained in the Safety and the
Seismic Safety elements will be used as input in the up-
dating of the County's 1972 Emergency Plan.
NOISE ELEMENT
Comment 1
The element does not provide an identification of noise
compatible Land use standards. Basicallyj such standards
are an effective means of determining how much noise is too
much for a gi,,.,iland use in a community. rt is recommended
that the County consider adoption of standards similar to
those provided on page 26 of the Guidelines for the repara-
tion and Content of Noise ,Elements , of the General Plan
,
Prepared by the 6ffiCe of Noise Control, February, 1976.
,"
SCENIC HIGHWAYS 4LEMT D
Comment 1
Pho text does not identify Or evaluate any Of the gc,6,njC
highway col -rd -dors elijible for designation as 4 State scenic
highway or exisj:ng county scenic highway. These highways
Should be identified and theiz potential for desiynati
'on
d1scussed in the text.
Response to Comment 1
That segment of the State highway system eligible as an
Offidial State Scenic Highway is shown in Map V-1. There
are no existing County scenic highway segments.
Each highway segment that was considered for designation,
whether State or County, is shown in Map V-1. Each of
these segments was evaluated according to the procedures
and criteria, discussed in Section C of the Scenic Highway
Element beginning on Page IV -4.
Comment 2
The discussion of implement ng measures is weak. and spread
throughout the element. It is suggested that consideration
be given to Such measotes as land acquisition, scenic
easements, open space, zoning, and road beautification in
scenic highway implementation.
Response To Comment 2.
Implementation measures are presented only in Table V-1. I
The discussion of the I various, mea:ns.for developing and
protecting a designated corridor are informational in
hatUre
13
Uriand police on a warrant: pleaded . guilty 'and was r n .gil
tcersczidonit that'heaasln sentenced to the CaliforniaDeputies- Arrested on a warrant, he Is the five -member
said Ber•eson was free on recognizance bond. boaid Both board Preside�
tar■ '
` y' I
_
vital ��r� ESVitI£t--1 e40
SCLPatC HIGHWAYS _»I
6UTTE SCENIC MIVAYS. ELEMENT
COUNTY GENERA. PLrj
PLA 'NINO REV S
J INs fP
�C HAS,SET Si0
J j ( CITY _� s
Li
RA
fc
a+u 1� 11RUSON� ' OT!
i s ` SPRINGS { ♦ f - -
,." as
!.
RD { MAGALI i fit.
ORD Mn ff f '� LGA t ►t
>? f�-' PARA DIS L
'1 L Rey _�..� � f � �•
-ter _ L
Hit JAR G�"P i a
- a•`ca T� � ys�� .• S j
BRUSN CP,EEK.
DA N BUTTE
i Awr CJLEE RE
t R- r• '
ri~ OUrHA` C tROK BERRY CRE K
PRATT (A.MT PC
FEATHER JI -
will INE Son
FORS y r? Yi
R HERMA'_ �Q �
S ICHVALE t_ d to r
t. s C MEDT
... t Hefei py
W AHDOTTE r1
PALERMO
-YIIIMLCTpq- �.� - - i
' + t3KiGS GG I- 43,-
1 s
BA a
�S 1 4 qtr � I• y Z _. - - • _ +
1. r --r.- EAST
PAR%, RQIaSt
-�-all r4TICUT 1 -
1 1 74r '
! .:.tee � ��v _ �`� • ... '- �.- . -
C•e R¢. ■ti pt • r • '~.yam' - _
.CR
SCENICHIGHWAYS AND Fy R61ER � The ma }j7bove reveals the sections 4teman, urged farmers to inform :them
of state highways and count roads dark -tined wlhfch are Included in the property to the proposed scenic highways andoe>ipress their vleepia Puof blic
Troposay Scenic Highways Element of the Butte County General Pian. The hearings vriit be, held by he Board`of Supervisors and perhaps by the Coun
nap played an important role In lest week's me of the Butte County Planning Commission (watch for announcoment of time and ,plact3 f
arm Bureau when members Were warned of special TOstrictions which are hearings) before the proposed Scenic Highways. Elements and other et
dated on land use by farmers and other property owners along roads ments on safety,, notse3. and seismic safety are adopted by March IS..
Dr- Frank Bonnett, Chico dentist and cat-
2
7 9- 211
ae.OFge qui
Ie"Wd ,a" and P'loctrio Oompany
sp JF°rtaginco, wfornie►
RULE NO. 15
&,V11Wd Lill, P.04, Sheet Ngo.531i4;
Claflooliliff Azkv►fttd 01ai.1'.11.0, Hhnnt &In dRRR.V
LIM EXTENSIONS
(ContinuirA)
Q (Overhead BUtenaiooe to individual Applicant* for Service (Cw--inued)
D. Bxtzaoolons Beyond the pray Lenuth (continuo_ d)
b. Method of Refund (continued)
(6) When two or more partioo'make a Joint advance on the same extension, refundable amounts
will be distributed to these parties In the saws proportlon as their'lnadvances bear
advancbear
to the total Joint advance.
(6) No payment will be made by the utility in excess of the amount advanced by the applicant
or applicants nor after a period of 10 years from the date the utility Is first ready to render
service from the extension, and any unrefunded amount remaining at the and of the l()"yesr
period *Ill become tha property of the utUity,
0verhesd Extensions to Serve Subdivielons or Developments . et
KZACondhlonr of Service
Overhead extensions may be constructed when condillons,in either a, or 1f; below are found to exist M
a. (1) The lots within the residential subdivision or the development ex,inted as legally described
parcels prior to MAY 6, 1970, and significant overhead linen exist within the subdivision or
development, or
(2) The new residential subdivision or development Is ono for which a nmsterplan, prellminary
map, or tentative map was flied before May 5, 1970, with the appropriate local authorltlea
Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act and an agreement for electric service was entered
into with the Utility before May 6, 1972
b.; The minimum parcel size within the now residential subdivision or real estate develop-
ment, identifiable by a map filed with the local governmental authority, In 3 acres and
the applicant for the extension shows that all of,'the following conditions exist:
(1) Local ordinances do not require underground construction,
(2) Local ordinances or land use pollciea do not permit further division of the parceis In.
volved such that parcel sizes less than 3 acres couid be formed.
(3) Local ordinances or deed restrictions do not allow more than one single-family dwelling
or accommodation on each parcel of less than 3 acres, or any portion of a parcel of leas than
2 acres.
(4)". Now overheadA
es constructed to or Within a residential subdivision would not be
In proxlmlty tand visible from,* a designated scenic highway, state or national park;,as
or other area rmined by a governmental agency to be of 01181110 scenit; tntereat to,4
t the genertal public.
(6) Exceptional circumstancesdo not exist which In the Utility's opinion warrant tile. Instal
latlon of underground distribution facilities. Whenever the Utility invokes this provision,
the circumstances shall be described promptly in a ietter to the Commission, with a copy
to the applicant for the extension.
(8) The UtIlltydoes not elect to 1 Kan the extension underground for Its operating convenience,
Whenever the Utility elects to Install the extension underground for its operating con.
venlence, the extra cost compared with overhead shall be Borne by the U(Ility.
o
(Pin proximity to" shall mean within 1,00o feet from each edge of the right-of-way or tieslgnated state
roconle highways and from the boundaries of designated parks Pnd scenic areas, "Visible from" eball 1k
,mean that overhead distribution facilities could be seenL�bq.motorlsts or pedestrlans'traveling along;' P
,,,,scenic highways or vis"iting parka or scenic areas.
(continued)_
J%Uvtce Leiter.vu.111fu-r. ,issued by Date Filed Oct. 2 1973
Decimonfa No. R162Q & 81869 J, P. Roberts, Jr. lJficetive a
Nov. 1, 1973
Vice-President—Rates and Valuation Resolution No.
i
Tnblo V-1. SCI -3410 11TOI AYELEMUT
1t1MONZfMENDCn CHANGES � COWXTTnE
Typed try Clark oL the Donal of
Supervisors office/ cap
rxNTaY.i\'GS
POTITCY
'1:1+� P1,8MI Nr ,CA7'ZpN
1. Same
1.
Protect vnlunblo scenic Areas
1.
Develop a oyatem a,f neca.ic highways
for enjoyment by rosidents and
no provided in the policy state -
visitors, however no particular
Mont.
Area shall be so designated until
a public hearing is hold thereon,
,
(prior to said public hoaxing
notification to all Affected property
owner shall be done).
cmc
2,
Consider official State designation
2.
if a particular highway is adopted
of scenic highways adopted in this
as n sconic highway, the specific
element.
Procedures will be as set Out in
appendix B.
3 Scenic corridor boundaries may
include areas visible .from high-
3.
Some
30
Survey scenic corridors. Solicit
ways, Outstanding natural or man-
citizon part;lcipntion. Prepare
"Scenic
made features, land Where development
Highway Report" for each
may Affect views, and feasible
corridor. Dot'ermination of scenic
regulatory areas,
corridor shnll only be mndo after a
noticed public hearing.
4. Development of scenic highway right-
4.
Consider quality of the 'view and
4.
Same
OP -way may have significant impacts
driving safety in design of the
on the view and driving safety.
rdndwoy and Other features in the
right-of-way where economically
"�*
feasible.
5. Numerous vehicle access points Along
scenic highways' can effect drivor
5.
Control access to scenic highwayR to
5.
Utilize existing access where
safety and comfort, and roadside
maintain safety and view considering
fOcits
fonsibloi nevicw encroachment'
beauty,
all of economics and engineer -permits
for safety.
ing.
6. A negntive, visual impact of
utility lines
6.
Locate and desi z future utility
g
6
f-,
Review the looa,.lon anddesign of
and structures
may be mitigated by incon-�
structures to minimize visual
impact where economically
future major ttonsinission lino.ai
Require`tha
spicuous siting ,and pleasing
feasible.
loast conspicuous
location of distribution' lines,
designi
As feasible and tvhere` there is
`_
tpasonnble choice.
.'t'(ihok V-1.t17G1ItJAX I;r,1;r1N'a" Jtl;C01 tI Nlal4,i) GIIANCC,I 4 C!?itiMX!f" 131
TYPOd ley C,lol.k
I CNI
1 ar�xCY
of 0,10 J10411"d o
StIporv.laern Ci,Ct;ice/cAF)
�'rn ENIRRVATToN
ConOidcr the density and location
of man•mado structures , 7.
pc_ein C
Amend
the Sc alit c-�ItiShway Ordinancen
corridors,
to imnlemottt local County police,
8. some
a.
Same..
9 An effective peenic hi IYwa a
� y
Program requires active local
9.
� 8.
invite citizen pArLiaipation in 90
Some
Same
involvement: and support and
the scenic highways program and
give notice by mail to
must have the active support
and Participation of the.
e
the property
owners affected.
'
property
wtnrs.
The map will only reflect these highways
that
have been designated as scenic highways,
. l��L,rsr�M,!'
ltd G02 rNDrD C11:�11VGL�5 COMhII'a"a'r
l�yY>��cY lay 41 t: tc. ui Ilia Sic mcd (�f
ril�nxr,cs
utirpervisA't` :(Vanp
rox,xc�t
-------�-
x12-11;rtr ,r�4�► . r.ort
1. 0I)Jecti0n0bl0 noise from trans-
port ation facilitios and
1.
Endonvor to maintain An acceptable
1.
Sema
stationary sources may have n
noise onvi,ronmont in all areas of
the County#
significant impact on public
health and welfare,
-
2. some
2.
Where economically feasibjep otherwise
feasibly possible, control the
2,
Study Stnto Lina Federal XC'gula-
sources of transportation noise to
tions for reducing transportation
noise. Consider noise in the
acceptable levels.
Location and doaign of County
i
Ronds Locate aircraft flight
Paths sway from developed Arens
where feasi'blo.
31 Rni.lroads and highwnyi can clause
a significant noise problem near
3.
Discourage future railroads and hLghw '
3.
Consider noinc sources in review
developments.
ways And othor noise producing act:iv-
ities near residential developments.
Of zoning and subdivision proposals
and mitigatirs aaaeasuros,
S
4. Same ame
4.
Some
4.
Locate noiso»sensitive uses away
from nirports. Encourage compatibl
uses
uses near envirorts of airports.
5. Same
S.
Same
Place limits on the levels of
amplified sound and the time and
Location of outdoor concerts, faUto
and motorcycle races, and similar
noisy activities, Advi.m locations
for such activities tont aro
compatible with the public health,
welfare and safety,
6 Same
6.
Same
S.
Same
7b "Same
7.
Some
7.
Attempt to dove), on compatible
noise control programs.
8. Same
f3.
Same
II.
Same
Table xxlwl., ".►:.)LOOK IIAZAr,D SrIB»ELDIVT
. RI- TN
Same
2. Saris
e—.10 . Some
4. Seine
I. Same
2. Soma
3. Some
CaCCr4l Nttan. CtYA1�Gr;S coMMIITTpp `1'Yt>ecf by Clark aC the Iiaa'rtt Of
TOL Ctr Supervtoora p:fCica/oop
reit x, �, rr,ra�,�nx�xt
18 Approvo cnd publish the Hazard,
maks in this Milan element, rocos.
hiving Chat alis map is genea'nl ant
that oaclt project must be judged of
its merit.
2 Continto to Implement guidelines
rostrictixig uses in high hazard
-arc."' ";at'ablish linins an the
dena'ity and type of development
permitted in High hazard areas.
3 Consider requiring investigation
of landslide potential for propose
development. Present findings in
environmental review and subdivisi
review.
4.
Some
4.
Consider requiring investigation
of erosion potelitial for proposed
development. Present
findings in
environmental review and subdivisi
5. Same
review.
50
Protect against subsidence
from ground -water withdrawal
and oil and
5.,
rTonitor sinking as necessary.
y•
Consider subsidence
gas withdrawal.
potential
Cpopse State plan to pump our
in review of proposed withdrawals.
support
ground -water out with deep, *� Ass.'
canal projects to bring
surface
6. Same
waters into Butte County
wherever possible.
6.
SAme
7. iligh wager at peak: Periods
causes significant erosion
7.
Protect the river banks with
6.
7.
Same
Su
and
other problems' for l3uttc� Count Y
appro ridte ri' xn and oitior .
ri p p
devices.,
Support clevela ment and c
ri control
of
o" Water
tier i'caourties.
valley farming areas.
dMi projects.
,
support,
rip policies fov controlled
water development in Butte County
and out, of Butte County,. Support
dam projects in the. Nas,,the:rn Calif-
orniaaren
Cr.ee& Dam.., specifi ctlly the Cottonwood.
x
Tatle I1-2 SEISMIO 'IhFE'I'Y CLEMUT
Fll\ ))I IGS
POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION
1.
Butte County is in ar, area of known
faults and regent srY;��3mi.c activity.
I.
Inform the public of current
1.
Approve and
pP publish this plan element,
y
estimates of seismic hazard in
Keep the information up-to-date.
all parts of the County:
2.
The only kaogn, active fault in Butte
County is vho Cleveland, Mill fault
2
Take into account all known
2.
Consider the most recent information
near. Oroville. A number of faults in
seismic information in making
land use decisions. Avoid
on seismic hazard in, all zoning and
or near th( Count,/ should be considered
locating schools, hospitals
subdivision decisions,
potentially nc .tvc*The proximity of
and similar uses in known
the San Andreas fat.lt system is
fault areas._
generally si.e:ti fict;nt in evaluating
seismic risk i'+t the County.
3,4
The avec around the Cleveland Hill
Fault t1
designated
g d as a
3.
Review the policies and criteria
3.
Exercise approval .authority with respect
a
Special StudiesZoneunder the Alquist"
established by the State Mining
and Geology Board the
to all real estate development and
r olo Actj effectuve January 1, 1971.
(Chapter 7.5)
within
special studies zone and consider
structures for human occupancy within
the Special, Studies zone, as
Division 2, California
Code.)
implementation:
provided
by State law.
4.
Portions of the Sacramento Valley have
a generally high potential for
4.
Consider liquefaction potential in
Require appropriate design o� structures
liquefaction during a major earthquake.
making land use decisions.
susceptible to the effects of liquefaction,
4
IF M__=1
r all
ROME
I
Table 111-1. GEOLOGIC HAZARD S011ELEMLNT
VINDINGS
POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION
1.
The identification of geologic
hazards is in the interest.
1.
Inform the public of geologic
1.
Approve and
pp publish the hazard maps
public
hazards;
in this plan element$ recognizing
that these maps
are generalized and
that each project and each: site must
be judged on individual merit.
2.
Geologic hazards limit land
development capabilities.
2.
Consider geologic hazards in.
2.
Continue to implement guidelines
development of Land Use, Housing,
restricting uses in high hazard
Circulation, Conservation, and
ureas.Establish limits on the
Open Space elements.
density and type of development
permitted in high hazard areas„
3.
The risk of landslides is greatest
in areas with slopes over 15%, weak
3
Consider landslide ,potential of
J.
Where appropriate, investigate land=
root, and high rainfall.
private development and public
facilities in
slide potential of
p proposed development
areas rated 4 and
5 on Map III -l.
and present findings in environmental
review and subdivision review.
4.
The removal of surface material by
rain and water varies by slope, soil,
4.
Consider erosion potential of
4.
Where appropriate, investigate erosion
vegetation, precipitation and
private development and public
facilities in
potential of proposed development and.
development. It is greatest in
areas rated high
and very high on Map 111-2.
present findings in environmental review
areas of granitic rock.
and subdivision review,
5.
Ground surfaces can sink and cause
significant damage in meas where,
5."
Protect against subsidence from
5.
Monitor sinking as necessary. Cousider
there is extensive withdrawal., of
ground water withdrawal and oil
to
al Oppose Stout
plan
subsidence potential in review of' proposed
ground water, oil, and gas.
p to pump ournd
pump ground water o
withdrawals. Support projects to bring
surface waters into Butte
with deep wells.
County wherever
possible.
` Table 111-3. FIRE HAZARD SUB -MMMT,
1+IND.INC"S
C
IMPfEDENTATI'C N
7,
1.
fire hazard is a problom for all areas,
but is
I.
Make Protection from fare hazards a
1.
Consider fire hazards in all land use and
more pronounced in certain Foot--
hill and mountain
consideration in all planning, regulatory,
zoning decisions, environmental review, sub -
areas.,
and capitol improvement programs, with
division review and the provision of public
special concern for areas where Piro
services.
hazard is more pronounced.
2:
As population grows, the potential and
incidence of fire also
2.,
County should attempt to improve fire
2.
Continue to require subdivisions and major new
grows.
Protection as papulation grows.
developments to make contributions to fire
protection services on which they relay, as a
condition of approval.
3.
Vegetation is the erotical factor an
fare spread,
3.
Use fuelbrakes along the edge of developing
3.
Require fuelbreaks where feasible in areas
areas and in high fire hazard areas,
where fire hazard io high.
4.
Fire protection facilities and services
are marginal in the
4.
Upgradd find service where economically
4.
Promote formation of voluntary ;dire companies.
some areas of County.
-feasible.
in remote areas. Construct additional
facilities and ,services as desired by area
residents and as economically feasible.
5
Davolopment in watershed areas can
affect communitywater supplies. pp
5.
Carefully- evaluate development 7.n water-
5
Prepare zoning plans for critical watershed
.
shed areas to determine their effect on
areas. Consider possible effect to watershed
community water supply,
in environmental review:
6.
Fire control and suppression �.s often
restricted b inadequate water supplies.
y q pp
6:
In, approving devela encs grater su l�:es
developments, supplies,
s
should be fully
6.
Review fare protection standards' for individual. i
considered.
and community water systems serving noir
developments.
7.
Many residential areas with high fire
risk have swimming pools,
7.
Require water connection to pool for fire
7.
:Adopt building code requirements for such '
purposes.
connections.
Tabl o 111-3 • FIRE HAZARD SUFI"B LLMEW
�r�D��r��
P
�7
POLICY
l:MPxyEMC;NTAly1:f3N
$.
Access ofires bvemergency equipment
inadequate roads,
8.
Ensure d�essfor new development
8.
Develop
standards for road widths, grades,ieaftenlimitedby
s adequate farfrepiprotection purposes.
and curves to pormIt passage and maneuvering
of emergency Vehicles. Require inuitiple
access where feasible.
9=
Fire report and response times are often.
delayed by inconsistencies and deficiencies
9.
Require or promote the easy identification
of streets devel.,:!yed
9.
Develop and implement a consistent street
in street naming and, house numbering.
and properties.
naming and house numbsraxg system for the
entire County, Require all names and numbers
to be clearly visible.
10.
8cme human activities and land uses have
a high potential for causing fires.
10.
Regulate as necessary those activities and
10.
' Consider adoption of uniform fire code or
uses with a high fire potentia]
modifloation, thereof,
11.,
in higher •than, average fire hazard areas
certain t g
typos 'of building materials are
11..
Regulate use
C of certain building materials
'higher
3.1.
Adopt building code regulations for roofing'
less fl.amable.
�n. areas of than average fire
hazard.
and siding materials in fire hazard areas,
1.2.
Accumulations of shrubs and debris
con. stitute a fire hazard.
12.
Promote controlled burning in hazardous
1.2.
Develop and adopt standards for controlled
areas.
burning.
t
Table +1V-6 NOISE ELM W2
FI11DINGS
IMPLEM, N`.i'! TION
I.
Objectionable noise from transportation
1. i
Endeavor to maintain an acceptable noise
1.
Consider adopting -thea State Is 1brj�el
facilities and, stationary sources can
environment in all areas of the county.
Community Noise Ordinance, or a modification
have a significant impact on public health
tk�ereof,
and well"are
2.
Some aspects of transportation related
2.
Where economically and vthbrwise feasible,
2.
Study State and Federal regL.Lations for
noise can be controlled by the County.
control, the sources of transportation
reduoin,, transport atioxa. noioe,, Consider
noise to maintain acceptable levels.
noise x'i the location and design of County
roads. Locate aircraft fl.i.g"ci1 paths away
from developed areas where feasible.
3.
Railroads and highways can cause a sign -,
3.
Discourage future railroads and highways
3. _
Consider .noise sources ir, reviow of zoning
ficant noise problem near developments
and other noise sensitive activities near
and subdivision proposals.
residential developments.
4.
Development near aircraft flight paths
4.
Plan for airport development and discourage
Looate noise -sensitive Lases away fr.- airports.
subjects people to objectionable noise
noise-sansitive activities near airports.
prepare specific Airport Environs ,"ins for,
and threatens future airport operations,.
Chico and Oroville airports. &tra,)raga compat-
ible uses around airports.
5.
Some types of recreational activities
y.
Control recreation antivities that have the
5.
Place,dimits on levels of amplified sound and
m
make objectionable noise.
potential to cause objectionable noise.
the time and location of outdoor concerts, auto
races,and motorcycle andactivities,
Identify locations forsuch act4vitiesethat are
compatible with the public health, safety, and
welfare.
�f�"r /�r,_p� °fq '?{If? � J�Fl�''�4 .r�4�+a pr r'edkl lidari Md ti'������5r"{j l � �.�'fr
�, ,rr8.�, �G au.. � 7�x�r,��tr�.,.�r! �t �4,�liitt'«;�l'�
Table V -l., SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT'
FINDINGS
Poticy
AMPT!Ni.
I.
Butte County has many areas of
picturesque natural landscapes,
I.
Protect valuable scenic areas
for enjoyment by
I.
Develop a system of scenic _highways.
residents and
visitors.
2.
Official State designation of
scenic highways requires various
2.
Consider official State designa-
2.
Follow procedures in Appendix E for
County actions.
tion of scenic highways,.
designatioc. of State scenic"lzighwayty
3.
Scenic corridor boundaries include
the "view from the road."
3.
Delineate corridors to include
3.
Evaluate possible scenic corridors.
scenic values according to
criNeria in this tan elements
Solicit citizenark,,ci ation. Prepare
p P
'Scenic
p
highway Report" for each
corridor.
4.,
Development within a scenic highway
right-of-way can have significant
4.
Consider scenic values in then
4.
Rewire Planning, Commission annual
impact on the view,
design and improvement of the
right-of-way.h
review of major road projects to
include concern for scenic values:
5.
Numerous vehicle access points along
scenic highways can interfere with
h
5.
Where possible, minimize driveway
54
Utilize existing access where feasible.
driver safetyand comfort and
Y to scenic nigh-
wads, considering economics and
g
Review encroachment. permits for
roadside beauty.
engineerl.ng design.,
t
necessity,
6,
The unsightly view of utility libes.
and certain stvuctures be
6.
;Locate and design future utility
6.
Review thea location and design of
may miti-
gated by inconspicuous siting and
p � g
structures to improve the view,
`
'economically
future major transmission lines. Require
pleasing design.
where feasible.
the' least conspicuous location of
distribution lines, where there is
reasonable choice.