Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
80-72 CHICO AREA GENERAL JAN 1980 THRU MAY 1981 (4)
'POPULAT I ESTIMATE FOR`.THE COUNTY LAO i MAP Areas. Within the Ch{co to here' of Influence _ ',0601.01611. CSTIMATF FOR TIM COUNTY;'LAH4 USE MAP Gross Acveaae and pnpuldt onl Acres Dwellings Population Holding Population for the Chico Vic'finity Rural Density785 785 1005 Cirico Generll Plan estimate for-Sphere of 87,225 Influence -;by 1995' Low Density 636 2,544 5,A50. Het 1�Nfease in Inner Sphere. Densities,, g,ggq Podium Density 312 , 96 2 q 5 40 ,7 ProPcsed by County Comrerctol 226 Buildout'Pop U tion Beyond Chico sphere line 2 18,175 Industrial 258 ___ TOj'AL 114,244 TOTAL T�� `3; $"-' , ,9 Yearn at 2,2%, Growth Rate to ReachTi4,2q-3 -�' 30 Net Populaciad2 Years' at 2,7; Growth ;Rate to Reach 114,2444 25 Rut all and LoW 4ensitj 3,119 7 174 Medium Oens4ty 2,1126 4.61 subtotal ;.,. , Comnercial3 yd usted' et Po U at N p_t ion 2 990 l This figure 11,JUdes the 71,1'40 r'onoo l Plan projection,Plus populations for the llprtheast'Chital�Speclfic Plan, tal;ifornla Park, The, Villages; and the proposed Southeast Chico StwOr Assessment O strPct ercas, Areas Outside i'he Chico"Sphere bf Influence �. 2 ,M # " ded In this estimate, bUt wlich are designated for•agritultUral otalnuse,. „ Acroag6 and Population ireas . esidenti are the area between Highway 32 and Stilson Canyon Road east of 9. he Chico;Sphore of Influence, and the area between Humbu''Road and the,SkyNay Acres Dwellings FspOation east, of the Sphere,, f�opulattcrj estimates could :not be compiled in time 'for distribution' AyriCU, ltUral Res.fidoirtial5 3,g"45. 3,'g3O 6,974 of,this report: LpH;Density 1.098 4,392 14.,100 3 2. was the 17014th rote for,Ch166,(1970-76} and is used 'here dssuminll a 60; Chico urban area populptioi for 19Uq: Medium Density do 480 1!105 4 2.7X is a liboral figure, in excess of our current Growth'rate, Conn@rcia 225 Industrialf � fata-'7xo-g-- I --T—� 1 'These figures represent:areas where the County Land Use Map proposes hrore intensive `Chico uses tt>3,n the 04.awe based on a censeryatioe 2,3 persons :vsr dwell Ing fl�gure. 2 Qe net o6pulAtlon estimate is the diffdeoncc between C6 ty prapo'sed ucjsitles an8 City�praposed densi.tles� , J' In se�reral areas, the County proposes conmercial -uses ir%`plaie cf City designated rest- rienttal use3, Therefore, 1,30(1 dwellings; or 2,994 people anticipated with the Chico with Plan r004 potentially .be displaced by these C tlesignations. ' A, See Fd6th6te' 02 tlirr.:f611bwih" a e. V , Quffe. Co. Ftannigg fwgm s ossa 0�'oyi!(a4 �alitarrti4 , CITY OF CHICO �� UNCR &71�� a d Ulf TO:r,2T`1 COUNCtt (Mtg. 3/4/90) DATE Feb:. 25, 1.980 FROH, INT ERCOVzlw NTAL ;RELATIONS COMM. L Meeting hold 2/21/80 at 400 PQM: TO.` civ 'Call GYT. ,(ritg. 3/4/$0 DATES xeb. 2,198tl PAOids k "�EtCfl4ER.i2IEN7AL REL' TIOyS COM IxTTEE PILES Thn, 0odnty coUl,d also' ado't °n „ ;t P greah litia past of the 93 Ch&to Creek. Estates Subdivi'alo.nj suziigm!t ming he"ld'.Iabruary 1,, 980, at 4100"`P.M+ County staff agreed to corieulC with. City staff and pzepaie one tt&p- shawing--rccamtantsdatipns epdrE dantaln6d• 1a bbth xs for ttie aaxt'` ( . copmittto meetingth Council :iot appoint, 'its, iiva x eabaro'ta Cdtsxitteps Cf v.St tF; Couttaiinah the G'itmittec 8Comtii6tee` u t y y n 4 th1u coctittda could sweet again at'd coopletd ata dtudy;: Gtidto, Ch It Aatinj; Tlohn ng Di'ro for Adlstar �ounailtzan Nu.yss City Managor -Davis. Cnttncilnan.,f7ty Citl4 Clcrk Evano The domm:Ltde,agxcnd to meet again on t?;rida Tnbtuar 29, 980, at' g Y� y f 1p30 P.Mi (mnetinS Co ba .Iseld in`Centa't',anFe Rfl'arr 2)., c Suae:vidorri: ' podntv.5taftiJ� s Super,4 sdct Aalaa Planning Directar lflair, 5tparviaor;Whnald Cnuaty-1'llhnC'r Drogkp Z 4 CTTS., &"GOURJTY CEN RAS FLAy' LANb�'US& ELCtf)7liT9:', The dotcmittao raviawed thu W City Clerk, ACtdth, " xeptrr :roti 5ulrezviacr Do1a:t dated 2/4/80 and the tepo>t frnm C1G`y Plan-' ing:pt:ffE ddtdd 245/80y iand agrnad ad $uilova: Dints: 1. Far tho areae ;within the 0 ty'it prima"gy Sphere of IngItionce, the Olty Caus(til (7) Ciatl (5). ind Caunty ahc11 work to'war"da a aoapr;Stnine dandistent with sound )tinning principles,- xha n rioultur4.1 otoad on the city flan 3iEh City:Monagati (2) DCPL""/AGMs the Sphe a il',1 tie ,nedndod to indtoatti `ap'p.ropriata I uil' land,unda, t.aq�+gnixinE "tfi;s oxldatng la d daYalop;p01%0 in the araa+- The City Pla, Planning 15tza'ttus AirY Pubic'tarcO i. vh6uld, .,p. Co0hty lamiliq 2, 'Far ali. p> ojprts in fjia wotkn ahi'ch ptopyoe urhan1hubur6un daYdlo}t- 'klantA Nu�tq 3tedia((7) oil pxif:c hgritultural salie,,' toe Cc+usi'ty gill tndaabnr to drspl�� cat that 'VILA, hio I ft,0, oot alto,rnati a lthich praaazvra ,th'a MajcipCu:q a�otint cE pzleb sPila. In Ch la tegatd, hn Cotis{'Gy ensu d dot +1 goal,� t cd oreugrva a a4goiticant perccntage nE the 3,SSb aorod' dt agPLaul-. rvr rh 1 apila nox d tndiKtfor"utbdnlaubudbn do pm Axi projocrd lig the >+dv�o in otther the City 4'r 'S,aUnty .shdlj gray an ' cd:.sr:ta add Lhd Cit • it:td GounC Cnl1 y 1r>?bvlde input i:o aito h o�thgr, througi rho nnr>ral ,}eosin mases: � &5P , rr ?r was ngtnd, that the 9out:h`;Chaco and th4 Airport to itoha proy�eatp r ° �. contain; n:gzit'joaiit riroaa at' p'risaa atai1 yhidh could ba Ldnrvt3d by, �pptapriata 9:a�sisigR , 4A itin Ghia -v tiny of 'tha '.it Ili'' Chiaa''C'teek i,statcn sodivisl6n 9F lave 1o.tge lbt. ]suburban inning, slant of the appfao7td nub`disi- � sines, :ted MgrtnuitUYhi znhini pith itt I' a lst Id cps^ "lo'a' 64-nn:� Goat 'fit Glatt nnsl, as vido,mmoAAod in supa')Iidor'17n'lans P CITY 4F CHICd IREPORT_ T�: "' INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS DATE FEBRUARY 15, ;1980 COMMITTEE (14TG4 2/21/80) FR CIA PLANNING STAFF FILE' CP 6199 A�C-ST-18 8UEJ CT. PROPOSED ,AMENDMENTSTO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN FOR: THE CHICO URBAN AREA At your February 4, 1980 meeting, City Planning staff was requested to analyze potehi. tial impacts of the above named proposal upon the Chico General Plan, and to make recommendations for alleviating areas of conflict., Pursuant to this request; a com- parative City/County Land Use Map was prepared; the "buildout" population of the County Plan was estimated (see attached sheet), a comments from the City's Fire., Police and uhlic Works Departments were solicited.: In summary, the proposed amendment to t.f, Cnunty;Plan would provide for an additional ,8i844 persons within the Chico sphere of Influence, beyond what is thdicated on the Chico Land Use Map. Outside the Chico Sphere, the County proposes 5,578 acres for urban and rural residential' uses, containing a future population of 18,175. The Chico General Plan projects a population of 87,225 (see attached sheet) for areas within the Sphere by 1995, Therefore, the County Plan would increase 'that figure by 27,025 persons, or a Chico area population of 114,250. At an average annual growth rate of 2.2%, roughly the rate used in the Chico GeneralI Plaq populat,i,on projection, it would take 30 years<'. (the year LOIO) before Chico would reach the propbsod holding capacity of the County Plan. At a more generous rate of growth, 2;7%:; it would take -25 years to, reach this,` same 'point;: _ Impactson.City Services PublIt._Works, A review of the County's proposed land use designations within the Chico Sphere indicated that they Would not caOse a sign ficarjt impact upon existing and proposed urban services such as roads and sewer. Urban designations for areas outside the Sphere could have adverse impacts upon existing PUb'Iic;:Works `facilities, Urban land uses poo proposed on the.County Ma f,r areas west of the,, p. - f tracks would `hasten the`need' for an additional fire station in that Police" 'The increase in densities proposed' by the Couhty,for the riorthwesteenjj fringe of the: City's Sphere would have��an an �on f�olice services. This is dud, to'the fact that:it is ineff tient for the Police pepartiament to ser lce �an en�Tave of hiyher �ens�i'ty resadenti�al use`s on =the frir(ge of the urban area, Preser"vation of .Prime Agricu'l'turil `Land One of the major underpinnings of the Chico General Plan is the concept of focusing urban development to the east of the City, as well as '!i.nfi1lirig" of the urban area, i,n order to preserve tte rich agricultural soils on Ch.iGo's welts de: Therefore, Fk ]f I POPUL,A1 ESTIMATE FOR THE COUNTY LAND Am MAP low Areas 61thin.'the Chi,col Sphere of Influence Gross._Acreage and Populatianl Acres Dwellings:Popu Rural Density" 785 785 1,805 LOW Density 636 2,544 5;850 Medium Density312 2,496 5,740, Commerc lal 226 -_ Industrial 258. TOTAL 2,217 51825"13,395 .. Net, Populat on2 Rural and Low Ilens'ity 30119 7074, Medium Den ity 2,026 4,'660 Subtotal 11 834' Commercial3 Adjusted'Net Population 2,990 8x844 Aroat Outside-the Chico Sphere of Influence Acreage and Population` Acres Owe ll,Lnc5 Papulation agri.cultura,l Res-idential4 3,945' 3030 6 ;97G Low Density 7,898 4 392 1Q�1gp Medium Density 60 4$0 1,1.05 Cominerc fa'! industrial 250 Total 18,175 1 These�figures represent areas where the County Land uses 'than ,t,he Chico Map. Population estimates are Use �1a,p proposes'moreintensive` based "conservative ;. dwell ' per �n9 fJgure. gn a 2.3 persons 2 The net population estlma�te is the difference between,COunt Cit - ro Y ;ppq,sec� denstt,�es:_r y-prapased densities 'and 3 In severalareas, the, Count r y proposes cOmmercial Uses in place' o,f .ity designatdd resi- dentiel uses Therefore, 1,+300 dwellings, or-2,990 people anticipated with the; Chico Plan would potertiaily be displaced by these commerceal designations, 4, See footnote #2 'on the eolloWiny page', city OF OHICO CITY Or cHIcO --- CITYV���1Yr � j � C IT Y' li�x�i�Io�N����l.001 V��1IltC A13dO1ANU01 TO CITY COUNCIL (hfTG, 2/19/80) DA'r>; FEBRUARY'q, 1,900 TOt' CITY COUNCIL (MTG, 2/15/80) DAA:-FE5RUARY 6," 1950' + ft6l s 1NTERGOVERNMOTAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE FIM "/ PAOM: INTEMOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS COi:1ITTEE' lim Cp 615RES T'GEY PRE;6lS§/A-C4T-l8/D-:1 SS/CM AIG04 } ' 3USJCcT, MEETING AW BEARUARY 4, 1080 SUSJSCt; MEETING OF FEBRUMY 4i 1980 - PAGE 2 11BSS,lGF, At it"s meeting of, February 4, 19e0, the Iriteqgvernmental RrlattonS Committed Si The Iwo staffs should'meet,anri report on the differences ii their discussed a: strategy ,for 6t"in9ing"Ehe Cfty and County General Plans into com• data bases arid interpretdtlon$ of plan.n)ng studies. pl oke bn Chico!s'Western Perimeter. Members present at this mea"ti>1g were: fury t 1 Oot,sn, lheoler, Grteco and.fays, County staff ores-nt ° Wed. Advanced Planner 6 The>committdd should ,mubt to,j,gvtew these staff reports, and 'deter»t ` 9rg0s; Planning hiractar. Blair. City staff present e" t 'Assistant Planner mine ,a compromise policy foF the City and County General Plans; Prince; And Acting Flannin§';Dlrector'eolster. Slam also rdeorwoodad ghat the County draw its urbanjaq'"riculturo boundary•line Minty Plarther Arofts presented a staffi=proposed revision to the County Land Use around approval subdivisions ,And"that "ldrgq-lot (1-5 acre) land use designations Pap. for tHs' area, amok. stated that the urban designations (1.4 dwelliggs;per, and zoning ba,implomdnted between these ,dovoloponts and Glenvtood Avenue_,: hest;,. acre) an the proposed Njl encarpass County approvId:'ezaned areas and subdivisions of GignWogd Avenue an �g"rtcultural designation (;10 acres;+) and zoning should the NrtraM Rezone and Big These Chico Creek Estates', Agricultural designations being Glenwood Avenue, • he.im"slemented buten aslso•'t,oted that the County's-tXistihq General P)an'for drdws line ext?gnd y:esi'harei frc7w areas, a rcajar ofvisibn line thA C1tico urban'Area the urban/Oriculturo e4s,K of GTehwcod Avenue, Brooks stated that Courtly staff belfe'ves the preposed Map rppl"esents a cohipramise bat;een tf, reViou:s Count Land Use 11a and, the Cit` s Gre�rlline, County staff County �`p yr biscussion followed conc'arAl" the head fora buffer � zone; tett;ebn. the rasdrsntidi retia rends + at the City's Land Up- tiap be incoi"po,rated into the County Map for uses approVod east of G1enWood,AYeniro aild the agricultural uses 14 uses tha'area wlthiri the City boundaries, It was: also rtGorntandec that tflr. fnllbviinp recammandotian -that one (ll acre minirTuri' 1o`ts, be:idesignated jest cast of `Gigmkto ' County rezcnig orojacts, rrhiclr nra in toes Vror"ks; 'should ndt be indluded iri the Avenue to prq,fi'da for thi:.buffe r Was discussed•: , Cc M'" s;d.scussione Airport reiohe; nbrth.Nighway 32 commerdial rezone, and theSouth Ciiito rezone.�Tha Cart�tfttee aq,raad that they ribuld limit their"meeE#nrsto a"-,yreck per:(oT, and th5t their 6ekl9Guld be"separate fron that of the proposed 10-r"enter City/County adt)n P)annin� oitrector Bolster reviewed t11C CountyLand iis'e Moop, intjtiatinh Gitiz"en's Adviidry Crimmi. 'atae. i was also detej'mined tha'G"on9oit'g projects in' -hold wait side areas w,ene the plan 9tbulr r""@cult Hifi urbaO+densi"ties 6Cyond:the City's ', 'the Coufity'would'not up by the Cortmi'"ttee's discussions, County and City` �tlphaFese,far aluance, and stated thit the Cornnittee should fbcuJ their "attention ,. suabffsry grrad totpreper ands ioysiyo f fire in acts the�pra used lend lse P P ' .;,'dee a.Ad, n t * arc0i � s s i._or Bolan s re o, nen ns uld )iAv on the ex "sting Git, p .. �+ Genera a Plan, ... SuP.6visor ('olam'dlstribut'ed` a iaemo htakitig'recbrtimendotions Or the CaPrvnittae"t. The next" mbetirrg was scheduled for Thursday, February 21 1980, apt, 4,-,(d PM". in cons'iderdt.iohi" Dblan's eecoritendatl;bns Were'as`fo1lmS the City Cbuneil Cha, bersr 1, The County shoal'l' adopt thn Cifiyls Lane Use Map for all Areas Withi11 Ill(EfIGOVfRIItfEf17AL RELATIOtIS CCN'41tTEE' 'thus hp p re of In'iiuoaco, �. Ail projects cur{ren�ly" under "bonsideratiop viithin the Gity' and County, ��1 , � Should not be suhiact to ravies�.tr the Corirrtttee�'By t, t�j .� 3. She city'rhould "a,hcnd its General"; P1a'n to_.ine'luder the 1928' tiorthrlest sa rinc � Assistant Panner Ghtco ketone LOW 4 Gi�y andCqunty 'Gaffssfi'n�tld meet°and prepare a report describing' t}.t diffarenoa's tti,ean the City rind Cd n;1" P1ans.� And recorrntonding z rti 1"ia p � � Pp P to cern roh sasx ' ® �-�'� �IAi1RwNeims� 1 ' r Y ,,aG�Ti�� Y. " Intargot'ernmental Rol�itionn nriittoo r '" <: tn4er•De{�ar7rlier�4al F,9emoras>d>Jm City -county land use - ;PCs 2 Feb. 4, 1980 dt,,,r#:x' ; ra xrtt�- ro4crlinentul Relntiena Commitkoo"tu:d Supervi,aor Hilda Wheeler coincide Nith tho 1978 RorthNedt Chioo ;rezone. It shctiva be noted this N111 xcpreaont a ma.ja"r" nompromioo and a major change in the C¢nQrnl Flea r-+,ai4 Supervisor Jane polar ort the part of the City. For its pa Ftt the county w111'have to dzax in its urban lines domowhat, but that seemed to ba what was prgaia¢d when the sual,ccrl City-County::diacufla bn on dL^foxenaea bQtiroan CQidoral Plano: romone Was accomplished, This Hill ti that ea much as some a" Us and the mea t City miaY hdvo disapproved of th7.a xezanc, Ne N,1,1], not debate it uxthcr. DAM l'a`m=est=, 4, 1980 4,: StafSo:itoUld' meilt'and prepare a report on tho differenBe Certs Smly Wo are all that diaczopanaido categories and dannity d6aignattona and provide sucp6ti'ona on how ccncu or aimiaartty can be roachad, (lNamplei City plan had ono a6ricultural aware cruet betw6en t ra Coneral Plans davelcped bj Lha City cf Chico and the County bf 13Utta l; CITY OF CHICO: REPORT` T0: ;INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS DATE;. FEBRUARY 15; 1980 CC, vu r (MTG. 2/21/0,0) .} b.ITTEE FRCIOs PLAtiI MG STAFF FILE; CP 6159/A -C -SA -i8 3U84tV PROPOSER AMODIMENTS TO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CHICO QRBAiI. /REA A', ys?ur`February 4, 1980 meeting; City Planning staff Was-reque"steel to analyze Pot gn tial iinpaets of the above named proposal; upon the Ghfco General Plan, and to make. retcrnlendatigns ''! alleviatingg areas of`conflict, PursUGnt to alis request, a com parative, Citylitb.,Aty Land Use Map was prepared', the abuildoU10 population,of the County Plen was estimated (see attached sheet),r and comments fronl;,the City's Firer Police and Public Works Departments, were Solicited, ,.b sun tary, the proposed atsdndmdnt to the County Plan would provide for an Additional .8 844 errsons-within the Chico S`heeo of Influeihco, beyond What is indicated an h Chico Land Use Funk Cutside thd,Chico Sphere, thol County proposes $,578 ..;ores for urban and ruralresident;ial uses', cotrtaining a future population of 18,175, The Chico Gcneral Phan protects a population of 8702, (see attaofied sheet) for areas wi£hin tf* Sphere by 1955, Therdfcre, the County Plan would increase that figure by 27,025 persons, of a' Chico ardu,;population of 114,250, At an average angrovith rate of 2„2°,; roughly the rate used in the Chico General plop population hrndectiah, it Would take 30 yeare- the ydar 2010)• bofgre Chico Would reach the proposed holding; capocity of the; County Plan, At.a More ;generous raze of'gwoy,th, 8,7 , it, Wau1d take'. 25 yeaes to reach this Same point. Irpacts an City. Services Public Uorks A review of the Cognty's proposed. Uqd Use. dos ignatipns Wfttin the; '�"'�'""� Chico spheno indicated that they yiduld Adt,cause a'tionificant impact` .upon existing and propoted urbdn scrvicds tut as goads diid sewdr.- urban, des:fgriations for ,areas outsidd the Sphere could have adverse ..spalls upon existing public Works facilitios, Fire Urban land uses propoted on the"County Map for of west�Of the,SPRR, traOt would 1,asten the need far an additional fire ttation in that area./ 06 " the increase .fn densities.: proposed by the County for the northwestern tringd of the City's Sphere would ftavd An adverse impact on polite, 3erWcds,,. This is due- to the fact chat it is fnefffclent :for, the Police, De'partment,to 3efvldee an end a of higher density ;residential otos en the fringe of the urban area# Preservation of.Prime Adrieultural Land; Cne �rf''£he iie',or underpinnings of the,01010 GendNal Plan s the cpncep£ of focusing rrr;n develop^elft to the Hast of the City, as well as "tong” of ttie urban area,; In Ordei~ to preservd tMe rich agriculturdl tdils`on Chico is west`0do, Therefore,, r i ° I CITY OF C.HICO ° REPORT losINTERGOV,E8Nf1EN7AL RELATIONS DATE: FEBRUARY 15, 1980` COMMITTEE (,JSTG. 2/21/80) PROW PLANNING STAFF FILV CP 6199/A,,C-ST-18 SU9JEC;T+ PROPOSED Ah1ENGMEtiT5 TO COUNTY`GENERAL PLAN FOR: THE CHICO URBAN AREA - special attention 'should be paid to the impacts the Compromise `proposal would have on this. poll'cy', The current:Amendment to the_County l:,nd Use`E1ompt mould Allow urban and rural residential development upon 3,550 actis of primp soils op Chica's ne area);,west Andsouthvjest sides. Clearly, Wthkif jihcl,udfn'q. the Airport Rdzoa substapt al antount of productive farinland is in question, ' Recommendations While the-urban/suburban landv$6,design6tiohs of the new County Laniilite Map cannot be Justified 'on the basis of pro,iectpd population growth alone, they MY represent a toRiprnmise--that, in £he long torn); will, enable the City to realize itt Baal' of Pfoorviho the rich agricultural lards on Its wastsida. , The'Sity's Bendral plan, in addressing the pre_seryatigp istUe poihtt but on page 15 that "The 'rhhale concept, of prd wyfng agriculture and guiding urban ddvelopt Will to. lost unless. 06 City and County undertake a unified Course oflction," In the interests of est6blishiti8 this volfied ceurte of action, the fofloNir,g specific ,j retomnendatiopps are .suggested, These recommendations expand those presented in 5V"ervisoi Do1a 's memo to the Inter4overnr4erital Relations Cam'ittee, ar,d Supervisor h. Hilda Wheeler; atca:February '4, 1985: 1, For'thd areas Within the CitPA primary Sp here, of, Influence, the City; County shall work tpwiards a compromisd consis;tdnt With sound planning.`. Orincipals,�T}}��d agr.icultural areas ori the Ci y Plat)Within the Sphere, Wild be amended to indica.te.approprfd td 'urban.Iand uset'j.recognizing the, exittahg land devolopments in the area, . The City Plan should, to mast athe� ins'tafices, pre-vail, t� 2, 'For all projeett in the Work which propose urban/suburW dd'Yelafrrents op primo agricultural Sol19,.the Cofioty, Will:egdeavdr' to imFler nt that viable prgdept alternative wliic'h preserves the maximin amaunt.of pr're soi'is, in this regard, the County should set a„goal in preserYc a lige.-' ficint�percdntage of the 3,G50 acrds�of agricultural sails nowt indt”' ted for urban/suburb,a devdlopi t. 1 3, For 6,11 urban areas outside of the Primary .and Secondary Spheres df1 fluence, thd' City ani.'County,' gofntlyf slwuld','pr'epard specific plans so that futare 400. ppments in those"areas Wil contain the' necessary •public i� praveients and facilitiesrequir°dd for urban develdpr,.ent, The City v,ould tF.en tine„d Ceneral 'Plan and' Spheres of Inflilencd plan with the dventual goal of i having the asuman ardas within the City limits, 4, Yhd:area ft) the ViciilitY off, the.9i. Chico Creek EstpCris Sdbdivition 06,0d d , POPULATION ESTIMATE fiDA THE COUNTY. LAND USEAP P Areas Within the cHco Sphere of InflUonce, POPULATION ESTIMATE'; FOR TNE' COUNTY LAND 115E ?MP Gr!r_It kreage and PooutdHoni HdTding Population far the Chico Vicinity Acres bweltings Population Rural berisity 785 785 f080: 01co Oonergl plan estimate 87 for `Sphere of ,225 Influence -'by 1995 LoW Density 636 2544,: 5,850 Net Increase in Inner Sphere bensfties,;, g�dgq Medium Oensity 312 2,455 5040 Proposed by County c- merciai 226 z Buildout Population Beyond Chico ,Sphere Line18,1'75 Industrial. ?.58 ».__ TOTAL" 114,244 TOTAL�T3'_. Years at 2:2 broWtii Rate to 'Peach 114,2443 r 30 ltet Poodlation3 Years at 2,7% Growth Rate to Aeaclt 114 Z444 >p 25 , Rora1 and how bansfty+ 3119 i174 (led fum Density 2,026 A 5GO " :suRota, l' Corrnerciel3 �Adjusteii Net.Populatinn 2 9g0 8, """"` 1 figur This e includes the 71,100 General PI h. pprojeFtfon plus populations for the Nohtheast Chico Spatlfic pian, California pahk, The Village;, and tha prapos'ed Southeast Chico Sewer ftgessmert.bistrfct areas, Areas Outside file CFico Sphere of tnfiuenco 2 Areas hot included in this ettlmate, but Which are designated ler agrlcultUrel Acreage and Population, Acres residential use, af,e the area betWeert Htnh{ay 32 and Stilson Canyon Road east of the Cbico;Sphere of Influartce, and tho area between Hu,oug,load and; the Skyway east bwe111nn§ po'ulation : of the 5phero population estimates could ;hot' ba compelled"ih time for distribution"' A9ricultu'ral llesid'ential 4, 3;445, .3,038 6 970 of this re port. ` aW berisfty u 1.098 4,392 Jo 0 Oq 3' 2.2 was the growth rate.for 01cn'(1910•�) assuming GO,OOb Chico Urban area lotion for 1980, [fed1um Density GD 4g0' i,tp5 . d, 27� is a'`liberai• ff9uro, 1n"excess,oi ,QW curreht growth rate. ' Oarrmercial cc�5 _.;�« 's Industrial �2G0. � � , Total 902!"! 1 These flSUres�represent areas Wheed uses Than the=;Ctrico flap. Popula`tfon a the County�Land Usa Ma p,proposeg more intensive 1 are based on a 2,3 per dwelling figUr, .estimates Conservotivie persons �2 Thd netpopulation estimate isithe difference 6W at GauntY-'ro osed:densitiessd city,proposod ;densities, W. P n - 3 In several areas, the 'County ptoPosat Cotmercial Vses to Plate Of City designated "rest« denttaT,uses>Therefore, 1,300 dwellings, 00 le anticipated with th,e,Chted, Plan would patent, latiy,be displaced .� Gy these conmarcfal desf.gnations, i r • V zt a�iY;ri' I, )'A 'Intoxgovernmentcl Holations Wtteo Inter-Departme t Clty-County land uao - Page 2 pob+ It, 06d ra, Inter avaxnmerital golatibno Commi£teo""and SU caYidor llilda Supervisor P "baler rpo.n gill rep with the 1 78 Northxoat Chico zbzono. It ohould be noted this will repreaant a ma9jor Com .+u rv3sor Jane Dolan ' P romiae and.a major change in Lilo Ceriaral plan Pa of Lilo City. For its part, the county x iopJL_.i! City -County dioouesion on dtffdrancgp batKaert General pjnirg. Wanolinea nomcpNhaE but that deemed to bo trhat xaa r have to drnx in, ito ' P1 omiaad when the that aaT.0 ebrrlary 4� ig80 MY y r n muCli an dome or us at d Lilo Cit�nanawujravocdidaidxovod aflfhiolrazond PP net doba,ta it,turthar. Certainly we ttro all aware, that aleardpancied 4. Starfnstrouid meat and pkoparo a: kapott on the alfferanoeb hatxocn lam! rise categorise and denaity dodlgnationd end provlda ouggentlos inationt{ exiat between the Gbnbral Plaud dovaloped,by the City of Chico cold the County of DUtto Sar ttie Chino area, Thoia eocOricnt0 have ordrited ror nearly zC years doaior on ilex aidtied r. can be rsachod. OEKdmplci City plan hats os a g hat doftnoa no dwelling unite per Cern or. n alydculiuzal £hd deoldnetion uaod 1' iza and `that and numerouo attempts ha�id boon mado to reconcile ttta iiiffexennea aha numoroun arguments have OnU agradnent 'on one plan eama xh,on both bvornracnta xer© in for ovd thi , 1s County';o Ian ha ng not; in un i{rban de5lgnatloa'r xhil_e ,th', P e throe aaier,or ea that do list denai£y,) e ddinE thnilr fire Concra]Ptpnnd,, the early 3g6o'd, The Cit approved,, 6 p„ BpProve it, xhs Cb { Yits Ian first and aokna the:ifoatLi to;alnn } d: ltd dwn. pled for the Chico than snot Erne '£ho Cit 5.' Stnffb,ahal 1 maut and prdparo a report on where and hr,x'L intorprotod piniining dal and n`r - hay have.diffe,rsnll y N tl en i aroti ,which. orris difforonl s the di did not c}rair o the t olrtoe Y 6 l.A and tharo hayo boon nrgur�ontd;,avor rhos Sar Lilo Clrlcb ursai i. o, population aludinC'and projnatiohd; houairlg damdnd pzudistias, availability or g, a£b, l believe it ade"Uto to Say tliat the major diffeinnaan`iuid Lilo dourCa o recurring argupant and canflIcL have troeh lung uao ddsi "nhtibnir f 'aouLhwent of Chihd. t)iir Council msmber-3uporviebr Commit,Eaa dturll review; Lh t aesolu a it n roliay dstnrminatian cath be . ode reportu from our otafCd, rewi upon broadand :Wliag CblioLrtu'lnly diffarsnosp exint hglarid ilaetdaulgnatidnn idr other da dirforencaa ked o CounaiX+ Cris Laiix<i. :to r000auaand £rs our neCIrvtho sit acand poXioyhnrnttharokybutmito)band in land I'tagozy donctlptioaa bounty and. Lilo oity vi )f urban ancra ctunarmittinlo axw1maln,tuis, oa difterontly.tiio „. abayo' oan 6o.ngro i upon it x111 mean taut doclu �eajor' and iu q P toly be op i nd, iao'rnfoxe, to locus the work of our oom ILLen Arid bur staffs, rollc+tirigr ash' evod. It will also moan UAL prdjdabt hnvo,lohg�boun propoo� and rb fial+ a aro 'bbing, dorso, a► all` not ba, truttlonod wltlt anotllo'r 1aydi, unbacon: I propoda Shn tyeratloM. 1. Fo'r all Croda witlrir% the City's Piicnary 8phoxo or Inf]uenQa Lho ,,� " daaignationd an dsva3opod by, Lilo city shall to,ofpro, i initigte Ttrerir the tacos aC Lila diaairenion ehall to the diff eroncad in lana uob ca£arinr-, izittion and Lha dllforonosa 1n donaily d'o dgnntion;'to nnd.�lho,'thetlantl'uau y shall neoaadaiy atepa to o}usrlga the county plan. `7ho do thld bo it run coincide with other Conaial ilrin,oliangau dotab�not Irinn ta'"` jeopaYtiizo £imalinobe not goo no - Lha itnat of Chico. . t'zomthoko wq:laolc at raslity and it seems xa aro cloaor to clay a to dr other projocito beoauoe of t1u changed a yo4z'y r aoera, agroamndt than it projooLa that Arae "Ur Lha xarkd'� :phall et1►y' on ane. „ Tlto City nils Cwanly dl it ;uou the ha�ring prbdcaa reap' dpprdvulu� xlet' Upblsrovrsi Dig Chino Crbok mtatab' tdn£ativo map and dt u r h r tontalivn • , bn twoon, jird City .d Crar glipo .and tf tl undarve Aa hoolr as end r CounlY'a urban doatl bn thnn eca aq ttrat the anathnx' txikcuUoiutia of ed pthor for" in,Ut xa dtvsll be, no unxarrant P Cad didcundiori 4d do1nY or Lila tuekir o;` loop to j urap through. may not 114 0 oxidt. Slhoo rdCbnf�idnral thbas dreisios (andI d6jirt)i th0�n e. Ib. , inn is vo ` i,rtlihol b Y_..bd thele shone Apprdvod-butrpol'-tiUilt autxliti Y Y the Cbugty, furthor dineunaiai L: nha11'iitil dol ?fliodb projects "in the xor)ca�r Of procoria:, i;o nhoule`(',net dst t lei bad in L, of tl10 IiurYinir of tjfn 1 t zi ip a doWLiiig Airport t]rvitona aooiety an maLtnrd the Drxi2k1 has alrarW,er npprovad and Ka oholl.d not i'ora6 thbas cr un who do hot lik0 thcua derSiCiona' to nay oro do." ifo nhauld rdreC,n ze tfro� bxiat 'any Korth !a`splariaao rozond PS1dFaway .`and ;further Cotton ori them ri'ill be Sn aoir y . to rezone South Ctricb Toxone rrd*hil5. lor?C . area oro, it doomo that the focus or diacuadibn for our Paa>ZI-Caurjcil' caraitteo , id the area U4+lKadn Lilo ijonjurn' eddd ar lhdao devote renidsntinl,liha, - The village �+llfotTlia mento 1 prapoaoLlult thio caunLy'druw its- cw and the cqunty�d low danglty t}to kdetuiTr uoundary'af cheap a dcnaity rostdential 111r ; lykic Sart;headt chino lana uuodaeilgnatibn:.nna eorilri buainletnbn ad bctNobnd£ttvit-;,15rp d tut (1 Lo acro r ilVontia rind that ah' agziaul,luraT dndigdatiori p6niX mcntn and CXanM 3., ,Ttie County and; the cityi should and agrieul£ural ba impluruented wbdt of Glonxbr 1. ng` (10 ao0. 11 and up) dwt ita land uoe dealg_rwtibn l hbo` to car tlity and County y hhnIhd Dixaatora� 1'ubIi'b Gozi d,.t7spa�t{montn, C2gjhLy AdaibltsttaLira l Offlcar, ,OILY KInrtgdr, tiswa Mpdid Y , r ca:y ga CHICO OLw:";M nukl TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS CO mITTGE DATE: JANUARY 29, 1980 MOM, REFERENCE: OM, CITY CLERK SUBJECT; Agenda for meeting on Honday, February 4, 1980, at 4,00 P.M. in Conference Room 1, Chico Municipal Center, 4?l hlain;Scree . L Discussion tivith County rep"resentativesconcerning discrepancies between tine City and County General Plans concerning the locations of the "Green Line" along the We. sterTy port' oto of the Chico Urban Area,: This meeting is'the result of concerns epressed by the Council coneerni'ng urban deVe]op ment hest of Chico. Representatives or the County Planning Department Will review the proposed new County General s I'1 an Land Use hiap a,nd the City' s, Acting P1 anni ng D i rector y��'i 11 t•evi ew the City' s `current Gen�ra;l "P1 an land Use, [11ap, At the conclusion of your discussion, it is requested that the City and County represet7�- atives make recommendations which niav be 'Forwarded to the City L'o ine 1 and the Qoard of Supervisors fo:r revisi ons to she General "P'',,ant concerning urban development. along the t tvesterlY; 'f in of the Chico Urban Area. Al thourTi the. Council and, Supetvi sons have agreed to apo' nt a 14 -member^ =ci ti ins ccmmi ttr'� to r�eVi eV; both pl ons for the Chico ;area, the Ci ty and County 1^epresentati ves a t chi s meet in9 Have been risked by the City Coun,ci 1 to, protii ale spec' r"i c recommerda't7 ons, concern? i7g urb'en'deVelopmeht along the W6 terly 1'imits o the Chaco urban area. tJist;r_All Councilman Grieco, Chr•.� Councilman Hays Cotlnci an Supervisor Dolan upervisor 4;r�ee1er CountJ% planning Dept. Coonty Pub'i,c` Wotiks County Adm I n 0fcr. City hian;ager a+ _ c Pla b City Di r''4 Rub, Wks J. N 3'10 1980 erlrs tied' a04) PLA NPJ'tNG OFFICE, CITY OF .CHCCO lfu5 1-`tH � ia� b i A , CITY'OF MUCO` CITY OF CHICO rt CITY COUNCIL 11 E, If0RA0lDUAI � t C�T�' U0U,N' 1L MElIf01 A D131 Td-, CITY COUNCIL (MTG. 2/19/80) DATC: FEBRUARY 6, 1986 .CCI+ C.ITY,'COUNCIL (MTG., 2/19/80) DAT%t FE.9RL'ARY 51 1.980 + ,rR614i 11ITERGOYER,fNENTAI RELATIONS COMMITTEE FII£: p 65/CMAAGENtiAiA/p-j / tnbW 1NTEMOVERIMENTAL RELATiMs COMITUE, F1LL' AL- $UHJI CT; MEETING OF FEBRUARY q,-1980 OP10/PREA-C-5T-1��, A'G N SUBJECT: MEET1110 OF WAUARY A, 1980 = PAGE 2 " 11 ESS GE . `. :IIFIS8AGE s At its meeting of ;February A, 1980, the IntergoVernmgntal Relations Committee tliscussed a strategy for bringing the City and County Genera'I plans into t- 6, The two�stikffs should meet"bnd report on the difference:. 1"n their data base,$ and interpretatfods of Studies. ri iahce on CW s: in°estern erilreter. Members presbnt at this meeting were: Orc/ t pp planning Oolan, Why ler Grieoo and lia s. County staff resent Wer I Y p e: Advanced Planner 8rooksy Plznnlno birector Blair, City staff present Were: Assistant Plalirtcr x 6. Th'ii'Coaulittet shop.ld meet to rcVieW these staff reports, and deter- Prince+ and Acting':j'lanrilo Oiractor Bolster. Mine a comproiviise policy for ilia City and County+ General Plans. Count tali r Broo s- rase ted sta : o v �_ : Y l' .ne 1 p nF a ff prop sad Pevision to the County Land Us, . Golan also recommohded that the Cbunty draw its urban%agrkUltUev boundary 11166: ir"ound approved subdivisions antl that large -lot (1-5 acre) land use tlesignatians Magi fur thWdrea. Brooks stated that the':,urban ties"ignaCldns (1-A dweliings Haji;encompass per and Yoning be im iemented betwe n the5a dove 4 nencs and Glenwood venue `' P e L p A hast acro) on the proposed County approved rezoned areas and subdivisions (e»g, tj;c jta.rtram Razetio a;nd Oig Chico Creek Cstates), Agriculturo designdtiohs �` of Glenwood Avenue an,,a ricuj'tural dat na ton. 1 'tted + an zoning, ,s: 9 9 t (0 r s ) ,,d t ing.ahould, be 1nm1emented,, iibted 's �.? 1.z end v;n5tward f►cn, theta 5rra5, a major, divisjan line being G1enMiarC AMenue, Oolan"also that: the Count ekistjn .General Plan for " the C,tico urban area ,draws the urb1lA a: ricultare 1 ne e st of G1e,h:cd-'na`, / 9 i a r 8rook� suited that County'staff: believes the proposed Map represents a compromise rv_nVd. . tet;een ilia previous_County Land Use Map and the G'ty's Greettline,, County staf° recti-rends:that the City's -Land Usc Map be incorporated in 6' the County for bi `cu.ssion fri'lotired concer i "the need f a bu • ' T n fig n br ffer zona be�ween tLe residential 'a O :, t the area, within th;e City beindarjes, it Was also recommended that the foljo+,i99 Vtes,approved cast Glenyiood".Avenue and the,`} ricultura uses west a d 9 ,. .1 p,,. A tetoinssendatl6ri that one 1 acre minimum lgts:be des. noted Jst eas, of l- (� 1g d, t Glenredd.+ Couvt,l rerCnin9 ara,jectSt til;ich are 1!i tha narks, should riot ba' intlu.dod iii tha Avenin to ProG'idc for ttllf'buffer was discussed: Ccralttee s ddscussioa. Airport rezone, n.ortli Nlghway 32 commercial rezo:it� and the South Cflito rrzoner , ihe,Cc,oni"ttdo agreed €fiat they Wou'rd limit their r{eeting"s to a',6 week p� 'e;nd y r w , llcting Planning Oilectcr Bolster reviewed the County Land, Use 1!ap, i.ndjcating ;: filet their.vrirk would be sdparatc from that of'tho proposed l0 ranter City/Co'.mty; '',, Citizen's Advi'sbry Coiwoittep , , it, was alta determilied 't at q goi , s t h ng, r9 n w " ' est ,tido areas wirer} the p„ lan �rpuld result in urban dens.jties beyond"the Cjty s Sphere of lriflucnce, and statod that the Cbrmlttee ;should focus their attention , the:Count woo untJect ,, y , _1d .tint ae'hgttl up by 4bc`Cbnrait%cc's discussions„ County' and City.,.; staffs agreod,to prepare an analysis,nf the inpacts tho propoi d Ltnd Use dap:and: + ort .hese areas,. , SuporYiSor On1an s reO mendazions orarlld have .on the eristixlg Gity Geniraj Plan: Supervisor, 601an d;istri�uted a momo making recononennations for the Cairmitteers , epnside'rot{on, Coian's 04 faliluws, The ext mectin was'" sclsedu cd "or s a v n _ g . 1 f Thur d y, Nbruar. zl, 1980 at Agog P.i{. in Men aye the City CoUndiI Chambers; 1: The Cbu'lity shaul:d adopt the City's Land;,Use Fiap for alj Areas within IIITERGOYERfiiiEftlAL PELATidNS. CCMf1T7EE the Sphere of Igfluence.; �', 2, Al prof gcts cu&dht, Under.con _siderat on Grithio the City an- County should riot ba subject to feviaw ey the C'olrorlitted "'' y i.TFe City should arrcntl it`s General Plan to tot udc the 1g79 Northwas# Pr. nc , ssistant annex Chico,Re ono, %P%kni A: City and County :.staffs should meet and pfeparc a:jcport destribing tYe differences between the City`and County, plans$ alto rdeomntend 'ng k 'aP,iropridtq cbmprn„inset.- , , , ' .,u a. a ,,. •#: 1 POPULATIOY ESTIffJITE FOR'TNE COUNTY LAO Use MAP r t Areas 'a3thin thu _Chico 5ohet•e o6 Tnfluencl: '> ` `POPULATJON ESTlkATE FOR THE COUNTY L1L4b ISE P`, P ' � ; - - Cross Acreaae and Pobulatioril Roldina Population for the Chlec''V,ictnit�y Acres bwellinas Po U18taon , Rural OeWty' 785 785 1 r 1,806 ita i- by 1p X87,225, Chico Gen r) Plan estimate far Sphere of I:nfluencc 985 0ensitY + 636 2,544 Net Increase in Inner Spher- Densities, 8,844 County Ned{u O�nsity 312, 2 496 r Sioposed.by 174O Cor:aery{al U0.1dout Population 8ayogd Chico Sphere eine 2 18,175 Industrial 268: ---_ To7AL ,11.4,244 TOTAL ' " Years at 2,2x Growth Rate to Reach 114,2443 ,■ ' �;et'Paoulatton? , - Years at 2.7% Growth Ratc to Reach 114,2444 :.'25 Ruratand Low pensitY , 7~174- Medlo. Oepsity 2ttl25 650 "4',�----" Subtotal • 3 to M.. to l3 Adjusted NetP@puiation 2,990 �#t,�"""" ' M 1 This figure intludes,,the 71,100 General plan pp'rojectiop,.pjus Popatatlons for the Northeast Chico Specific Plan;'. Catifor'nia parkr The Yiita4es, and -the -propoitd' Sputlieast Chica 5ewer'Ass:�sme�t Ristiict area Areas Outside the Cfiico Sphere+ of 1nflucace ,, ` "? Areas not included in this estimate, but .W tc ' are des!tgn6ted for' agricultural 'Acrcar a and Pocutatiah, esidenC6a1 use, aYe the ai'oh betwepti fligh4:ay 32; and Stilson dnyon Rcad.easL';p!''` he Chi. Sphere of influence, and 'thd area betv;6en Hurbug Road and the 5kys+ay'ex 'the 'ea Aa es Oweil'inas. pocuUtlon bf the Sphere, Population estimt s,'Couic `not be cornpaled in tiAn is A9rlcutaural Resitleptial4 3x845 3,03,0 6i97O of th's roport. ` Low, bdn i+3' )iU58 4F392 10;fOD�� 3 + 2 R Etas the ( 000 Chico urban area Poi gp6Wth i ate for Chico 1970.76 assurning 60, ltrtNA, for1880: N.ediom"Oeristty 60, 480 ),105, , 2.7X {s a 1{berm figure, irr eases of`oUr cur'rdnt Growth rSte. r Cox-crc a1 225 ` Jndua,.r --t- , 1 T}Nese figurds rapresent area"s t�;iere�the Count a s y L no fse Map,propose� more in'te610 us§s't,an trRe.Chico.N�p. Population ostina 6t.art used on a coits.rvative 2A persons OW6mllin4 figure; 2 The`nPt pt p, estfm'bte is Cf t' + ro derts441es. the :difference betl ,en County.proposed°densities and I � P f+o sT,d 3' In se'rernl a"WV � H ciat s^ Y ase of Cit dont :, i'sci th fount' ro os� totnrerres! Tauri.. :for,, 1�30tl daaflinr��, rPQ '�pabp elgnCitii!ated� 6r 2 C 1 tl si",r ted re g 4+itn -the Clrico .. , .{ fY Mils p1�rf w °1d,t` .s ia�!7y be aw1Tert 1al° deslRaat,;iotlt,�x CITY OF CHICO REPORT 70 `TNTERGOVERNi1tNTAL RELATIONS ''OATEt FEBRUARY 16. 1980 COMMITiEE (MTG..2/21/80) FROM,' PLANNING STAFF FILEI CP 61:4;9/A -C -ST -18 SUBJECT,' PROPOSED MENOMENTS TO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CNICO UR2w`i AREA - 2 special attention should bo paid to the impacts the comp'r'omise proposal mold.have=', on this policy; The current amendment to the County Land Use Ele.ent wdvid allb. urban and; rural residential.de'velopment upon 3,650 acres of prime 'sails on Chico's; no (Including the Airport Rexdha ar.ea)j,West,and southwest sides. Glea'rly, a; substantial amount of productive farmland is inrguestion. ' Recommendations While t(ire Urban suburban ]and use designations of tho nevi CauntyLand Use Flap cannot ba JVstified on the bas�is'of projected population grbWth alone; they may represent a'compromse that; in the long term, wi1l,;enabte the City to realize its goal of p'csoNino the 'rich agricultural la.pds op its Westside, The City's Dencrai h1ao, in addressing the preservation 1'_SsUe, points out .ln page 15 that ''The 4diele concept of preso,'ving dgricu ture and guiding urbzn deveioprent' dill bo lost Unless the City and County unUerta�d a unified-tounse of action,' Tn the ipterests of establishing ,'tilt Uhified course df action, the to'llowihg. 41fiC, recommendations are suggested; itiese recommendatiians expand thasd'presented h Supervisor' 0olan`s.mamo to'the Inter cvernmental Relations Committee, ansupervisor 1. Ni.tlda 1Jhedl, dated February Q; I98 , 1, fpr the areas within the Cityprimary Sphere of, Infiuehce, the 03t� County shall wol' toltards a cdmprAmjse enn5i`stent.With sound planhin, principals The agriault3ral areason,tha City Pian within the sp'he f will be ainended to indioat6 appropriate urban land uses; Fecognfxijig the, k1 existing .land deuctopmcnts in the;'araa. The City,pian shoptd, in most dtifer jn;tcncesr proV;ai1r, i 2. Fdr all, pr4Ju'utstn the, markshitli pe Opose urlransuburban'; develoq ants oA prime agrieutturat soils] the County Wi11 endeaYor td'ilnplerent that viable prosect alternative vthich preserves, the ts..ak3muin atroUnt of prir^e , ( rEoils 6, this regard, the GOUnty:�shOUid ('seta gpal,to preserve a 'signi- " ficant parbentage!df tite 3, 550•acres of agricultural novr indicated for Urb6n_AVburban development. . ( 3: For all Urban areas outside o�f the Primas¢ and Secondary Sphere3 of dnfluehee E the GUY and County, jointly, should peep sppc,ifid plans so thaE future developments in these areas vtfi1 contain the necessary pubytc.improven4nts and facilit'lot fegUired for Urbah dd"lopnent. The City, ►b'u'd tt;en ar0d its General Ploh and Spheres.of Infiuegce'plan With the eventual goal of � l MYJ0g thesq urlhn;eraAt,withln the City -limits, 4. Tha:,becd jn the. vicinity of the Big Chico Creek Es Ates Subdivision ahoyld �I�e+vrrr.�rrrroi..■. ., .. 1 a' Senator Johnson; Page Toro 03 -But -32 9/7=917 involved. The prOdeSs is minimized when.a local agency environ-• subdivision properly addresses enal dacument;covering,.a impacts of a -required new new connections a State hxgYAway. the if this has not been done, as in the case of Route 32, it is an: environmental document separately then necessary to process far the new canriect on. These segmentation si;ttaat ons ,can be avc5ided by following the purpose and spirit of. CEQA,and by p gency and the devela er, the local a early cansultat_ion.between the State, #' e as W o. ���y5 �i���% R • ,aga'SAssistant Director Legislative Affairs TDB :,RHB :.bg bcc:, JRGodon RGAdaztts EhlWal,l AWrenn--03 Chief t lgineer EKLowe RSk.dmore--03 Director's files p4swa�.d Dir-i2ef fiJ.e RR�ipinsk PlAnnit & Design files -pis 03 mg h, tt A& MTV OF MICO TO: INTERGOVERNMENTALRELATI'O14S CO11111TTEE DATE. JANUARY 29, 1980 FROM: CITY CLERK FILE REMENCE SUBJECT: Agenda for meeting on Monday, February 4,. 1980, at 4:00 P.M. in Conference Rooms 1, ;Chico Municipal Center, 421_ Man Street. Di'scassion with County representatives concerniriq discrepa.nries bet' r4en.tive City and ! County General Plans concerning the locations of the %reeri Line" along the westerly ports on of the Chico Urban Area. 1 hi s meeting, is-the t esul t of concerns expressed by the Council concerning urban devel op_ menu wast of .Chico: 'Ropresentatives of the County Planning Department will reviow the proposed new, County Oaneral Plan Land Use Map and the City's Acting Planning Di rector wi l 1 review i:hc City's , current General Plan Land Use, Map+ At the conclusion of your discussion, it' is requested that the City and county rept^eseni doves make recommendations which may be forwarded to tho 'City Cruricil and the Board of supervisors for revisions to the General Plans concerning urbah development; along, the westerly 11,06 of the Chico Urban Area, Although` the Council and Supe'rvi sot^s have agreed to ap;�oi nt a 10�-mdttlber ci ti zees coriimi ti to to review both plans for the 'Chico area ` the City and County repres;erita.i Ives at this meeting have, been asVed by the City Council to provide specific recommendwd'ons roYicerning e p g the ties°terl.y 7 i[ua is 6f they ,Ci°1i co�� �urbar7� area, t malt urban d..Vc; I o men. �Di sty CogncT !than Gri eco, thr. -' Cottnc i lman Nays Gou6611Rian Ori sup rvi!ior Calan Sui�'�at^visor 1�heelc;r C0Qn'by Pl aorifil Dopt County PUbl i c, VIorks County .A min dfcr Ci ty `144nage14 J Cly Ati;erney Acting Planning Dii�, OCM {iC�ts City Dir^, Pubs Irks.° 1e4� f9ed; a O 13utt Nowiog otrtln. l ravlho, a(i}OM l7Sk'X»Ia1 �aN Fb CoU dU CM' (( C ^^Q ot� 0p C U U- !/' F O R G OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK rEI.EPHONE 19,jr, 343.4401 AFTER S.'00 P.617343573�7 ®Cii�tp °Sarramanb\ �Son" Frnncisco- January 3, 1980 Board of Supervisors County of Butte 25 County Center Drive OrbUi le,'Ca. 95965 Enclosed at=e the following docutneilts Which Were ;co�lsrc*My=ed and -approved by the City Coiinc11 at i s fan"uary 3 Meetii�.9 1;i1 connection With ui�ban development in Unineorporated west of Chico: areas 1. Latter to Board of Supe5^Visors signor by the Mayor. Resolut oii ��16 �87 9-80 �concerniny� urben dove I.' of the city �lmits ��iest sincerely, BARBARA Ai c8,V city Clerlt cc'. (; ty Colunci l Butte Cop annirig 1�1'ahnin Dire VIm, Pudic !o rks Ci`tY M,4Ila ger ,,JAN 419D 1 RESOLUTION NO: 8i 79 -.BO t 3, that the City, of Chico 'inform the Board of SuperVisors, 7 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY 2 County of Butte; of its continued unequivocal and absolute opposition to the - 3 OF CHICO CONCERNING URBAN DEVELOPMENT WEST (IF TN1r. CITY L1MI7S SeUeral developments proposed on .or near West Sacramento Avenue, Westerly of , d i - the Green Line shown on ;the City of Ch1c6 General Plan. 5, l~1{EACAS,the human race hat,beer endowed with a limited amount of 5 The'loregoitiq resolution was adopted.at a regular mgetfn9 of it G productive agricultural Iand; and "' G City Council of the Cit, of Chico held on the 2nd day of January, 1980, by the WEAEA51 those wWachiove control over this land Wd a Yit-1 following vote::' U and unremitting responsibility to humankino., both present and future, to use e 9 thisi fans to peo4 to moth-neoded food; and: g Mes;. CouncilMembe se Epochs, HacWan, Ofy and *rley. to WHE:RtAS, t6me of the a ohotl and mast productiVe, of this soil is io NOM Councflmembers Hays, driedo and C`Ynas, 11 located near the 'City of Chico, CiflAfgrniap partidularly irvediatelY to the: 11 'IS,pSENT! 'None, 12 west; andi 1� WHEAEAS, urbon and suburban davolop ont are traditjonally. and 13 ATTEST,, �% 'Ln 14 atickally the responsibility of cities, rather thin coupties, an d r1'.1 1T ` , � C i4.v �/„ -.,3r •.'.�yZr er S 1', WHEAMSj that Gen rl plan, xari3ng an's1sphor`es of infi�uenco are 1 IE, 9 and legtirVte 'ibois to affect the type and16 er°satly considered, to��be to aj univ Ap P VEO TO ORId ih A7Al tot;groWth;'apd I7% C1tY Attowney 18 FHlREAS, thc-1e041,,nwraI and troth-tional posture of the Ctt' As 1� Chico (asexpr`essod •root <cidarly in fits 'Oelieral P`1on•) toward urban :and 'sUhurb- 1 ,' 26 , n devolp,�nent 1Ea: bean dfrocttd a}ray from thePost productive son's; , 20 IOW' THEREFIIRE, bC 'IT RCSDLV£O #Y f,HE dmco AS'PQLLbWS: 21 ;k Ithat the City of Chico•)`oiffirm its historical position of 22 wresider;ti'a1. davelopmont qo prima ogribultural land: s 24 :, that the City 0 Chico exp rbss its moral in#ent to 'MIOta in 2a the totegrity,of;prime agricultural land through,whatever•lawfdl mans are at 25 } iiS d15iSSl: 26 r