HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 01 - Land UseChapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
1
CHAPTER 1: LAND USE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................4
REGIONAL SETTING ...................................................................................................................................................4
COUNTY BOUNDARIES, PLANNING AREAS, AND LAND USE ......................................................................................4
1.2 EXISTING BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN.............................................................................................6
GENERAL PLAN CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION ........................................................................................................6
Land Use Element................................................................................................................................................6
Circulation Element.............................................................................................................................................7
Housing Element..................................................................................................................................................7
Conservation Element..........................................................................................................................................7
Open Space Element ............................................................................................................................................7
Noise Element ......................................................................................................................................................8
Safety Element......................................................................................................................................................8
Seismic Safety Element.........................................................................................................................................8
Scenic Highways Element....................................................................................................................................8
Recreation Element..............................................................................................................................................8
Agricultural Element............................................................................................................................................8
RELATIONSHIP TO CITY GENERAL PLANS ..................................................................................................................9
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CATEGORIES ...................................................................................................9
AREA PLANS ............................................................................................................................................................12
Oroville Area Plan.............................................................................................................................................12
Chico Area Plan.................................................................................................................................................13
Gridley-Biggs Area Plan....................................................................................................................................14
Paradise Urban Reserve Area Land Use Plan...................................................................................................14
Durham-Dayton-Nelson Area Plan....................................................................................................................15
Concow Area Land Use Plan.............................................................................................................................15
Palermo/Honcut Area Land Use Plan ...............................................................................................................15
Cohasset-Forest Ranch Area Plan.....................................................................................................................15
SPECIFIC PLANS .......................................................................................................................................................16
1.3 ZONING...............................................................................................................................................................17
SUMMARY OF ZONING DISTRICTS............................................................................................................................17
Agricultural Zones.............................................................................................................................................18
Timber Mountain Zones.....................................................................................................................................18
Foothill Recreational Zones...............................................................................................................................18
Agricultural-Residential Zones..........................................................................................................................18
Suburban Residential Zones...............................................................................................................................18
Residential Zones...............................................................................................................................................19
Commercial Zones.............................................................................................................................................19
Research & Business Park.................................................................................................................................19
Industrial Zones.................................................................................................................................................19
Other Zones........................................................................................................................................................19
SUMMARY OF COUNTY ZONING MAP ......................................................................................................................20
1.4 CITY GENERAL PLANS ..................................................................................................................................21
CITY OF CHICO ........................................................................................................................................................21
Population and General Character....................................................................................................................21
General Plan......................................................................................................................................................22
CITY OF OROVILLE ..................................................................................................................................................23
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
2
Population and General Character....................................................................................................................23
General Plan......................................................................................................................................................23
CITY OF BIGGS.........................................................................................................................................................24
Population and General Character....................................................................................................................24
General Plan......................................................................................................................................................25
CITY OF GRIDLEY ....................................................................................................................................................26
Population and General Character....................................................................................................................26
General Plan......................................................................................................................................................27
TOWN OF PARADISE.................................................................................................................................................28
Population and General Character....................................................................................................................28
General Plan......................................................................................................................................................29
1.5 EXISTING LAND USES IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS.........................................................................29
COUNTY LAND USE .................................................................................................................................................29
HISTORICAL LAND USE BY GEOGRAPHIC AREA ......................................................................................................30
The Valley ..........................................................................................................................................................30
The Foothills......................................................................................................................................................30
The Mountains ...................................................................................................................................................31
Urban Land Use.................................................................................................................................................31
GENERALIZED DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING LAND USE .............................................................................................33
LAND USE BY PLANNING AREA ...............................................................................................................................34
Nord...................................................................................................................................................................35
Cohasset-Forest Ranch......................................................................................................................................35
Stirling City........................................................................................................................................................35
Chico..................................................................................................................................................................35
Magalia (Upper Ridge)......................................................................................................................................35
Paradise.............................................................................................................................................................36
Concow ..............................................................................................................................................................36
Durham-Dayton-Nelson.....................................................................................................................................36
Central Butte......................................................................................................................................................36
Feather FallsBrush Creek..................................................................................................................................37
Table Mountain (Cherokee)...............................................................................................................................37
Berry Creek-Bald Rock-Hurleton.......................................................................................................................37
Gridley-Biggs.....................................................................................................................................................37
Oroville..............................................................................................................................................................37
Palermo..............................................................................................................................................................37
Honcut-Bangor ..................................................................................................................................................38
1.6 PHYSICAL FORM AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.....................................................................................38
PHYSICAL FORM AND VISUAL CHARACTER .............................................................................................................38
COMPONENTS OF PHYSICAL FORM ..........................................................................................................................38
BOUNDARIES ...........................................................................................................................................................38
NATURAL FEATURES ...............................................................................................................................................39
Valley.................................................................................................................................................................39
Foothills.............................................................................................................................................................39
Mountains/Timberlands.....................................................................................................................................40
Waterbodies .......................................................................................................................................................40
Unique Land Forms and Habitat Areas.............................................................................................................41
HUMAN SETTLEMENT ..............................................................................................................................................41
Current Urban Development..............................................................................................................................42
1.7 LAFCO AND SPHERES OF INFLUENCE......................................................................................................42
LAFCO RESPONSIBILITIES ......................................................................................................................................42
MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW..................................................................................................................................43
SPHERES OF INFLUENCE...........................................................................................................................................43
SPHERES OF INFLUENCE IN BUTTE COUNTY ............................................................................................................44
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
3
Chico Area Sphere of Influence .........................................................................................................................45
Existing City of Chico SOI.............................................................................................................................................45
Service Constraints.........................................................................................................................................................45
Oroville Area Spheres of Influence....................................................................................................................45
Existing City of Oroville SOI .........................................................................................................................................46
Service Constraints .........................................................................................................................................................46
Gridley Area Sphere of Influence.......................................................................................................................46
Existing City SOIs..........................................................................................................................................................46
Service Constraints .........................................................................................................................................................48
City of Biggs Sphere of Influence.......................................................................................................................48
Paradise Area Spheres of Influence...................................................................................................................48
Existing Town of Paradise SOI.......................................................................................................................................48
Service Constraints .........................................................................................................................................................49
1.8 OTHER COUNTY AND REGIONAL PLANS AND POLICIES...................................................................50
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND OTHER BCAG PLANS .............................................................................50
BCAQMD NONATTAINMENT PLAN ........................................................................................................................50
AIRPORT MASTER PLANS ........................................................................................................................................51
AIRPORT LAND USE PLANS .....................................................................................................................................51
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN .............................................................................................................52
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN..............................................................................................................52
BUTTE COUNTY STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.....................................................................................53
1.9 STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES CONCERNED WITH LAND USE...................................................53
AGENCIES WITH PERMITTING AUTHORITY...............................................................................................................53
AGENCIES WITH REVIEW AUTHORITY .....................................................................................................................55
AGENCIES THAT OWN LAND....................................................................................................................................56
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1-1 SUMMARY OF EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
...........................................................................................................................................................................10
TABLE 1-2 DISTRIBUTION OF CITY AND COUNTY LAND BUTTE COUNTY 2000 ..........................................................33
TABLE 1-3 ACREAGE BY GENERALIZED LAND USE CATEGORIES UNINCORPORATED LANDS BUTTE COUNTY 2005 ...34
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1-1: REGIONAL SETTING ....................................................................................................................................5
FIGURE 1-2: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS (2003)....................................................................................................11
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
4
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Since land use is the principal focus of the General Plan, this chapter of the General Plan
Background Report provides an analysis of existing land use conditions within Butte County. It
also discusses local, regional, state, and federal planning documents.
Regional Setting
Butte County lies in north central California at the northern end of the Sacramento Valley,
approximately 150 miles northeast of San Francisco and 70 miles north of Sacramento. State
Highways 70 and 99, which extend in a north-south direction through the county, define the
principal transportation corridors connecting the county to the region. State Routes 32 and 162
provide sub-regional connections to areas to the west of the county and to Interstate 5. Figure 1-1
shows Butte County’s regional setting.
County Boundaries, Planning Areas, and Land Use
Butte County’s jurisdictional boundaries are defined by the Sacramento River, Butte Creek, and
Glenn and Colusa Counties to the west; Tehama County to the north; Plumas County to the east;
and Sutter and Yuba Counties to the south. South Honcut Creek and Wilson Creek are the
southeast boundary with Yuba County. The county encompasses approximately 1,670 square
miles (1,068,000 acres) and can be divided into three general topographical areas: a valley area, a
foothill region east of the valley area, and a mountain region east of the foothills. These
topographic areas comprise approximately 45 percent, 23 percent and 31 percent, respectively, of
the county’s land.
The county includes five incorporated communities (Chico, Oroville, Paradise, Gridley, and
Biggs) and several small unincorporated rural communities (see Figure 1-1).
The U.S. Forest Service is a major landowner in Butte County with holdings in Plumas National
Forest (81,972 acres) and Lassen National Forest (49,240 acres). The U.S. Bureau of Land
Management owns 18,960 acres, consisting of scattered foothill lands. Combined, these two
Federal agencies own and control 12.3 percent of the land area in Butte County.
Urban land constitutes a proportionally small share of total land area in Butte County. In 2000,
the most recent year that the Division of Land Resource Protection in the California Department
of Conservation has data for Butte County, urban land uses occupied 62.7 square miles or 4
percent of all county land in 2000 (Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP)),
In 2000, incorporated areas of the county accounted for 3.6 percent of all county land, according
to U.S. Census data (see Table 1-2 later in this chapter).
REGIONAL SETTING
Figure 1-1
Butte County
General Plan
Source: Butte County Department of Development Services, 2003
BUTTE COUNTY
Date printed: June 6, 2003
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
6
1.2 EXISTING BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN
General Plan Content and Organization
In this document, “existing General Plan” refers to the Butte County General Plan as of January,
2004, consisting of a collection of 12 elements that were adopted between 1971 and 1995. Since
its adoption, the existing Butte County General Plan has been supplemented and portions of it
superseded by the adoption of area plans, updates to existing elements, and additions of new
elements. Some of the elements have been amended, while most have not. The following is a
summary of the status of the various elements of the General Plan.
• Land Use Element (Adopted October 1979; amended several times since its adoption)
• Circulation Element (Adopted May 1984; minor changes were made in 1988)
• Housing Element (Adopted 1981, revised 1994; new element adopted in 2004)
• Conservation Element (Adopted August 1971; no changes or amendments)
• Open Space Element (Adopted December 1976; no changes or amendments)
• Seismic Safety Element (Adopted March 1977; no changes or amendments)
• Safety Element (Adopted March 1977; no changes or amendments)
• Noise Element (Adopted March 1977; no changes or amendments)
• Scenic Highways Element (Adopted March 1977; no changes or amendments)
• Recreation Element (Adopted August 1971; no changes or amendments)
• Economy Element (Adopted August 1971; no changes or amendments)
• Agricultural Element (Adopted February 1995; no changes or amendments)
The following paragraphs describe each of the existing General Plan elements, briefly
summarizing their structure and general content.
Land Use Element
The existing Land Use Element is divided into five parts. The first is an introduction that briefly
discusses the nature of the plan. The second part is a collection of background information
describing existing conditions concerning the natural environment, the county’s population, the
local economy, countywide development patterns and trends, and public facilities and services.
The third part is the statement of County concerns and policies, which are presented in eight
sections: 1) Purpose and Application; 2) General; 3) Resource Management; 4) Residential
Development; 5) Economic Development; 6) Public Facilities; 7) Environmental Preservation;
and 8) Natural Hazards. The fourth part of the document describes the land use categories
appearing on the County’s land use plan specifies permissible uses, and includes policies
addressing site development criteria, development intensity standards, and zoning concerns for
each of the categories described. The fifth and final part describes the implementation program,
including descriptions of the land use maps and other aspects of the implementation process.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
7
Circulation Element
The existing Circulation Element has a planning time frame extending to the year 2000. It
consists of six major sections. The first section provides an introduction to the scope and basic
planning requirements for the Circulation Element. The second section, “Existing Transportation
System” examines the existing (1984) condition of the county’s local roads and highways, and
related transportation infrastructure, such as public transportation, bicycle, aviation, pedestrian,
railroads and utilities. The next sections discuss transportation and energy, financing issues of
the transportation system, and road classifications and standards. This is followed by the
“Transportation Forecast” which has a traffic forecast to the year 2000. Finally, the Circulation
Element concludes with a section on transportation issues and policies.
Housing Element
As part of the comprehensive General Plan Update, the County completed a Draft Housing
Element in January 1993 in order to comply with statutory requirements unique to housing
elements. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has
reviewed the draft. According to their interpretation of housing element law, HCD found some
deficiencies in the revised Element. After considering HCD’s comments, the Butte County Board
of Supervisors adopted the updated Housing Element in March of 1994. According to State law,
housing elements are required to be updated every seven years. However, pursuant to Senate Bill
320, the next Housing Element update was delayed until September 30, 2002. This was due to
the statewide economic recession that began in 1992, and to legislative action that suspended the
preparation of a new Regional Housing Allocation Plan by the Butte County Association of
Governments. The Housing Element update was subsequently delayed to December 31, 2003.
Conservation Element
The existing Conservation Element describes several issues related to conservation, including
water (domestic supply, flooding control, pollution), air pollution, soils and erosion, fisheries,
and urban encroachment on sensitive natural resources. The element contains no policy
statements or recommendations. In 1993, the County prepared a draft Energy, Natural Resources,
and Recreation Element (ENRRE). However, this document was not adopted as a formal element
of the General Plan. The Board of Supervisors directed that the adoption of this element be
delayed until the comprehensive General Plan update is completed. The document’s database
was incorporated into the 1999 General Plan Technical Background Report.
Open Space Element
The existing Open Space Element addresses seven topical areas, with a discussion of policy
recommendations for each issue. The seven areas are: 1) Open Space versus Urban
Development; 2) Agricultural Land; 3) Timber Land; 4) Water Resource Area; 5) Wildlife
Habitat; 6) Open Space for Outdoor Recreation; and 7) Areas with Development Hazards.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
8
Noise Element
The existing Noise Element contains four sections. The first describes general issues related to
noise elements and State requirements for their preparation. The second section states the
primary objectives of the element. The third section documents existing and projected noise
conditions resulting from traffic, railroads, and airports, and describes noise-sensitive areas
within the county. The final section presents policies and programs to address the identified
noise problems. The Noise Element requires updating noise contours around stationary sources
and measurements of ambient noise, as well as other related noise data.
Safety Element
The existing Safety Element addresses geologic and fire hazards. The geologic hazards section
addresses landslides, subsidence, erosion, expansive soils, and volcanic. The fire hazards section
describes potential hazards and the county’s fire protection services.
Seismic Safety Element
The existing Seismic Safety Element outlines the county’s geologic setting and seismic history,
including descriptions of active and potentially active earthquake faults. It also evaluates the
county’s fault zones and presents predictions of the effects of seismic activity related to these
faults. Finally, the Element outlines policies and implementation programs designed to address
the effects of earthquake hazards.
Scenic Highways Element
The existing Scenic Highways Element was adopted to satisfy State requirements at that time
(Government Code Section 65302(h)). It includes sections summarizing criteria for the selection
of scenic corridors, describing the process of developing and protecting designated corridors, and
outlining policies and implementation programs.
Recreation Element
The existing Recreation Element addresses parks, tourism, and riding and bike trails. The
element consists of a discussion of existing facilities and agency responsibilities, a list of
recreation facilities with proposed improvements, and policy recommendations.
Agricultural Element
The existing Agricultural Element affects areas of the county designated Orchard and Field
Crops and Grazing and Open Land. This Element established policies designed to achieve four
main purposes: 1) to preserve agricultural lands for continued agriculture uses; 2) to strengthen
and support the agricultural sector of the economy; 3) to protect the natural resources that sustain
agriculture in Butte County; and 4) to consolidate agricultural policies required in mandated
general plan elements into one document. The Agricultural Element is the County’s commitment
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
9
to strategies that ensure continued agricultural productivity unhindered by development
pressures.
Relationship to City General Plans
The existing Butte County General Plan applies to unincorporated areas surrounding the county’s
five cities. County General Plan policies and land use designations need to consider the adopted
General Plans for incorporated areas. County policies and land use descriptions are generally
consistent with those of the adopted City General Plans.
For development proposals within city limits, the applicable city general plan takes precedence
over County General Plan provisions. Development proposals outside a city’s boundaries, but
within its sphere of influence (SOI), are reviewed by both County and City planning agencies for
conformity with existing general plan policies. If a development proposal within a city’s SOI
would require municipal services (e.g., sewer, water), compliance with city general plan
provisions is usually required. Approval, however, is required by the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) for properties that wish to be incorporated within City limits or for the
extension of sewer service outside the Urban Service Area (USA). As of 2005, there are no
designated USAs in Butte County.
Existing General Plan Land Use Categories
The existing (1979, as amended) Land Use Element sets forth 14 land use categories that apply
to incorporated and unincorporated areas of the county, as shown on the General Plan Land Use
Map. For each land use category, the Land Use Element describes applicable principles and
standards, including primary and secondary uses, site designation criteria (i.e., preferred site
attributes for that category), intensity of use (i.e., limitations on parcel size, residential densities,
and other factors), zoning districts consistent with the land use category, and factors to be
considered in determining the appropriate zoning classification. Table 1-1 lists the 14 land use
categories in the existing Land Use Element, along with the primary allowable land uses for each
designation.
As shown in Figure 1-2, most of the eastern third of the county is designated by the existing
General Plan for Timber-Mountain uses, and most of the unincorporated area in the central part
of the county is designated as Grazing and Open Land. The western part of the county is
designated as Orchard and Field Crops. Each city has adopted a land use and circulation plan for
their incorporated lands and for their planning area.
Over the years the County has processed many amendments to the land use designations. Some
of the changes were at the request of private property owners, but many were at the direction of
the Butte County Board of Supervisors or Planning Commission. In addition to the adoption of
Area Plans, the County has processed numerous changes to the land use designations. The most
notable are related to the North Chico Specific Plan and the Stringtown Specific Plan.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
10
TABLE 1-1
SUMMARY OF EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
Land Use Designation Primary Land Uses
Orchard and Field Crops Cultivation, harvest, storage, processing, sale and distribution of all plant crops, especially
annual food crops.
Grazing and Open Land Livestock grazing, animal husbandry, intense animal uses and animal matter processing.
Timber-Mountain Forest management and the harvesting and processing of forest products.
Agricultural Residential Agricultural uses and single-family dwellings at rural densities.
Foothill Area Residential Single family dwellings at rural densities.
Low Density Residential Detached single-family dwellings at urban densities.
Medium Density Residential A mixture of urban residential uses, including, detached single-family homes,
condominiums, multiple-dwelling structures, mobile home parks, group quarters and care
homes.
High Density Residential Higher-density urban residential uses, including condominiums, multiple-dwelling
structures, mobile home parks, group quarters and care homes.
Commercial Structures and activities providing a full range of merchandise and services to the general
public.
Industrial Processing, manufacturing, packaging, storage and distribution of goods and commodities.
Research & Business Park Allowable uses are narrowly defined to assure compatibility between uses. Industrial uses
are limited to those manufacturers engaged in the production of low volume, high value
products, particularly advanced technology products. Businesses requiring outdoor
production and storage are prohibited. Following is a partial, representative listing of the
primary permitted uses:
1. High and advanced technology, research and development uses, laboratories, including
university-based research and facilities used for testing and analysis of products or uses.
2. Business and professional corporate headquarters, regional offices, and data processing
facilities.
3. Uses that emphasize product development over high volume production in order to
minimize traffic associated with the transportation of raw materials and products, and
other nuisance factors.
Public Large facilities owned and operated by government agencies, including schools, colleges,
airports, dams and reservoirs, disposal sites, recreation facilities, conservation areas, fire
stations and other government buildings and property.
Sports and Entertainment Examples of uses that are considered appropriate under this classification include, but are
not limited to a golf course; an amphitheater for use as an open air entertainment facility;
eating and drinking establishments; food and beverage sales; vehicle repair services;
gasoline service stations; public buildings; hotels and motels; offices; RV Park.
Solid Waste Management
Facility Combining Designation
Uses that are accessory and/or related to solid waste and/or septage disposal.
32
99
70
191
162
70
162
99
32
PARADISE
OROVILLE
BIGGS
GRIDLEY
CHICO
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATIONS (2003)
Figure 1-2
Butte County
General Plan Legend
TM - Timber Mountain 40 to 160 Acres/Dwelling Unit
GOL - Grazing & Open Land 40 to 160 Acres/Dwelling Unit
OFC - Orchard & Field Crops 5 to 40 Acres/Dwelling Unit
FAR - Foothill Area Residential 1 to 40 Acres/Dwelling Unit
AR - Agricultural Residential 1 to 40 Acres/Dwelling Unit
LDR - Low Density Residential Up to 6 Dwelling Units/Acre
MDR - Medium Density Residential Up to 13 Dwelling Units/Acre
HDR - High density Residential Up to 20 Dwelling Units/Acre
SE - Sports & Entertainment
C - Commercial
I - Industrial
P - Public
Water
Miles02468101
Source: Butte County Department of Development Services, 1996
Date printed: June 24, 2003
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
12
Area Plans
Because Butte County is physically, environmentally and socially diverse, countywide land use
policy is not sufficiently detailed to adequately address the unique issues applicable to different
parts of the county. Because of this, the “area plan” concept of the General Plan was initiated
through the adoption of the Land Use Element in 1979. Policies applicable to specific planning
areas were established within the existing Land Use Element, beginning on page LUE-82, to
provide extra detail beyond what the General Plan was designed to accomplish. These policies
supplement and provide more specific direction to the various planning areas.
The following is the list of Butte County’s Area Plans:
Area Plan Date Adopted
• Oroville 1984
• Chico 1982
• Gridley-Biggs 1986
• Paradise Urban Reserve 1981
• Durham-Dayton-Nelson (D2N) 1992
• Concow* 1982
• Palermo/Honcut* 1990
• Butte Meadows Not completed
• Forest Ranch Not completed
• Richvale Not completed
• Bangor Not completed
• Stirling City Not completed
* Area plan maps were integrated into the Countywide Land Use Map; no separate policies were adopted.
In most cases, policies specific to each area were also adopted along with the maps. Concow and
Palermo/Honcut are the exceptions to this. For the communities of Butte Meadows, Forest
Ranch, Richvale, Bangor, and Stirling City, the County’s existing Land Use Element diagram
(1979) is still the most current.
A special circumstance exists for the Cohasset-Forest Ranch area. While the community of
Forest Ranch does not have an adopted area plan, the Cohasset-Forest Ranch area has special
development policies incorporated into Title 24 of the Butte County Zoning Code as Appendix
E. In addition, a neighborhood plan was adopted in 1999 for the Chapman/Mulberry area in the
Chico Urban Area.
The following discussion briefly summarizes the existing area plans.
Oroville Area Plan
The existing Oroville Area Plan, adopted in 1984, uses a 20-year time horizon and covers both
the incorporated and unincorporated areas within the Oroville-Thermalito area.
The Plan generally reflects the land use patterns and zoning in areas of existing development.
Recognizing the sprawling and scattered growth patterns in the area, the Plan consolidates urban
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
13
development in two general areas: the area in and around the City of Oroville and a smaller area
in the eastern portion of the planning area along Kelly Ridge. The Plan also establishes an Urban
Reserve policy within the approximately 2,000 acres of the area south and east of the Wyman
Ravine (page LUE-82 of the existing Land Use Element).
The Oroville Area Plan includes text establishing the following Urban Reserve policies:
• This area shall be managed as an “Urban Reserve” permitting rural residential development
and uses on parcels of not less than ten acres, and
• Plans for the extension of sewers, water, circulation and means to control downstream
flooding shall be developed before development and uses on parcels of less than ten acres
are permitted.
The Oroville Area Plan includes text that addresses drainage problems and downstream flooding
associated with Wyman Ravine and Ruddy Creek. The following policy applies to the Wyman
Ravine and the Thermalito drainage:
• Development in the Wyman Ravine watershed and Thermalito basin which significantly
increase runoff from pre-development levels shall be required to annex to (or from) the
appropriate district formed for drainage or retain the increased runoff onsite using
appropriate techniques.
The Plan identifies that traffic congestion will become extreme as development proceeds east
along State Highway 162. To reduce this congestion, the following polices are applicable within
the planning area:
• Residential development at relatively higher densities (High Medium and Low, R-3, R-2,
and R-1 zones) should be emphasized and encouraged in the area south of Oroville
between Oroville and Palermo adjacent to the community’s planned industrial district.
• Urban development in this area should be coordinated with the simultaneous provision of
east-west collectors (e.g. V-6, Ophir Road, as major thoroughfares). Planning in the area
should recognize the need for road improvements to increase the carrying capacity of
Lincoln Boulevard.
The remaining policies of the plan specifically deal with access issues for State Highway 70, and
are dependent on the financing of a frontage road and single central ingress-egress point and turn
lanes. Such improvements may be realized as part of the proposed Caltrans multi-million dollar
Highway 70 By-pass Improvement Project.
Chico Area Plan
The existing Chico Area Land Use Plan establishes a “greenline,” generally around the western
portion of Chico. The greenline constitutes the boundary between urban and agricultural uses on
the western side of the Chico urban area. The County’s area plan states that all land use on the
“agricultural side” of the greenline “shall consist solely of agricultural land uses as provided by
the Orchard and Field Crops designation.” Agricultural Residential land uses are also permitted
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
14
on the agricultural side of the greenline, where designated by the Chico Area Land Use Plan. The
Plan further states that land uses on the urban side of the greenline “shall be guided by the
policies of the Land Use Element and the applicable urban land use designation contained in the
Land Use Element.”
The area plan also establishes development policies for the Highway 32 corridor, which extends
in an east-west direction through eastern Chico. Land use designations for this area are generally
consistent with those of the City of Chico General Plan.
Gridley-Biggs Area Plan
The existing Gridley-Biggs Area Plan, adopted in August of 1986, has a time frame extending to
the year 2000. The intent of the plan is to regulate the conversion of agricultural land to urban
uses within the City of Gridley’s sphere of influence. The Plan states the following policy
regarding Urban Reserves:
• The urban residential designations adjacent to the City of Gridley’s current boundaries
shall be managed as an “Urban Reserve,” permitting rural residential development and
uses on parcels of not less than five acres until such time as they are needed for
development and adequate services are available to serve these areas.
• Properties planned for industrial or commercial uses shall be managed as an “urban
reserve,” permitting industrial or commercial development on parcels of not less than 10
acres until such time as they are needed for development and adequate services are
available.
The Gridley Urban Reserve on a map following page LUE-86 of the existing Land Use Element.
The General Plan also calls for City-County coordination of land use policy, zoning, and
subdivision in this area, and further reinforces the urban reserve concept with additional policies
that can be found on page LUE-85 of the existing Land Use Element.
Paradise Urban Reserve Area Land Use Plan
The Paradise Urban Reserve Area Land Use Plan, adopted in 1981, prescribes land use for the
large unincorporated area called the Upper Ridge, and smaller unincorporated areas adjacent to
the Town of Paradise on the Lower Ridge (including Lime Saddle). The area plan designates
approximately 1/3 of the Upper Ridge area Agricultural Residential; 1/3 Grazing and Open
Lands; and the remainder Timber Mountain, Public, and Commercial.
The Paradise Urban Reserve Area Land Use Plan land use designations surrounding the Town of
Paradise on the Lower Ridge (including Lime Saddle) include small portions designated
Agricultural Residential, mainly on the north and south sides of the Town. There is a larger area
designated Low Density Residential near Lime Saddle and some Public and Commercial
designated land also within this area. The Plan provides land use designations for the area within
town limits which are generally consistent with those of the Town of Paradise General Plan.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
15
The existing Land Use Element (page LUE- 86) contains a “Paradise Urban Reserve Policy
Statement” which establishes further regulations for the “South Paradise Area,” the area
immediately adjacent to the area plan’s southern boundary. The intent of the policy is to regulate
future urban/rural residential development in an area currently devoted to mountain recreation,
open space, and rural residential uses. The policy statement establishes an Agricultural-
Residential land use designation in this area and calls for its management as an “urban reserve.”
The policy permits rural residential development on parcels of not less than 40 acres in areas
designated by the California Department of Fish and Game as “No Development Zones” for
protection of critical deer herd winter ranges, and not less than 20 acres on all other properties
until they are needed for development and adequate services are available.
Durham-Dayton-Nelson Area Plan
The Durham-Dayton-Nelson (D2N) Area Plan was adopted in 1992, covering a planning area
located in the west-central part of the county that includes the unincorporated communities of
Durham, Dayton, and Nelson. Of the three communities, Durham is the largest in terms of both
geographic size and population.
The Plan established area-wide land use policies that provide less potential for future
development than had been allowed under the former Durham Area Plan, which governed the
area prior to the adoption of the Durham-Dayton-Nelson Area Plan. In order to separate land use
policies for the Durham area from those for the Chico area, the Plan also removed approximately
2,200 acres of land from the Chico Area Plan “greenline” policies.
Concow Area Land Use Plan
The Concow Area Land Use Plan was adopted in August of 1982. The Board of Supervisors
approved a General Plan amendment and rezone for approximately 53.6 square miles (34,300
acres) of land in the Concow-Big Bend-Jarbo Gap area, east of the Town of Paradise. The Board
of Supervisors adopted a map and text amendment to the Land Use Element to include a new
land use category called Foothill Area Residential.
The Plan designates the majority of the planning area for Timber Mountain land uses with a
minimum parcel size of 40 acres. Large areas in the southern portion of the planning area are set
aside for Foothill Area Residential uses. The Land Use Map also provides for pockets of
commercial, industrial, and low-density residential uses near Concow reservoir and the Feather
River.
Palermo/Honcut Area Land Use Plan
The Palermo/Honcut Area Land Use Plan was adopted in 1990. Like the Concow Area Land Use
Plan, plan maps were integrated into the Countywide Land Use Map and no separate policies
were adopted.
Cohasset-Forest Ranch Area Plan
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
16
The Cohasset-Forest Ranch Area Plan was adopted in May of 1986. This special area plan
provides development policies, standards, and implementation measures for a portion of the
Cohasset-Forest Ranch Planning Area. The Cohasset area has special development policies
incorporated into Title 24 - Butte County Zoning Code as Appendix E. The purpose of these
special development standards are to:
• Provide in written form the guidelines for responsible development on the Cohasset
Planning Area.
• Mitigate environmental concerns peculiar to the foothill character of Cohasset Planning
Area.
• To identify areas which are more suitable for development and identify areas of serious
environmental concerns.
• Prevent significant environmental degradation within the Cohasset Planning Area.
These general “goals” are supported by policies which focus on: septic tanks, wells, housing
construction, erosion, drainage, geologically hazardous building sites, and a policy to ensure that
all new development is adequately protected from loss or injury by the peril of fire.
Specific Plans
A specific plan is fundamentally a tool for the “systematic implementation” of the general plan,
typically within a defined area. Because the general plan must address policy issues on a broad
scale throughout the agency’s jurisdiction, it lacks specificity in order to deal with the needs of a
smaller area. Although the specific plan must be consistent with the general plan, a specific plan
can address infrastructure, land use, and financial issues in a more appropriately focused and
detailed manner.
Specific plans represent an opportunity for a local government to: 1) Protect environmental
resources; and 2) Carry out the general plan for an identified area of the community. A specific
plan contains the regulations, conditions, programs, and legislation necessary to implement each
of the seven mandated elements of the general plan. It offers a unique opportunity to combine
zoning regulations, capital improvement programs, detailed site development standards, and
other regulatory schemes into one document tailored to the needs of a particular area.
The County has three Specific Plans. These are the East Avenue Specific Plan, the Stringtown
Mountain Specific Plan, and the North Chico Specific Plan.
East Avenue lies immediately north of the City of Chico and serves as an urban arterial
connecting Highways 99 and 32 with what was previously North Valley Plaza, Chico’s previous
regional mall. However, the East Avenue Specific Plan only covers a portion of East Avenue
from North Avenue to Manzanita Avenue. The primary intent of the East Avenue Specific Plan
was to foster commercial development in the area while addressing concerns regarding access,
traffic flow, pedestrian safety, infrastructure limitations, and aesthetics. Most of the land within
this plan has been fully developed and/or annexed into the City of Chico.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
17
The Stringtown Mountain Specific Plan, adopted September 1994, addresses design criteria and
development standards for the future development of a health resort and residential development
in the foothills east of Oroville, at SR 162 and Forbestown Road. This plan has had difficulties in
implementation due to problems with obtaining sewer. The proponent is working on strategies to
overcome this obstacle and build the project.
The North Chico Specific Plan was adopted in January of 1995. The Plan area applies to 3,590
acres bounded by Sycamore Creek on the south, State Route 99 on the west, Rock Creek on the
North and Chico Municipal Airport on the east.
In 1983, as a result of drainage studies conducted in the north Chico area, County Service Area
87 (CSA 87) was formed to provide funding for maintenance of drainage ways and drainage
improvements in what now generally constitutes the North Chico Specific Plan area. The Board
of Supervisors initiated the preparation of the North Chico Specific Plan to comprehensively
respond to development proposals and incorporate them into a concept of land use for the area,
while evaluating and providing for area-wide solutions to drainage, circulation, and provision of
public services. Although development impact fees have been adopted to help fund various
improvements within the North Chico Specific Plan area, the funding mechanisms necessary to
pay for all of the needed infrastructure was never adopted.
1.3 ZONING
The Butte County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, approved January 1995, sets forth zoning
regulations for unincorporated areas of the county. The Zoning Ordinance regulates land uses,
building height, setbacks, provision of open space, and other factors that relate to development
on individual properties.
Under state law, cities and counties have broad latitude in establishing zoning standards and
procedures. One key requirement, however, is that zoning regulations be consistent with the
general plan.
Summary of Zoning Districts
The Butte County Zoning Ordinance provides for a total of 33 zoning districts. This total does
not include districts that provide varying regulations within the same basic zoning district; for
example, the FR-1 and FR-2 districts are variations on the FR (Foothill Recreational) zone.
The following is a brief summary of the basic zoning categories. This summary outlines only
general standards and is provided for reference purposes only. The Zoning Ordinance itself
should be consulted for specific questions regarding permitted, accessory, and conditional uses,
and other regulations.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
18
Agricultural Zones
(A-5, A-10, A-15, A-20, A-40, A-160)
These zones provide for agricultural uses with minimum lot areas of 5, 10, 15, 20, 40, and 160
acres, respectively. Permitted uses include one single-family dwelling per parcel, agricultural
uses, and housing facilities for agricultural employees.
Timber Mountain Zones
(TM-1, TM-2, TM-2-1/2, TM-3, TM-5, TM-10, TM-20, TM-40, TM-160)
The Timber Mountain zones permit “management, raising, harvesting and removal of trees,
shrubs, seedlings, flowers, herbs and all food crops for human or animal consumption.” Other
permitted uses include one single-family dwelling per parcel, animal-keeping, and prospecting,
claiming, drilling, mining, excavating and dredging of mineral, hydrocarbon and geothermal
resources. Residential uses at higher densities (e.g., labor camps, commercial guest lodging,
group quarters) are conditionally permitted. Minimum lot acreage correspond to the suffix of the
TM zone; for example, the minimum lot size in the TM-1 zone is one acre.
Foothill Recreational Zones
(FR-1, FR-2, FR-3, FR-5, FR-10, FR-20, FR-40, FR-160)
These zones apply to foothill areas of the county, and allow single-family dwellings as well as
agricultural uses, mining and excavating, and pedestrian, equestrian, and bicycle trails. The FR
zones also permit uses for “protection of land and forests from fire, erosion, floods, slides,
quakes, insects, diseases and pollution,” including arboretums and natural, experimental, and
study areas. The suffix of each FR zone specifies the minimum lot area in acres; for example, the
minimum lot area in the FR-1 zone is one acre.
Agricultural-Residential Zones
(AR, AR-½, AR-1, AR-2½, AR-5, AR-10, A-SR)
These zones permit residential uses at varying lot sizes and densities. As with the agricultural
zones, the suffix of the zoning district indicates the minimum lot acreage; for example, the
minimum lot area in the AR-½ zone is one-half acre. Single-family dwellings, in addition to
agricultural uses, are permitted uses in these zones. Duplexes and multi-family dwellings are
conditionally permitted uses, except in the AR-MH (Agricultural-Residential--Mobile Home)
and A-SR (Agricultural-Suburban Residential) zones.
Suburban Residential Zones
(S-R, SR-1/2, SR-1, SR-3, SR-5)
The Suburban Residential zones permit single-family homes on lots ranging in size from a
general minimum of 8,125 square feet (in the S-R zone) to a minimum of five acres (in the SR-5
zone). These zones also permit agricultural uses.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
19
Residential Zones
(R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-N, RT-1, RT-1/2, RT-1-A, R-P, M-R)
These zones permit residential uses at varying densities. The highest residential density
permitted is one dwelling unit per 2,150 square feet of lot area, in the R-4 zone. The RT zone
also permits mobile homes at specified minimum densities.
The R-P (Residential-Professional Office) zone permits offices in addition to single-family
dwelling units. The M-R (Mountain or Recreation Subdivision - Residential) zone permits
agricultural uses, arboretums, and mining, along with single-family dwellings.
Commercial Zones
(C-1, C-2, C-C, C-F, H-C, N-C)
These zones (Light Commercial, General Commercial, Community Commercial, Commercial
Forestry, Highway Commercial, and Neighborhood Commercial, respectively) allow various
types of retail and other commercial uses. Except for the C-F zone, these zones also permit
specified types of residential uses. The C-F zone is intended primarily for logging and wood
processing uses.
Research & Business Park
The R & BP zone is initiated on a case by case basis by a property owner. The standards are
spelled out in the Section 24-167 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Industrial Zones
(L-I, M-1, M-2)
These zoning districts (Limited Industrial, Light Industrial, and Heavy Industrial, respectively)
permit varying intensities of manufacturing uses (including assembly, processing, fabricating,
refining, repairing, packaging, and treatment) as well as warehouse storage and distribution.
Other Zones
(R-C, S-H, TPZ-160, WP, PUD, MHP, P-Q, U)
Four zones are designed to protect natural resources. The R-C (Resource Conservation) zone
encompasses natural, wilderness, and study areas; native fish, bird, and wildlife preserves; water
resource areas; archaeological and historical sites; agriculture; and recreational uses. The S-H
(Scenic Highway) zone protects scenic highways designated by the General Plan.
The TPZ-160 (Timber Preserve) zone applies to areas for which a forest management plan has
been prepared and that comply with specified State standards regarding timber preserves. The
WP (Watershed Protection) zone is an overlay zone (i.e., a zone that is combined with other
zoning districts) that allows the County to impose specific regulations for protection of
individual watersheds.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
20
The PUD (Planned Unit Development Zone) intended to accompany a master plan and tentative
map for a development site. The PUD (Planned Unit Development) zone allows diversification
in land uses, structures, lot sizes, and open spaces, consistent with the Butte County General Plan
and subject to County approval of a land use and development plan for the site in question. The
MHP (Mobile Home Park) zone sets standards for mobile home park development, in
conjunction with a master development plan for the site.
The P-Q (Public, Quasi-Public) zone is intended exclusively for public facilities such as schools,
parks, playgrounds, recreational areas, hospitals, and other public buildings.
The “U” (Unclassified) zone is an interim zone intended for areas that have not been specifically
zoned. The “U” (Unclassified) zone is a “holding zone” that permits one single-family dwelling
per parcel, agricultural uses and buildings, and conditionally permits multiple-family dwellings
and commercial uses.
Summary of County Zoning Map
The Butte County Zoning Map shows zoning for the western half of the county and divides the
remainder of the county into subareas. A series of subarea maps shows zoning for these areas:
● Bangor ● Gridley-Biggs
● Brush Creek ● Richvale
● Concow ● Dry Creek
● Cherokee ● Big Bar Mountain
● Table Mountain ● Butte College
● Lake Madrone ● Paradise
● Craig ● Stirling City
● Feather Falls ● Forest Ranch
● Forbestown ● Cohasset
● Lake Wyandotte ● Stilson Canyon
● Oroville ● Durham
● Thermalito ● Dayton
● Oak Grove ● Chico
● Cana ● Chico Airport
● Nord
As shown on the countywide zoning map, the majority of the western third of the county is
zoned for agricultural uses (A-5, A-20, A-40, A-160). The subarea maps indicate that, generally
speaking, the eastern third of the county is zoned Timber Mountain and Timber Preserve, with
scattered properties designated Unclassified. Properties in the central portion of the county are
predominantly zoned Foothill Recreational and Unclassified. Moving into the southern portion of
the county, the zoning becomes mainly agricultural (A-R, A-5, A-10, A-20, A-40).
Large areas of residential, commercial, and industrial zoned properties are also found adjoining
the five incorporated cities in the county. The boundaries between city and county lands, as
reflected by the zoning map, are least distinct in the Chico and Oroville areas.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
21
The Chico city limits, for example, on all sides abut unincorporated lands zoned for residential,
commercial, and industrial uses. Similarly, the City of Oroville is adjoined by unincorporated
properties with urban zoning. Lands immediately adjacent to the Gridley, Biggs, and Paradise
city limits are generally zoned for less intense urban development (such as Foothill Recreational,
in the Paradise area); however, some properties immediately adjacent to these cities’ boundaries
are zoned for residential, commercial, and industrial uses.
A substantial amount of land immediately adjacent to Lake Oroville is zoned R-C (Resource
Conservation). Several roadways in the county, including the Oroville Quincy Highway,
Lumpkin Road, and the Skyway, are zoned S-H (Scenic Highway).
It should be noted that the above discussion is a generalized description of zoning in Butte
County. County zoning maps should be consulted for zoning of individual properties.
1.4 CITY GENERAL PLANS
Butte County contains five incorporated cities: Chico, Oroville, Biggs, Gridley, and Paradise.
Each city has a General Plan to guide development within the city limits and within the city’s
larger planning area. The following discussion describes each city’s size and character and
briefly summarizes the provisions of each city’s general plan, particularly those relevant to the
Butte County General Plan and countywide land use and development issues.
City of Chico
Founded in 1860 by John Bidwell, the City of Chico has grown from an individual rancho to the
center of economic activity of the Tri-county area, which includes Butte, Glenn, and Tehama
counties. Chico is home to two regional malls and major discount retailers. Also, Chico is a
major medical and education center servicing much of the entire northeastern part of California.
The Chico Planning Area consists of approximately 150 square miles of land located in the west-
central portion of Butte County. The Planning Area includes all of the incorporated City of Chico
and “...any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency’s judgment bears relation to
its planning.”
Population and General Character
The City of Chico is located in the northwest quadrant of Butte County, about 100 miles north of
Sacramento and 70 miles south of Redding. The City of Chico is bisected by State Route 99,
which runs in a north-south direction. State Route 32, which runs east-to-west, intersects State
Route 99 near the center of the city.
Butte County’s largest urban community, Chico experienced a moderately slow and steady
growth rate until 1960. The city grew rapidly during the 1960s and through the first half of the
1970s, largely due to increased student enrollment at California State University, Chico (CSUC).
Additional growth during the period from 1970 to 1990 established the city as the retail, service,
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
22
and medical center for the region. According to California Department of Finance (DOF)
estimates, the city’s population as of January 1, 2004, was 71,317. This figure is the population
estimate for the area within the city limits. The total population for Chico and its sphere of
influence (SOI) is estimated at 85,134 in 2000, with a population of 60,516 within city limits
(see Chapter 2: Population).
Chico serves as the center of the region, since it is sufficiently distant from other cities of its size
and offers diverse commercial, service, and cultural opportunities. The economy of the Chico
area is based mainly on service and retail uses, the State University, and manufacturing. The city
also provides the most fully developed retail commercial area in the county.
In the non-urban part of the area surrounding Chico, the predominant land use on the valley floor
is agriculture, including a variety of crops. Prime agricultural soils are found on the valley floor
on the west side of the city.
Generally, soils to the east of the city are suitable only for seasonal grazing. In the foothill areas,
the predominant uses are low-density housing, marginal agricultural activity, and recreation/open
space.
General Plan
Guiding policies found in the “Growth and Physical Expansion” section of the Land Use
Element of the City of Chico General Plan state the following (City of Chico General Plan,
(November 1994, updated 1999, page 10 and 11)):
• Promote orderly and balanced growth by working with the County and the LAFCO to
establish long-term growth boundaries for the Planning Area consistent with Plan
objectives.
• Promote infill development.
• Ensure that new development is at an intensity to ensure a long-term compact urban form.
• Maintain long-term boundaries between urban and agricultural uses in the west, and urban
uses and the hillside in the east, and limit expansion north and south to maintain compact
urban form. The hillside is generally defined as the area where oak woodland habitat
begins, approximately the 300-foot contour in all areas, except in the Northeast where it
is defined by the 250-foot contour) Multiple approaches to restrict urbanization outside
the City’s sphere of influence will be used, including large-lot-zoning and possibly
acquisition of land for a greenbelt.
• Ensure consistency between the General Plan and implementing ordinances and
regulations.
According to estimates prepared by City staff, the holding capacity of Chico is approximately
175,000 people. The buildout of the general plan was estimated at 134,000 and 128,000 with the
land vacancy factor. In 1992, the City of Chico initiated a comprehensive update of its General
Plan and adopted its updated General Plan on November 16, 1994. The City has prezoned the
area within its sphere of influence and is proposing several annexations and a sphere amendment.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
23
City of Oroville
Population and General Character
Oroville is the seat of County government in Butte County. According to California Department
of Finance (DOF) estimates, as of January 1, 2004, Oroville had a population of 13,344. Diverse
economic activities have historically shaped the city and include: gold mining, agriculture,
railroads, lumber processing, and dam construction and operation. Oroville Dam, completed in
1968, is the centerpiece of the California Water Project.
The City of Oroville is located in southeastern Butte County along the Feather River, on the
southwestern side of Lake Oroville. The city is bisected by State Route 70, which runs in a
north-south direction, and by State Route 162 (Oro Dam Boulevard), which runs in an east-west
direction. State Route 99 extends north-south four miles west of the city limits.
Oroville grew rapidly during the Gold Rush, but lost population as mining activity declined. A
second population boom coincided with construction of the Oroville Dam, which was completed
in 1968. The city’s population, which stood at 6,115 in 1960, had reached 7,536 by 1970. More
recent growth in the area has been largely due to urban-to-rural migration, rather than major
economic activity in the area. According to the 1990 Census, Oroville’s population was 11,960.
Major sources of economic growth and employment in the Oroville area are wood products and
agriculture. The seasonal nature of employment in these industries has contributed to cyclical
variations in the community’s economy. The tourist-related economy, also seasonal, has added to
this problem, although the impact of Indian casinos has somewhat stabilized the seasonal nature
of the tourism industry. Other local industries, such as banking and services, have lent some
stability to the city’s business climate. Residents of the area generally also work and shop there,
except when making major purchases.
The Oroville area is characterized by low-density, scattered development with many vacant
parcels. The area did not grow from a single core, but became an urban agglomeration by the
merging of fairly distinct and separate communities, including the original areas of downtown
Oroville, Thermalito, and South Oroville. The highest density residential development in the
Oroville area is located within the Oroville city limits, although this development is primarily
single-family in character with a scattering of apartments, mobile homes, and mobile home
parks. The city also contains principal centers of commercial development, located in the
downtown area and along Oro Dam Boulevard between State Route 70 and Olive Highway.
Industrial development is mainly limited to a band extending from downtown Oroville to Ophir
Road between State Route 70 and Lincoln Boulevard.
General Plan
The City of Oroville initiated a General Plan Revision Program in April 1991. The document
was modified and adopted in 1995. The revised General Plan was adopted in October 1995. The
Oroville General Plan consists of seven elements: Land Use, City Design, Circulation, Open
Space, Natural Resources, and Conservation, Public Facilities and Services, Safety, and Noise. A
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
24
space is reserved for a Growth Management Program element. It does not include the 1993
Housing Element, which is being updated.
The General Plan Land Use Map shows land use designations for an area extending beyond the
city limits and sphere of influence, with designations outside the sphere of influence primarily
for Rural Residential and Resource Management uses.
Principles of the General Plan state the following:
• The City should take a leadership position and actively seek agreement with Butte County
for the control of development in the fringe areas surrounding the City.
• The City should oppose any proposals which would permit further encirclement of special
purpose districts which would compete with City services.
• Future population growth shall be permitted only within the planning area and “new town”
development should be relegated outside the area of influence of Oroville.
The City of Oroville General Plan provides for a population holding capacity of 80,277 at
buildout, using an annual growth factor of 4.5 percent The actual population growth rate for
Oroville averaged 3.3 percent between 1980 and 1990. If future growth were slower, then
buildout would take place over a longer time period than the 20-year horizon of the General
Plan. In comparison, the Oroville Area Plan of the Butte County General Plan would, at buildout,
hold 195,000 within a slightly larger planning area. While the two plans are generally consistent,
the County Plan in several areas calls for higher densities of residential development and greater
intensity of commercial development than does the existing City General Plan.
City of Biggs
Population and General Character
The City of Biggs is located in the southwest portion of Butte County, approximately five miles
north of the City of Gridley. State Route 99 runs in a north-south direction east of the city, and
the Union Pacific Railroad extends through the center of the city.
The City of Biggs was founded in 1903 with the development of the area’s agriculture and the
construction of the California and Oregon Railway, now known as the Union Pacific Railroad.
The growth of the city has hinged on agricultural development. Small fruit and field-crop farms
and large rice-growing ranches presently occupy a major portion of the immediately surrounding
area. The rice industry is a major influence on the community’s economy. Local economic
growth is tied to agricultural productivity and the demand for local goods and services, as
prospects for non-agricultural development appear limited. Biggs offers a small commercial core
area that serves most daily needs of its residents, but most shopping for major items occurs in
other population centers. According to the 1990 Census, the city’s population was 1,683. The
2004 DOF population estimate was 1,805.
Most of the incorporated land area in Biggs is developed in low- and medium-density residential
uses (1 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and 7 to 12 dwelling units per acre, respectively). Recent
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
25
growth has involved primarily single-family home construction. The City has annexed small
tracts of land to provide areas for new housing.
General Plan
The City of Biggs initiated an update to the City of Biggs General Plan in 1996 and the City
Council subsequently adopted a revised plan in November, 1997. The General Plan covers a
planning period from 1997 to 2015. According to the City of Biggs General Plan, it is projected
to grow at about two percent (2%) per year. To realize this growth, the City will need housing for
an additional 702 residents by the year 2015.
The City of Biggs General Plan prescribes land uses for the area within the city limits and sphere
of influence. The sphere was adjusted by LAFCO in 1994.
Page 1-7 of the City of Biggs General Plan calls upon the City to achieve the following land use
goal:
“Maintain and promote the qualities which make Biggs a desirable community.”
The City’s plan includes a list of policies and programs to achieve this goal which include the
following:
• Encourage the preservation and restoration of significant historic structures.
• Ensure that individual development projects conform to an overall plan for the community
and that consideration is given to the configuration of adjacent areas to be developed in
the future.
• Actively pursue annexation of lands outside the present City limits to allow for
coordinated, long-term planning and to reduce approval of incompatible uses on
unincorporated land adjacent to the City.
• Require future residential development projects to promote the small town character of
Biggs through project design and development.
• Secure and make available to the community funds for renovating or restoring commercial
and residential structures throughout the community.
• Proposed development projects shall not exceed the long-term development capacity
allowed under this General Plan as specified in Table 1.4 - Development Capacities
within Special Planning Districts.
• Annually review development occurring in the previous year and document the remaining
amount of development allowed under short-term and long-term development capacities
as specified within Table 1.4 - Development Capacities within Special Districts.
According to the City of Biggs General Plan, the City is in a period of transition. Changing
patterns of agricultural production and the general economic downturn of the late 1980s and
early 1990s has negatively affected local businesses. Because of economic factors beyond the
City’s control and a lack of available commercial real-estate along “B” Street, the commercial
downtown core has been in a state of decline. The City has realized that it must actively support
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
26
local business and proactively manage new residential development. Economic development is a
guiding principal throughout the new Biggs General Plan.
The 1977 City of Biggs General Plan anticipated population to increase to 2,200 by 1995,
however, actual population was closer to 1,640. The growth rate from 1990 to 1996 was the
lowest rate since Biggs incorporated in 1903. This equates to an actual growth rate 1 percent to
1.5 percent, however, the revised General Plan anticipates a growth rate of 2 percent in order to
adequately accommodate future development.
Table 1.4 - Development Capacities Within Special Planning Districts, in the City of Biggs
General Plan, places numeric limits on amounts of residential development allowed in certain
planning areas. These areas are intended to provide short and long term capacity for future
growth. Residential development is split between a North Area and South Area. The North Area
is projected to have a long term capacity of 268 attached and detached dwellings. The long term
projection for the South Area is 236 attached and detached dwellings. The short term and long
term limits are to ensure that traffic does not significantly impact the community. Traffic studies
completed during the revision process identified that future growth up to the capacity of the short
term projection would not impact traffic, however, development beyond the long term projection
would require a general plan amendment regardless of land use compatibility.
City of Gridley
Population and General Character
The City of Gridley is located in the southwest corner of Butte County, approximately five miles
south of the City of Biggs. State Route 99 runs in a north-south direction through the eastern
portion of the city, and the Union Pacific Railroad extends through the center of the city.
The City of Gridley was founded in 1905 as an agricultural service center built upon and
surrounded by prime agricultural soils. The City has a small commercial area that serves most
daily needs of its residents, but most shopping for major items occurs in the other population
centers (e.g., Chico or the Marysville-Yuba City area). Most of Gridley’s working residents are
employed in activities related to farming or in local retail and services. Some residents are farm
workers who live in Gridley on a seasonal basis. A large percentage of the population is retired
and not in the labor force. The 2004 DOF population estimate for Gridley was 5,769.
Development in Gridley since the mid-1970s has been primarily single-family residential in
character. Developments around the city’s periphery have begun to depart from the traditional
grid street system by incorporating curved street patterns and non-continuous streets. Some of
the internal street patterns do not include adequate provisions for canal-crossings or other
connections with the surrounding street systems. Consequently, some recent developments have
obstructed orderly expansion of the community.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
27
General Plan
The City of Gridley General Plan consists of eight elements: Land Use (adopted in 1999),
Circulation (1999), Public Facilities (1999), Open Space (1999), Conservation (1999), Housing
(adopted in 1992, with amendments in 1993 and 1994), Noise (1984), and Safety/Seismic Safety
(1974). The General Plan designates within the city limits and primary sphere of influence (SOI).
City of Gridley General Plan policies call upon the City to:
• Provide a safe, healthy living environment, free of litter, excessive noise, congestion and
safety hazards, for all residents (Land Use element)
• Provide adequate, well-maintained public facilities and services to all residents (Land Use
element)
• Maintain a rural atmosphere in Gridley (Land Use element).
• To the extent feasible and consistent with the overall planning goals of the City of
Gridley’s Land Use Element of their General Plan, preserve agricultural land (Land Use
element).
• Provide jobs for local residents (Land Use element).
• Maintain the quality of life enjoyed by local residents (Land Use element).
• Minimize restrictions on the use of private property (Land Use element).
The existing Housing Element of the Gridley General Plan plans for an annual minimum growth
rate in the range of 1.5 to 2 percent. This policy would yield a population of 5,113 people and a
need for about 374 additional housing units by 2000. Between 1984 and 1990, only 89 new
housing units were constructed. Based on current (1990) zoning, roughly 430 new housing units
could be built. Pre-zoned lands within the City’s sphere of influence (SOI) could provide
approximately 420 additional units.
Substantial differences exist between the land use designations of the City and County General
Plans for the area within the City’s primary sphere of influence. The main differences occur in
the areas of land immediately south, east, and west of the current city limits. In general, the
County land use designations would allow higher density residential development than would the
City designations. Besides limitations by the County Agricultural Element, the Gridley Urban
Reserve limits parcel sizes to five (5) acre minimum.
An Area of Concern (AOC) was adopted by the Butte County Local Agency Formation
Commission between the City of Biggs and the City of Gridley. This is a designated area within
the unincorporated land between the cities where LAFCO is required to notify both the Cities of
Biggs and Gridley of County development projects. This area is to help coordinate growth and
facilitate communications concerning development proposals in the area
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
28
Town of Paradise
Population and General Character
The Town of Paradise is located at the juncture of the western slopes of the Cascade and Sierra
Nevada systems in eastern Butte County. Topography and drainage patterns have had a major
influence on development patterns in the area. This area is defined by steep canyons: to the east
by the West Branch of the Feather River drainage, and to the northwest by the Butte Creek-Little
Butte Creek drainage. The Town of Paradise occupies an area identified as the Lower Ridge,
which ranges from 2,200 feet in the north to 1,500 feet at the town’s southern boundary.
Originally settled during the Gold Rush era, the Town of Paradise and surrounding area grew
very slowly during the first half of this century. In 1970, the Paradise area population stood at
14,539. The population of the area that became the incorporated Town of Paradise in 1979
increased by approximately 50 percent between 1970 and 1980 (from 14,539 to 22,571).
However, during the past two decades population growth within the town of Paradise has
slowed. According to DOF, the Town of Paradise’s estimated population was 26,725 on January
1, 2004.
The median age of Paradise area residents has generally been higher than the Butte County
average, due to the longstanding attractiveness of the area for retirees. In recent years, however,
the median age of the town of Paradise has declined. An increasing number of people with jobs
in Chico and Oroville are choosing to live in the Paradise area, and commuting to these cities has
risen dramatically in recent years.
The Town of Paradise is predominately residential in character, and most of its dwelling units are
single-family units. Multi-family units, at densities ranging from 8 to 12 units per acre, are found
primarily in central Paradise, near commercial uses and along major arterial streets.
Mobile homes are dispersed throughout the town, while mobile home parks, at densities of six to
eight units per acre, are located mostly along Clark Road, upper Pentz Road, and major collector
streets in central Paradise.
The town’s central business district consists of a narrow band of commercial uses along both
sides of the Skyway generally between Black Olive Drive and Maxwell Drive. Shopping areas in
Chico are 20 minutes away by car. The town contains relatively little industrial development.
Agricultural uses, including vineyards, orchards, and grazing land, are located primarily in the
southern third of the town.
As of 1991, approximately 20 percent of the land in Paradise was vacant. Some infill
development has occurred on large vacant parcels, and some moderate-sized subdivisions have
been completed. Central and upper Paradise, however, contain vacant parcels fronting on
collector and local streets, large vacant tracts of former agricultural lands, tracts with poor
access, and underutilized parcels. The largest tracts of vacant land lie in the southern and
southeastern areas of town.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
29
General Plan
The Town Council adopted an updated Paradise General Plan in 1994.
Land Use Policies of the Paradise General Plan state the following:
• The limitations imposed on the Paradise area by topography, soils and other physical
features shall be recognized in site-specific development design as well as when
establishing long-term growth objectives.
• The environmental and infrastructure constraints analysis system should be used to
determine future zoning classifications, densities and intensities of land use and to
evaluate future development projects.
• In conjunction with input solicited from Butte County, as soon as feasible the town shall
prepare a specific plan for an orderly and balanced development of the secondary
planning area south of the town limits which will more precisely determine residential
densities, roads, drainage, utilities and sewage disposal.
• The “Open Space/Agriculture” land use designation shall be applied to most lands within
the Butte County urban reserve area in the southerly secondary planning area as a holding
designation to prevent premature conversion to urban uses until such time as a specific
plan is adopted and public facilities and services are available.
• The town should consider annexation of the substantially undeveloped area between Neal
Road and the Feather River, including portions of the Lime Saddle Community Services
District.
Since the mid-1980s, the town’s growth rate has been restrained by the adoption of various
sewage disposal Ordinances. The Ordinances address issues associated with wastewater disposal
related to the use of septic systems for all property development within the town limits of
Paradise; the Town of Paradise is one of the largest urban areas using septic systems as opposed
to a municipal sewer system in the United States. Typically the minimum parcel size for newly
created parcels is ½-acre to accommodate a single family residence, the required septic system
and septic system repair area. Commercial development parcels are limited to a special design
system’s treated effluent discharge that cannot exceed 2,000 gallons per acre per day.
1.5 EXISTING LAND USES IN UNINCORPORATED AREAS
County Land Use
The total land area of Butte County is approximately 1,680 square miles or 1,073,000 acres. The
two most important factors affecting land use patterns in the county are geographic conditions
and political jurisdictions. Geographic conditions, particularly climate, topography, and
vegetation, create three recognizable and distinct landscape units within Butte County: Valley,
Foothills, and Mountains. These landscape units comprise approximately 44, 24, and 32 percent,
respectively, of the county’s land.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
30
Historical Land Use by Geographic Area
Historically, land use patterns in Butte County have been closely related to the natural
characteristics of the county’s main geographic areas. Each of the three geographic areas
(Valley, Foothills, and Mountains) has provided a context for the development of its own set of
industries and land use patterns. The industries associated with each area are frequently non-
transferable economic activities; that is, they are highly dependent upon the preservation of local
geographic and land use conditions. For example, the cultivation of almonds and other orchard
crops, a major industry in Butte County, is dependent on the deep rich soils of the valley in order
to thrive, and the timber industry is dependent on the forests in the higher altitudes of the east
county.
The Valley
Butte County has been, and continues to be, a predominantly rural, agricultural county. Two
kinds of agricultural activity occur in the county: 1) cultivation of row and field crops (field,
seed, vegetables), orchard and tree products (fruit and nut), nursery stock, and apiary (bee and
honey); and 2) grazing/animal husbandry, a category which includes livestock ranching and all
aspects of animal husbandry.
The Valley area, which consists of rich alluvial bottom lands of the Sacramento River Valley, is
predominantly agricultural in character. Most of the intensive agriculture in the county occurs
here, due to the availability of level topography, prime cultivable soils, and excellent drainage. In
2000, approximately 249,000 acres of county land were used for intensive agriculture, mainly to
grow rice, almonds, prunes, and walnuts. An additional 265,000 acres were devoted to grazing
lands. Numerous agricultural processing facilities are found throughout the Valley area.
The Foothills
Land use activities in the Foothills are concentrated in three principal industries: “extensive”
agriculture, mining, and recreation. Extensive agriculture (irrigated pasture, grazing and animal
husbandry) is a major land use in the county. A significant portion of the county is used at least
part of the year for grazing cattle, sheep, goats, and other livestock on natural vegetation.
Generally, however, extensive agricultural activities occur between the elevations of 200 and
2,100 feet above sea level where the rolling topography and poor soils are unsuitable for raising
crops.
Mining of mineral resources represents another important land use in Butte County. Most of this
mining activity takes place in the Foothills with the greatest concentrations of mines and mining
operations located south of Paradise near State Routes 70 and 149. The Palermo and the Honcut-
Bangor areas also contain large numbers of mining operations. Sand and gravel, stone, and gold
constitute the most important mineral resources in the county.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
31
Recreational uses in the Foothills are connected primarily with major water resources such as
Lake Oroville, Thermalito Forebay and Afterbay, and the Feather River. These areas are major
recreational attractions for both county residents and visitors each year.
Urban uses in the Foothills are concentrated in and adjacent to the incorporated communities of
Paradise and Oroville. The slopes east of Oroville have attracted both rural-residential and
subdivision development. In the Paradise area, development is dispersed over the ridges within
the Town of Paradise and in the unincorporated communities to the north. Much of the new
development is fueled by immigrants from more urbanized regions of California.
The recreational opportunities, relatively low land and housing costs, and “rustic,” wooded
environment are the most frequently mentioned reasons for settlement in the Foothills area.
The Mountains
Land use in the Mountains area reflects the area’s abundance of natural resources. Chief among
these are forests, minerals, water, and wildlife. The area’s scenic beauty has also created the base
for an important tourism and recreation industry.
Pine and fir forests (“timberlands”) cover approximately 341,000 acres in the Mountains area of
the county and provide for a thriving wood products industry. Lumber and wood-processing
account for four percent of the wage and salary employment in the county and contributed
significantly to the local economy. Mining operations (gold lode, placer gold, chromite, and
stone) are scattered throughout the Mountain areas. The mountains and forests also contain
significant wildlife habitats and watershed protection areas.
Sites for outdoor recreation include portions of two national forests (Plumas and Lassen), as well
as the Feather Falls Scenic Area and parkland along the Middle Fork of the Feather River.
Although no major urban settlements are located in the mountains, smaller communities are
distributed throughout the area, including many former mining camps that are now centers of
rural residential development or are linked to the tourism industry.
Urban Land Use
Historically, urban lands (i.e., residential, commercial and industrial uses, generally served by
public sewer and water systems) have constituted a proportionally small share of total land area
in Butte County. The Town of Paradise is an exception to this because it is not served by a public
sewer system. The Division of Land Resource Protection in the California Department of
Conservation, through its Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), Land Use
Element of the County General Plan reported that “urban and built-up land” land uses occupied
62.7 square miles or 4 percent of all county land in 2000 (see Section 13.5 (Agricultural
Resources) of Chapter 13 (Biological Resources) for more details).
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
32
Table 1-2 below shows the estimated acreage located within the incorporated areas, their spheres
of influence, and the unincorporated areas of the county in 1990 and 2000. The incorporated and
unincorporated areas were calculated from U.S. Census GIS data. The sphere of influence areas
were calculated from Butte County GIS data (SOIs were assumed not to have changed from
1990 to 2000). As shown in the table, the incorporated area of the county increased from 34,454
acres in 1990 to 38,703 acres in 2000. The majority of this increase was in Chico. The
incorporated area accounted for 3.6 percent of total county land in 2000.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
33
TABLE 1-2
DISTRIBUTION OF CITY AND COUNTY LAND
BUTTE COUNTY
2000
1990 2000 Growth: 1990-2000
Acreage Acreage Acreage Change
% of County
Total
#% of County
Total
#% of County total
Biggs Total - SOI and
Incorporated
525 0.05%525 0.05%-
incorporated 317 0.03%334 0.03%17 0.41%
SOI only 208 0.02%191 0.02%-17 0.41%
Chico - SOI and Incorporated 24,444 2.28%24,444 2.28%-
Incorporated (1)14,373 1.34%18,012 1.68%3,639 85.63%
SOI only 10,071 0.94%6,433 0.60%-3,639 85.63%
Gridley - SOI and Incorporated 1,738 0.16%1,738 0.16%-
incorporated 893 0.08%922 0.09%28 0.67%
SOI only 844 0.08%816 0.08%-28 0.67%
Oroville - SOI and Incorporated 26,499 2.47%26,499 2.47%-
incorporated 6,947 0.65%7,804 0.73%857 20.18%
SOI only 19,552 1.82%18,695 1.74%-857 20.18%
Paradise - SOI and Incorporated 29,133 2.72%29,133 2.72%-
incorporated 11,924 1.11%11,631 1.08%-293 -6.89%
SOI only 17,209 1.60%17,502 1.63%293 -6.89%
Unincorporated County outside
of SOIs only
990,597 92.33%990,597 92.33%-
Unincorporated County total (1)1,038,481 96.79%1,034,232 96.39%-4,249 -
Unincorporated County inside
SOIs
47,885 4.46%43,636 4.07%-4,249 -
Total Butte County 1,072,935 100.00%1,072,935 100.00%--
Total SOIs and Incorporated 82,339 7.67%82,339 7.67%--
Total Incorporated 34,454 3.21%38,703 3.61%4,249 -
Total SOIs only 47,885 4.46%43,636 4.07%-4,249 -
Sources: Butte County GIS Services, 1990 & 2000 U.S. Census; Mintier & Associates estimates.
Generalized Description of Existing Land Use
The existing land use information described here has been developed using information from
previous planning reports, study of aerial photographs, and field reconnaissance. Previous
planning documents have quantified the amount of county land devoted to urban, commercial,
agricultural, and timber/natural resources uses. Table 1-3 presents approximate existing land use
acreage by generalized land use categories in the unincorporated areas only.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
34
TABLE 1-3
ACREAGE BY GENERALIZED LAND USE CATEGORIES
UNINCORPORATED LANDS BUTTE COUNTY
2005
Category Acreage % of Unincorporated County
Orchard & Field Crops 299,974 29.0%
Grazing 158,995 15.4%
Forestry 334,690 32.4%
Rural Development 173,852 16.8%
Urban Development 28,364 2.7%
Other (wetlands, riparian areas, other open space)36,801 3.6%
Total 1,032,676 100.0%
Source: Butte County GIS
Land Use by Planning Area
The existing Circulation Element divided the county into 16 planning areas as a means to
develop population growth projections and forecast traffic patterns (page CIR - 41, Figure CIR-8
and Table CIR-6). These planning areas are based on U.S. Census Tracts. Although these
planning areas in some cases have the same names as the Area Plans described in Section 1.2 of
this document, boundaries are not necessarily the same.
The 16 planning areas are listed below:
• Nord
• Cohasset-Forest Ranch
• Stirling City
• Chico
• Magalia/ Upper Ridge
• Paradise
• Concow
• Durham-Dayton-Nelson
• Central Butte
• Feather Falls-Brush Creek
• Table Mountain
• Berry Creek-Bald Rock-Hurleton
• Gridley-Biggs
• Oroville
• Palermo
• Honcut-Bangor
The following descriptions summarize existing land uses in the county’s 16 planning areas.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
35
Nord
Located in the northwest corner of the county, the Nord planning area occupies over 60,000
acres, most of which is developed with agricultural uses and some industrial and residential
development. The primary development constraints in the Nord area are the shallow, impervious
soil east of State Route 99, flooding potential, and impacts to agricultural resources.
Cohasset-Forest Ranch
Located in the lower foothills adjacent to Chico and the mountain areas around Butte Meadows,
the Forest Ranch-Cohasset planning area occupies 139,000 acres. Land use in the area is
dominated by forestry, livestock, and rural residential development. Forest Ranch and Cohasset
are the two small communities in the area and development is expected to concentrate in these
communities, particularly for commuters to Chico. Development constraints in this area include
steep slopes, erodible soils, limited groundwater, poor access, and high to extreme fire hazard.
Stirling City
Located in the mountainous northeastern portion of Butte County, the Stirling City planning area
occupies 79,500 acres. Land use in the area is dominated by the forestry and timber industry and
most of the population is concentrated in the community of Stirling City. Development
constraints such as remote location, limited flat land, poor access, and public services will
impede population growth..
Chico
Located in the northern portion of the valley adjoining the foothills, the Chico planning area
occupies 22,300 acres. Urban land uses with significant public and regional retail uses
predominate the area. Existing policies seek to preserve agricultural land, centralize
development, and steer new urban growth to the north, east, and southeast. Development
constraints include agricultural lands and poor soils in the foothills area.
Magalia (Upper Ridge)
Located on the ridge above the Town of Paradise, the Magalia area is bounded by Butte Creek
Canyon on the west and the West Branch Canyon on the east, covering approximately 13,900
acres. Magalia, a historic community, is characterized by rural residences nestled among the pine
trees.
Situated at approximately 2,400 feet elevation, historic Magalia is located between the Town of
Paradise and the planned community of Paradise Pines. Residents enjoy a rural ambiance in the
pine forest where summer temperatures are moderated by the shade of the trees avoiding the
higher valley temperatures. In the winter the residents are treated to an occasional snowfall.
Principal land uses include rural residential, commercial, and timber.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
36
Constraints include limitations on septic tank use, conflicts with watershed/water supply, and
limited transportation access (only via Skyway).
Paradise
Located on the major ridge in north central Butte County, the planning area occupies 14,700
acres. Paradise is the third largest incorporated community in the county. Land use is dominated
by residential and commercial uses with a limited number of industrial activities. Constraints
include a shortage of flat, developable land, poor soils for septic tank use, and potential water
supply limitations.
Concow
Located to the east of the Paradise and Upper Ridge planning areas, in the watersheds of the
North Fork and West Branch of the Feather River, the Concow planning area occupies
approximately 69,100 acres. Rural residential and logging are the predominant land uses in the
area. Principal settlement areas are Concow Reservoir and Yankee Hill. Development constraints
include its remote location, poor access, high to extreme fire hazard, and conflicts with logging
industry. Additional constraints include poor public services and erosion.
Durham-Dayton-Nelson
Located south of Chico between the Sacramento River and State Route 99, the Durham-Dayton-
Nelson planning area occupies 90,900 acres, most of which is agricultural (orchard and field
crops). Urban uses are concentrated in the unincorporated communities of Durham, Dayton, and
Nelson. Development constraints include land use policies to protect agricultural lands.
Central Butte
Located south of Paradise and bounded by Skyway, State Route 99, State Route 70, and the West
Branch of the Feather River, the Central Butte planning area occupies 45,500 acres. Principal
uses include cattle grazing, rural residential development, and mining operations. Butte College
is also located in the area, but population is sparse. Development constraints include shallow
soils, fire hazards, poor access, soil erosion, and possible conflicts with livestock operations.
Approximately 18,000 acres of this area was considered for a General Plan amendment in 1998.
Several land owners within this area proposed to create a new General Plan land use designation
of “Agricultural Preserve/Planned Community.” This amendment also included a portion of the
Durham-Dayton-Nelson planning area. The proposal would have created a mixed use planned
community of approximately 2,000 dwelling units, mostly single-family detached units. Some
industrial and commercial uses were also planned. This proposal was denied by the County
Board of Supervisors on September 22, 1998.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
37
Feather FallsBrush Creek
Located in the eastern part of Butte County, the Feather Falls-Brush Creek area occupies 147,000
acres. Forestry and logging are the dominant land uses, with some rural residential. Urban uses
are concentrated in the unincorporated communities of Brush Creek, Forbestown, and Clipper
Mills. Much of the land is public (U.S. Forest Service) or owned by large logging companies.
Development constraints include steep terrain, poor access, soil erosion, and protections on
timberlands.
Table Mountain (Cherokee)
Located north of Oroville, between Lake Oroville and State Route 70, the Table Mountain
planning area occupies approximately 55,500 acres. Livestock operations, rural residential, and
mining operations are the main land uses. Development constraints include a lack of public
services, poor access, fire hazards and shallow soils.
Berry Creek-Bald Rock-Hurleton
Located east of Lake Oroville in the foothills around the lake, the Berry Creek-Bald Rock-
Hurleton planning area occupies 74,700 acres. Land use is dominated by rural residential
development, with minor amounts of agriculture. Berry Creek is the largest community in the
area. Constraints include poor access, fire hazards, and limited services.
Gridley-Biggs
Located in the southwestern portion of Butte County, the Gridley-Biggs planning area occupies
129,700 acres. Principal land use is intensive agriculture, with urban uses concentrated in the
cities of Gridley and Biggs. Constraints to future development include agricultural preservation
policies and drainage.
Oroville
Located in the south central portion of the county, the Oroville planning area occupies 38,700
acres. Land use ranges from rural residential in the foothills to intense commercial and industrial
uses in and adjacent to Oroville. Public infrastructure available through several agencies has
capacity to support future urban development.
Palermo
Located directly south of Oroville, the Palermo planning area occupies 10,500 acres. Agriculture
is the dominant land use, with increasing acreage devoted to rural residential. The downtown
portion of Palermo is characterized by commercial and public/quasi-public zoning, with small
residential lots in the immediate core area. To the west and south, within Palermo, the
community is characterized by large parcels and rural residential growth. State Route 70 is
located approximately 3 miles to the west of Palermo, providing excellent access to the Palermo
area via Palermo Road. Affordable land values are still available in the Palermo area as
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
38
compared with other populated areas of the county. Some constraints to growth include no
sewage service and poor drainage.
Honcut-Bangor
Located in the southeastern corner of Butte County, the Honcut-Bangor planning area occupies
77,900 acres. Agricultural uses, such as field crops, orchards, and livestock ranches, have
predominated historically, but recent subdivision activity has resulted in rural residential
development. Urban uses are concentrated in the unincorporated rural communities of Bangor
and Honcut. Development constraints include the area’s remote location, shallow soils, limited
water supplies, and possible conflicts with agricultural protection policies. Drainage is a major
problem in the Honcut area.
1.6 PHYSICAL FORM AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Physical Form and Visual Character
This section describes the structure and appearance of Butte County’s physical environment. The
physical environment is a key component in planning for future county growth since it
contributes directly to the desirability of the county as a place to live and work. This, in turn, has
consequences for the economic vitality of the county in that it affects the type and quantity of
businesses and residents that ultimately will settle in Butte County.
Components of Physical Form
Physical form and visual character are the result of the interaction of natural and man-made
elements. Natural elements, including topography, hydrology, vegetation, and climate, create the
basic physical context. Man-made elements, including buildings, roads, infrastructure, and
settlement patterns are secondary elements that establish a particular physical or visual
environment. Planning can influence the interaction between the natural and the man-made
elements, and help to establish a balance which enhances the quality of life for county residents
and visitors. The following discussion examines in more detail the natural and man-made
components and describes their contribution to the county’s form and character.
Boundaries
Butte County is located in the northeastern part of the Sacramento Valley and extends into the
foothills and mountains that rise to the east of the Valley floor.
Its boundaries were first established in 1850 as part of the original partition of California into
twenty-seven counties. In 1856, the county’s boundaries were redrawn to their current
configuration. On a map, the outline of Butte County appears as a rough pentagon with sides of
approximate equal length. It is bounded on the west by Glenn and Colusa counties, with the
Sacramento River and Butte Creek forming portions of the westerly boundary. To the north and
northwest, the county adjoins Tehama County; to the east, Plumas County; and on the south and
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
39
southeast, Sutter and Yuba Counties. The South Fork of Honcut Creek forms the southeast
boundary with Yuba County.
From a physical standpoint, Butte County is not perceived as a single, logical unit. Aside from
the Sacramento River, Butte Creek, and Honcut Creek, the county’s boundaries do not reflect
natural features or changes in landscape character. From major entries to the south and north, the
county line is strictly a legal boundary and does not coincide with any change in character from
the adjoining county.
Natural Features
In the rural setting of Butte County, prominent geographic features, such as mountains, hills, and
rivers, give shape and profile to the natural environment. Climate, vegetation and geography
interact to differentiate sub-regional landscape units within the larger environmental context.
Overall, the county can be divided into three major geographic units: valley, foothills, and
mountains.
The following discussion identifies five major categories of natural features which contribute to
the overall visual and scenic quality of Butte County: 1) valley; 2) mountains/timberlands; 3)
foothills; 4) Water bodies; and 5) unique land forms. Each category is described briefly in the
paragraphs that follow.
Valley
The western portion of the county is located in the northeastern Sacramento River Valley. This
valley area, which constitutes 45 percent of the total county area, consists of the Sacramento
River Valley floor and associated alluvial fans. The topography in the area is quite gentle and
flat, with elevations ranging from 60 to 200 feet above sea level. The level topography
contributes to a very open and uniform visual character, which has few distinctive features and is
not high in scenic quality. Natural vegetation in the area consists of valley grasslands, valley oak
woodland, fresh water marsh, and vernal pools. The landscape has a predominantly horizontal
character to it, and is distinctive for its relative absence of major vertical features. The openness
of the landscape means that features such as Sutter Buttes and the Coast Ranges become
important visual elements, although they are not located in Butte County. Within the valley area,
the most prominent features are the scattered rural residential units and agricultural processing
plants, and the urban areas of Chico, Gridley, Biggs, and Oroville.
Foothills
The foothills form a transitional area between the valley floor on the west and the mountains on
the east. This area, which occupies approximately 25% of the county’s land area, consists of
extensive rolling foothills within an elevational range from about 200 to 2,100 feet above sea
level. Foothill oak woodland intermixed and alternating with chaparral forms a transitional
region between the valley grasslands and the mountain forests. In visual terms, the foothills form
a distinct and highly attractive landscape unit which is more varied in topography and vegetation
than the valley.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
40
The visual character of the foothills is also less open than the valley, although viewpoints within
the foothill area provide sweeping panoramas of the valley area and beyond. The rolling
topography creates identifiable subunits within the area, which are frequently punctuated by
distinctive clusters of oaks or land forms such as Table Mountain. Predominant land uses in this
area are grazing and animal husbandry, and, increasingly, rural residential development.
Mountains/Timberlands
Approximately 30 percent of the county is a mountainous area formed by the southern portion of
the Cascade Mountain Range and the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada. Elevations range from
2,100 feet to over 6,000 feet above sea level. Elevations are generally lower in the Sierras than in
the Cascades within Butte County, but slopes are generally steeper in the Sierras. The mountain
areas, and the foothill areas to the west, have deep-cut canyons (e.g. Butte Creek and Feather
River Canyons) which were formed by streams and rivers flowing westward from the glacial
areas of geologic times. The combination of canyons and high mountains creates some of the
county’s most visually stunning and environmentally sensitive lands. In addition to being
topographically distinct, the mountain areas are also clearly distinguished by the vegetative
patterns which are much more dense and lush than elsewhere in the county. The mountain areas
are heavily forested with coniferous forest, mixed evergreen forest, montane meadow, and
montane riparian environments.
The Feather River Canyon is quite famous, not only for scenic quality but for the rail line,
water/power plants and historical gold mining.
The mountain areas are predominantly natural and highly scenic in character with dispersed
human activities and modification throughout the area. Rural residential and recreational uses are
the primary activities in the lower western elevations, and logging is the principal activity in the
middle and higher elevations. The road network throughout the area, including state highways,
county roads, logging roads and private residential roads, influences the area’s visual character,
because most roads have required some degree of alteration to topography or vegetation to fit the
rugged landscape.
Waterbodies
Butte County has an abundance of water resources that contribute to the county’s visual
character. Butte County is part of the Sacramento River Basin watershed, and is bounded by the
Sacramento River on its west side. Numerous streams and rivers drain runoff from the Sierra
Nevada and Cascades southwesterly across the county into the Sacramento River. Of these
waterways, the most significant are the Sacramento River, Butte Creek, Big Chico Creek, and the
North, Middle and South Forks of the Feather River. These waterways are significant visual
features within the county even though visual access to them is relatively limited because of the
terrain through which they pass.
More significant as visual features are the county’s surface water bodies. Few natural lakes exist
in the county, although numerous reservoirs have been built to provide domestic and irrigation
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
41
water, hydroelectric power, recreation, flood control, and watershed management. The most
visually significant of the county’s water bodies, because of their location and their size, are
Lake Oroville and the Thermalito Forebay and Afterbay. Other reservoirs that are important
features include: Concow Reservoir, Paradise Lake, Magalia Reservoir, Philbrook Reservoir,
Lake Madrone, Ponderosa Reservoir, Lake Wyandotte, Round Valley Reservoir, Lost Creek
Reservoir, and Sly Creek Reservoir.
Unique Land Forms and Habitat Areas
The county has a number of areas or features, that while part of a larger landscape unit, are
distinctive enough to contribute unique qualities. These areas and features generally consist of
land forms and habitat areas. Unique land forms are those whose geologic features clearly
distinguish them from their surroundings. As landmarks and reference points, they provide
orientation and an immediate sense of place. Unique land forms of this type in Butte County
include the steep river canyons of the mountain and foothill areas such as Feather River Canyon,
Chico Canyon and Butte Creek Canyon. Table Mountain and the smaller steep sided buttes in the
Lime Saddle area give a special signature character to the foothill area in the heart of the county,
and various peaks throughout the eastern portion of the county provide identifiable landmarks
(e.g., Big Bar Mountain, Bald Rock Dome, and Sugarloaf). The Sutter Buttes, while located
outside of Butte County, are important regional landscape forms. Because of the flat open
character of the surrounding landscape, the Buttes can be viewed from across the entire length of
the county. Additionally, Mt. Shasta, Mt. Lassen, and the Coast Range can be seen from many
portions of the county.
Especially unique or sensitive habitat areas in the county that are also visually important include
the two large wildlife management areas; the 8,400-acre Gray Lodge Wildlife Area west of
Gridley and the 5,500-acre Oroville Wildlife Area immediately west of Oroville. These areas,
which provide habitat for migratory waterfowl and resident populations of smaller mammals and
birds, provide large natural-looking areas that are free from the cultivation and development that
marks valley lands that surround them. In addition to these two large discrete areas, there are also
many important wetlands and riparian areas along the Sacramento River that make positive
visual contributions to the county.
Human Settlement
Endowed with abundant natural resources, the lands of Butte County have provided favorable
conditions for ongoing human settlement. Throughout its history, each settlement period has
been characterized by its own infrastructure development, economic activity, and urban
development forms.
From a planning perspective, the interest in understanding historic development patterns has four
objectives: (1) to preserve historic cultural resources (particularly notable examples of prior
settlements and architecture); (2) to protect, enhance and preserve the aesthetic and
environmental characteristics of the county’s urban areas; (3) to provide a sense of history and
continuity between the county’s present and past; and (4) to forecast where urban development is
most likely to occur in the future.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
42
Current Urban Development
Butte County is predominantly rural in character. With the exception of Paradise and the
Magalia/Upper Ridge areas, the county’s urban areas are located in the valley. Their locations
reflect their history: located adjacent to the prime agricultural lands which were their economic
backbone and adjacent to the major transportation corridors (the Union Pacific Railroad and
Highways 70 and 99) which were their lifeline. The configurations of the communities also very
much reflect the settings and their histories. The flat valley lands accommodated the grid pattern
of streets that is typical of rural communities, and the generally low density patterns of
development reflect an agricultural society that is rich in land and highly independent by nature.
The direction in which the communities have grown also reflect changes that have occurred over
time, such as the shift from one transportation system (trains) to another (motor vehicles), the
development of new infrastructure (such as Lake Oroville), and the decline in natural resources
(e.g., the establishment of the Green Line in Chico to protect prime agricultural land).
Traditionally, urban development in Butte County has been concentrated in the urban areas
formed by the county’s five incorporated communities. Up to the 1960s and 1970s, development
in these areas occurred primarily within the communities’ corporate boundaries. More recently,
however, much of the development activity has taken place on the periphery of established
communities. Some of this development has taken place under the jurisdiction of cities, but much
of it has not. In addition to the development in the established urban areas, the 1970s saw a sharp
increase in the amount of development that occurred throughout the foothill areas of the county,
beyond the existing urban areas. This development was associated with the influx of retirement-
age residents who moved to Butte County specifically to live in a more rural setting, away from
the urban centers. This development is dispersed throughout foothill areas (generally below the
snow line), but with concentrations near pre-existing rural communities such as Forest Ranch,
Concow, Cohasset, Stirling City, Berry Creek, and the Upper Ridge.
1.7 LAFCO AND SPHERES OF INFLUENCE
LAFCO Responsibilities
The Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO, is governed by the
Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. This act superseded the
Cortese-Knox Act of 1985, which in turn superseded the 1963 Knox-Nisbet Act. The Cortese-
Knox-Hertzberg Act declares that “among the purposes of a commission are discouraging urban
sprawl, preserving open-space and prime agricultural lands, efficiently providing government
services, and encouraging the orderly formation and development of local agencies based upon
local conditions and circumstances. One of the objectives of the commission is to make studies
and to obtain and furnish information which will contribute to the logical and reasonable
development of local agencies in each county and to shape the development of local agencies so
as to advantageously provide for the present and future needs of each county and its
communities” (Government Code Section 56301). In meeting these responsibilities, each
LAFCO is required “to review and approve or disapprove, with or without amendments, wholly,
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
43
partially, or conditionally, proposals for changes of organization or reorganization” (Government
Code Section 56475(a)).
According to Government Code Section 56201, “change of organization” means any of the
following:
• A city incorporation
• A district formation
• An annexation to, or detachment from, a city or district
• A disincorporation of a city
• A district dissolution
• A consolidation of cities or special districts
• A merger or establishment of a subsidiary district.
Government Code Section 56036(a) and (b) define the special districts that fall under LAFCO
jurisdiction. School districts and redevelopment agencies, among others, are not included within
this definition and are therefore not subject to LAFCO review.
In addition to its regulatory responsibilities, LAFCO is empowered to initiate and to make
studies of existing governmental agencies. These studies include, but are not limited to,
inventories of local agencies and determination of their maximum service area and service
capabilities.
Municipal Service Review
The requirement for LAFCOs to conduct reviews of local municipal services was established the
Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act of 2000. These Municipal Service Reviews (MSRs) are conducted
by LAFCOs utilizing specific guidelines developed by the Office of Planning and Research. It is
LAFCOs statutory responsibility to prepare a review of each municipal service so that the
information garnered can be used to promote orderly growth and development, preserve the
state’s finite open space and agricultural land resources, and ensure that high quality public
services are provided to all California residents in the most cost effective and efficient manner.
Spheres of Influence
As the basis in part for making decisions about organizational changes and annexations, LAFCO
must adopt a “sphere of influence” (SOI) for each local agency subject to LAFCO regulation.
The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act defines a sphere of influence as “a plan for the probable
ultimate physical boundaries and service area of a local agency” (Government Code Section
56076). In practice, “ultimate” is typically defined as 20 years. The sphere of influence plan must
be developed utilizing the information generated within the Municipal Service Review.
LAFCO Policy 3.1.10 (Urban Service Area) states:
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
44
“If requested by a city with a Sphere of Influence Plan, Municipal Service Review and Capital
Improvement Program, LAFCO shall adopt the five-year sphere of influence, or other mutually
agreed upon boundary, as an Urban Service Area for the city.”
However, as of 2005, there are no designated USAs in Butte County.
LAFCO Policy 4.1.12 (Action Options) states:
“LAFCO shall take one of the following four actions on an application for annexation or detachment:
▪ Approve the application if the territory proposed for annexation is contiguous to an existing city
boundary and within that city's adopted Urban Service Area;
▪ Approve the application proposal if it has found the change to result in the most efficient
delivery of services for the affected population and to comply with other applicable Standards
▪ Modify or conditionally approve the proposal to ensure efficient service delivery and meet other
policy objectives. These may include, but are not limited to: waiver of detachment from an
existing service provider, or, in the alternative, appropriate detachment fees; entering into a
Joint Powers Agreement with another service provider; and, requiring the inclusion of
additional territory or exclusion of territory in order to achieve more logical boundaries,
subject to a protest hearing if required; such other conditions as authorized by Section 56886
of Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg; or, Disapprove the annexation. In the event of such a
disapproval, LAFCO may, where appropriate, provide direction as to changes in the proposal
that could cause the Commission to consider approving a revised application.”
In determining the sphere of influence of each local agency, LAFCO must consider and prepare a
written statement of its determinations with respect to each of the following:
• The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space lands.
• The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area.
• The present capacity of public facilities and the adequacy of services, which the agency
provides or is authorized to provide.
• The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the
commission determines that they are relevant to the agency (Government Code Section
56425).
Once these spheres are adopted, LAFCO decisions must be consistent with applicable spheres
(Government Code Section 56377.5). This means that LAFCO may not approve city annexations
outside the adopted sphere of influence for the city.
Spheres of Influence in Butte County
The Butte County LAFCO conducted a comprehensive review of city and district spheres of
influence in 1985. LAFCO has amended SOIs in some areas since that time. The following
discussion briefly summarizes city and district service areas for the four major urban areas in the
county: Chico, Oroville, Gridley-Biggs, and Paradise.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
45
Chico Area Sphere of Influence
In the Chico area, LAFCO regulates the sphere of influence boundaries of the City of Chico, as
well as the boundaries of the Chico Area Recreation District, the Butte County Mosquito
Abatement District, the Pine Creek Cemetery District, and a total of 35 County Service Areas. Of
these County Service Areas, 27 provide street lighting, five provide storm drainage service, two
provide sanitary sewer services, and more than one provide street lighting and storm drainage
service.
Existing City of Chico SOI
The adopted sphere of influence for the City of Chico contains land totaling 21,960 acres. Of this
land, about 17,271 acres have been developed, including parks and open space. Urban land uses
occupy 12,180 acres generally coterminous with the planning area boundary jointly used by the
City of Chico and Butte County. The city limits encompass around 20 to 25 “islands,” i.e.,
unincorporated areas completely surrounded by land within the city limits. The City of Chico
estimates that most of these islands will be annexed by 2006.
Since the time that the 1985 sphere of influence study was conducted, LAFCO has expanded the
City of Chico SOI to include three properties: 1) the Peters property, an area of approximately 40
acres located on the south side of the city, adjacent to the Skyway immediately north of
Comanche Creek; 2) the Miller-Northgraves property, another area of approximately 40 acres
located on the north side of Chico near the Union Pacific Railroad; and 3) the Sky Creek
Business Park, 36 acres north of the airport.
Service Constraints
At the time of the 1985 SOI study, there were few service issues in Chico that established a clear
boundary between urban and non-urban areas; the County provided levels of service that
accommodated urbanization outside of the incorporated boundary of Chico. The major issues
relating to urbanization in the Chico area were therefore determined by the land use policies of
the City and the County, rather than by the availability or capacity of public services.
Since the time of the 1985 study, County revenue losses have reduced the general level of
services available to urban development in unincorporated areas. The Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB) order required that properties utilizing septic systems in the City and
County connect to the existing City sewer system by 1995. Through the County Nitrate Action
Plan, both agencies are working with RWQCB to estimate septic systems. In addition, city storm
drainage problems may have caused urban runoff to flood local creeks and some downstream
agricultural lands.
Oroville Area Spheres of Influence
In the Oroville area, LAFCO regulates the sphere of influence boundaries of the City of Oroville,
as well as Thermalito and Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation Districts; the Lake Oroville area (for
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
46
sewage collection, treatment and disposal); the El Medio Fire Protection District; the Feather
River Recreation and Park District; the Oroville, Bangor, and Thompson Flat Cemetery Districts;
the Oroville and Butte County Mosquito Abatement Districts; and 10 County Service Areas. Of
these County Service Areas, seven provide street lighting, two provide storm drainage service,
and one provides sewer service financing.
Existing City of Oroville SOI
The sphere of influence for the City of Oroville generally includes all land designated by the
Oroville General Plan or the existing Butte County General Plan as industrial, commercial, or
urban residential (one unit or more per acre). On the north, the boundary generally follows man-
made or natural water barriers: Miner’s Ranch Reservoir, Lake Oroville, Feather River,
Thermalito Power Canal, Thermalito Forebay, and Thermalito Afterbay. South of the Oroville
Airport, the boundary includes all lands designated for urban development by either the City or
County General Plan. Along the southern border, the sphere includes the planned industrial area
along Highway 70 and Baggett-Palermo Highway to the southern limit of the existing city limits,
and then follows the urban residential boundary shown in the existing County General Plan. On
the east the sphere includes Kelly Ridge, The Oaks, and other areas designated for low-density
urban development.
Since the 1985 sphere of influence study was conducted, LAFCO has not made any changes to
the City of Oroville’s SOI, but did approve annexation of the Pine Oaks Subdivision, a custom-
home subdivision of approximately 200 residents located on the east side of the city. LAFCO has
also approved annexation of several other smaller areas to the city since 1985.
Service Constraints
The major service issue in the Oroville area is that existing sewer systems have not been
extended to serve large portions of the Sphere of Influence. Because of severe soil constraints,
sewer service is a critical factor affecting the location, amount, and timing of urban development.
Areas planned for urban development loosely correspond to those areas within the spheres of
influence and/or areas of future expansion of the three major sewage collection agencies in the
area. A new sewer system was recently installed in the south side of the city.
Gridley Area Sphere of Influence
In the Gridley area, LAFCO regulates the sphere of influence boundaries of the City of Gridley,
as well as the Butte and Biggs-West Gridley Water Districts, the Gridley-Biggs Cemetery
District, three County Service Areas, four reclamation districts, and two drainage districts. Of the
three County Service Areas, four reclamation districts, and two drainage districts, two provide
swimming pools and one provides ambulance service. The reclamation and drainage districts
provide for drainage of agricultural lands in the area.
Existing City SOIs
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
47
The sphere of influence for the City of Gridley is coterminous with the area covered by the
Gridley General Plan. This area includes a small territory to the northwest, territory along the
southern boundary of the city, and an area extending approximately one-half mile east of the
current city limits.
Since the 1985 sphere of influence study was conducted, LAFCO has expanded the City of
Gridley’s SOI in two three areas:
1) Addition of a property located on the north side of the city, east of Highway 99, to allow
annexation and subsequent industrial development.
2) A row of 10 properties (approximately 50 acres) located in the southwest area of the city
was added to the SOI to allow extension of sewer service to the area; the properties have
not been annexed to the city because they are not contiguous to the existing city limits.
3) On April 6, 2000, the Butte County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
approved a Sphere of Influence (SOI) Amendment for the City of Gridley to
accommodate the growth anticipated by the City’s 1999 General Plan. On May 8, 2001,
the Butte County Board of Supervisors approved a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and
Rezone (Agenda Item 01-147) for lands in and around the City of Gridley’s SOI to reflect
the changes that LAFCO made to the SOI. This amendment involved changes to the
Gridley/Biggs Land Use Map (now called the Gridley-Biggs Area Land Use Diagram),
and policies in the Gridley-Biggs Area Land Use Plan (now called the Gridley-Biggs
Area Plan. Applicable lands were also rezoned to implement these changes.
LAFCO has also approved annexation to the City of Gridley of several “islands” of
unincorporated territory located in the western part of the city, along State Route 99. A large area
on the north boundary of Gridley will also be annexed and includes about 500 residential lots.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
48
Service Constraints
Drainage capacity in the vicinity of the City of Gridley is the most significant potential constraint
to development in this area. Urbanization in Gridley will increase stormwater runoff that reaches
the drainage laterals operated and maintained by the drainage and reclamation districts. In some
instances the runoff may overload existing canals, resulting in flooding in some areas within the
city during infrequent storm events. In addition, the open drainage canals coursing through the
City pose a potential health and safety hazard as the areas around them develop, as well as a
liability problem for the districts that maintain them. The drainage ditches and irrigation canals
also limit development potential by acting as barriers to urban expansion; the cost of bridging the
canals, or of undergrounding the system, is often prohibitively expensive.
City of Biggs Sphere of Influence
The sphere of influence for the City of Biggs is coterminous with the area shown in the Biggs
General Plan, including those areas designated Low Density and Medium Density Residential.
These areas are located on the south side of Brough Avenue, on the east side of Seventh Street;
on the north side to Biggs Rio Bonito Road; and north of the city along Ditzler Road. The City’s
SOI does not extend substantially beyond the existing city limits.
Since 1985, LAFCO has not amended the City of Biggs’ SOI, but has approved several
annexations to the city, including 1) an area on the south side of the city, to allow a 50-unit self-
help housing development; 2) a property owned by the Biggs Unified School District, located on
the east side of the City near Rio Bonito Road; and 3) and area of four to five parcels located east
of Second Street and north of Rio Bonito Road.
The City of Biggs is investigating annexation of two areas that contain rice dryer operations: 1)
the Red Top Rice Dryer, located one on the north side of the city along the Union Pacific
Railroad; and 2) the Bronner Rice Dryer, located on the west side of the city at the corner of E
Street and Biggs-Gridley Road. The City is seeking to sell its municipal electrical service to
these two operations.
Paradise Area Spheres of Influence
In the Paradise area, LAFCO regulates the sphere of influence boundaries of the Town of
Paradise, as well as the Paradise Irrigation District, the Magalia County Water District, the
Paradise Recreation and Park District, the Paradise and Kimshew Cemetery Districts, and
County Service Area No. 4 (which provides storm drainage service in the Upper Eden Ridge
area).
Existing Town of Paradise SOI
The sphere of influence for the Town of Paradise generally includes all land designated by the
Paradise General Plan and the existing Butte County Plan as industrial, commercial, or urban
residential (one unit or more per acre). The sphere of influence extends further 1) to the north, to
Coutolenc Road where it intersects with the Skyway and returns to Paradise Pines; 2) to the
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
49
south to Kunkle Reservoir, the Paradise Skypark Airport, and slightly beyond, and 3) to the west
to Little Butte Creek and generally along the western boundaries of residential areas in Upper
Ridge.
Since the 1985 sphere of influence study was conducted, LAFCO has not amended the Town’s
SOI but has approved a limited number of annexations to the town.
Service Constraints
The three major service concerns in the Paradise area are drainage, sewage disposal, and limited
access. The Town of Paradise levies varying development fees to maintain its gravity flow
drainage system. The Town does not provide a municipal sewer system, and development in the
town is constrained by a restrictive sewer disposal ordinance. Adopted in 1983 and updated with
revisions in 2000, the ordinance sets forth standards for septic system installation and
maintenance, and requires additional land area for leach fields, depending on soil characteristics,
in new developments throughout the town (see also Section 1.4, “City General Plans”).
Fire safety issues are a concern in the Paradise area due to the limited access provided to the
area. The Skyway, the major county arterial that serves Paradise and the Magalia area, has a
limited capacity that could negatively influence evacuation and access by emergency vehicles in
the event of a natural disaster. The Upper Ridge communities are especially vulnerable to
wildfires because they are isolated on top of a relatively narrow wooded ridgeline. The existing
two-lane roadway across the Magalia Reservoir dam creates a potential bottleneck for evacuation
during catastrophic events.
In addition to the anticipated problems created by emergency access and congestion during an
evacuation, an earthquake is capable of causing the main earthen dam to subside resulting in
partial or total loss of the roadway. On December 15, 1998, the County Board of Supervisors
acted on the recommendations of the July 1996 Skyway Improvement Program Feasibility Study
by directing the Department of Public Works to proceed with a project study of possible design
alternatives to widen the Skyway from two to four lanes from Pentz Road to South Park Drive.
The Board of Supervisors adopted an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this project in
2005. According to the Butte County Department of Public Works, the foremost priority for
construction involves the phase between South Park Drive and Coutolenc Road, which includes
the reconstruction of the Magalia Reservoir Dam. First phase construction is dependent upon
securing appropriate amounts of funding.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
50
1.8 OTHER COUNTY AND REGIONAL PLANS AND POLICIES
Regional Transportation Plan and Other BCAG Plans
The Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG) is a regional council of governments
created in 1969 by an agreement among Butte County and the Cities of Biggs, Chico, Gridley,
Oroville, and Paradise. Its governing board is composed of members of city councils and the
Butte County Board of Supervisors. BCAG has five major areas of authority and responsibility.
1) As a Regional Transportation Agency, to administer the requirements of the Federal and
State Clean Air Acts (see below).
2) To develop a Countywide Nonattainment Plan to satisfy all requirements of the Federal
and State Clear Air Acts (see below).
3) To develop a Regional Housing Allocation Plan.
4) To review the transportation plans and programs of member agencies and endorse them
based upon their satisfaction of regional need and their consistency with adopted regional
plans and policies.
5) To serve as an area-wide clearinghouse for projects proposed for federal funding
assistance.
In 2001, BCAG developed a Regional Transportation Plan whose planning horizon extends to
2025. This document outlines the state of transportation topics such as aviation, goods
movement, highways, mass transit, non-motorized transportation, and transportation systems
management; it also addresses transportation concerns that have emerged in the region as a result
of rapid growth, a deteriorating rural roadway system, and slow development of new
transportation facilities. The plan develops implementation strategies for achieving planning
goals and identifies financial constraints in solving transportation needs. It establishes a total of
$204 million in highway improvements over the next twenty-five years. $36,660,000 are
currently programmed in the STIP, while $167,340,000 are anticipated. Street and highway
projects requiring participation by the County of Butte include improvements to segments of
State Routes 32, 162, 70, and 99, as well as bridge projects on Centerville Road, Ord Ferry Road,
and Dunstone Rd.
BCAG has programmed funding for and developed transportation planning models for the
Chico, Paradise, Oroville, and Gridley-Biggs areas. These models will aid Butte County and the
City of Oroville in responding to Congestion Management Plan and air quality regulations and
requirements, and will be used in conjunction with the general plan revision processes currently
underway in the county. The model will test the effects of various general plan revision
proposals on the existing traffic network and on alternative networks for the forecast year 2010.
BCAQMD Nonattainment Plan
The Butte County Air Quality Management District (BCAQMD) governs air quality controls and
standards at the local level. The BCAQMD administers a set of rules and regulations that
establishes permit requirements and procedures for activities involving air emissions. The
BCAQMD also administers the county’s Nonattainment Plan for air quality. Since Butte County
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
51
is a “nonattainment area,” preparation of the Nonattainment Plan was required to describe efforts
to be taken in attaining and maintaining national ambient air quality standards. The plan, which
was originally prepared in 1979 and updated in 1982, contains numerous emissions control and
reduction strategies.
The California Clean Air Transportation Planning Requirements mandate that nonattainment
areas for ozone and carbon monoxide develop air quality plans. Accordingly, the BCAQMD, in
coordination with BCAG, is required to coordinate, adopt, and implement various transportation
controls to meet specific performance standards outlined by the Requirements. Butte County
coordinated preparation of this plan with other Northern Sacramento Valley Counties (Shasta,
Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, Sutter, and Yuba). The plan, officially adopted by the County in
November 1991, focuses on congestion management and traffic control to reduce automobile
emissions, the largest contributor to air pollution problems in the region.
Airport Master Plans
In 1997, Caltrans Division of Aeronautics applied to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
for funding to complete 37 regional aviation system plans in the state. After completion, each
participating RTPA would have a regional aviation system plan. This project was called the
Interregional California Aviation System (ICASP). In July 1999, BCAG participated with the
Division of Aeronautics to complete the individual elements for Butte County’s portion of the
ICASP. The resulting document appears as an Aviation Chapter in BCAG’s Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) of 2001.
The Aviation Element in the RTP describes the Chico Municipal Airport, Paradise Skypark
Airport, Oroville Municipal Airport, and the Chico Ranchaero Airport. It analyzes aviation
capacity issues and outlines short-term and long-term projects that are necessary for maintaining
the facilities and meeting increased demand for air passenger and cargo flights, particularly at the
Chico Municipal Airport and Oroville Municipal Airport. It also incorporates analysis from the
City of Chico Airport Master Plan Study of 1999. None of the other municipal airports have
master plans for their airports.
Airport Land Use Plans
On December 20, 2000 Butte County’s Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) adopted the
Butte County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). It establishes procedures and
criteria for the ALUC to review proposed land use development and affected cities within the
county for compatibility with airport activity. State law requires public access airports to develop
Comprehensive Land Use Plans, (CLUPs) designating airport vicinity land use and clear zones.
Such plans are to be adopted by the County’s Airport Land Use Commission, which consists of
representatives as follows: two members appointed by the cities, two members appointed by the
airport managers, two members appointed by the County Board of Supervisors, and one member
from the public at large appointed by the ALUC.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
52
The Butte County ALUCP is distinct from airport master plans, which address planning issues
within a specific airport. The purpose of a compatibility plan is to assure that incompatible
development does not occur on lands surrounding the airport.
The 2000 ALUCP encompasses the Chico Municipal Airport, the Oroville Municipal Airport,
the Paradise Skypark Airport, and the Ranchaero Airport. These four airports are the principal
facilities in Butte County and are further described below.
As of January 2005, the existing County General Plan land use designations and zoning districts
located within the Airport Compatibility Zones for the four airports within Butte County are not
totally consistent with the 2000 ALUCP. The communities of Chico and Paradise have not
established consistency with the 2000 ALCUP and their respective General Plans and land use
regulations. The City of Oroville has established consistency between their General Plan and
land use regulations and the 2000 ALCUP.
An important consideration in the development of the update of the General Plan will be
consideration of the Airport Compatibility Zones in respect to General Plan land use
designations. Where land use conflicts continue to exist between the General Plan and the 2000
ALUCP the Board of Supervisors may choose to initiate further planning processes with ALUC.
Integrated Waste Management Plan
The Butte County Solid Waste Management Plan was originally adopted in December 1975, and
a revised draft was prepared in 1985 with the intention of completing the plan in 1988, as
required by state law. Upon passage of the California Solid Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB
939), which substantially changed requirements for waste management planning, the County
opted to prepare the newly- required components in conjunction with four of the county’s five
cities (excluding Gridley). As a result, the County contracted with consultants to prepare a Waste
Generation Study, a Source Reduction and Recycling Element, and a Household Hazardous
Waste Element. A draft of these segments of the plan has been completed, and an Environmental
Impact Report is being prepared. The balance of the required components of the Integrated
Waste Management Plan will be prepared following completion of these initial elements.
Completion of the comprehensive plan was anticipated by 1994.
Hazardous Waste Management Plan
The Butte County Hazardous Waste Management Plan was completed and approved by the Butte
County Board of Supervisors in February 1989. The goals of the plan reflect the County’s intent
to reduce the need for additional hazardous waste disposal sites by reducing the amount of waste
generated. Goals related to waste reduction include minimizing waste at its source, recycling
waste, and reducing the quantity of hazardous substance used. The goals place particular priority
on recycling of waste oil, which constitutes the largest portion of the county’s waste stream.
Goals related to public health and safety focus on properly treating waste that cannot be reduced,
ensuring safe transportation of waste on the key transportation routes, and enabling the siting of
community collection and transfer stations to contribute to proper handling of the county’s
waste.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
53
In 1989 the County and all of its incorporated cities approved the Hazardous Waste Management
Plan, which also received approval from the California Department of Health Services in 1991.
Revisions to the facility siting policies of the Plan were necessary in order to receive State
approval.
Butte County Storm Water Management Program
In March 2003, the Butte County Department of Public Works submitted a Storm Water
Management Program (SWMP) to the California Regional Water Quality Board. This program,
which covers the period 2003 to 2008, was developed as a requirement of Phase II of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program, as ordered by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency. It is a comprehensive program comprised of various
activities designed to reduce storm water pollution to the maximum extent practicable (MEP)
and eliminate prohibited non-storm water discharges in accordance with federal and state laws
and regulations. The core elements of the SWMP are listed here:
• Public education and outreach
• Public participation/involvement
• Illicit discharge detection and elimination
• Construction site stormwate runoff control/new development
• Post construction storm water management
• Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for County operations and facilities
The Program also includes descriptions of:
• Best management practices to address specific activities identified in the regulations, such
as illicit discharges
• How implementation of program activities will be prioritized
• Staff and equipment available and required to implement a Program activity.
1.9 STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES CONCERNED WITH
LAND USE
A wide range of State and Federal agencies exercise some level of regulatory control over land
use decisions in Butte County, some through permitting or review authority and others through
ownership of land.
Agencies with Permitting Authority
The State Lands Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over all submerged lands owned by the
State as well as the beds of navigable rivers, sloughs, and lakes. The Commission has the
authority to grant three kinds of permits: Mineral extraction leases, dredging permits (along with
the State Department of Fish and Game; required for any dredging of navigable waterways for
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
54
the improvement of navigation, reclamation, and flood control); and land use leases (required for
any proposal to utilize navigable waterways for any purpose other than dredging, e.g., piers,
floats, docks.).
The State Reclamation Board maintains jurisdiction over all Federal Flood Control Projects and
levees that are either part of such projects or that may affect such projects. The Reclamation
Board is authorized to grant Encroachment Permits for any activity proposed along or near flood
control levees, including changes in land use, construction, earthwork, or removal of vegetation.
The State Department of Fish and Game (DFG) has jurisdiction over “all waters of the state,”
including any lakes, streams, or rivers containing fish or wildlife resources. In Butte County,
such waters include Lake Oroville and the Thermalito Forebay and Afterbay. The DFG has
authority over two permitting processes: 1) stream bed alteration agreements, required for
projects that alter the flow of any lake, stream, or river in the state; and 2) suction dredging
permits, required for projects involving suction or vacuum dredging activities in state waterways.
The DFG also operates the Feather River Fish Hatchery, manages the Oroville Wildlife Refuge,
and cooperates with the State Department of Water Resources and the State Department of Parks
and Recreation in maintaining selected fish populations in Lake Oroville.
The State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) maintains jurisdiction over
discharges into all rivers, creeks, streams, and canals. Any project that will discharge wastes into
any surface waters must conform to waste discharge requirements established by the RWQCB.
These requirements serve as the Federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit. The RWQCB also works to obtain coordinated action in water quality control,
including prevention and abatement of water pollution and nuisances.
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has authority over all State highway and
freeway rights-of-way, including easements, and undeveloped rights-of-way that have been
acquired in anticipation of future construction. Any project that proposes to construct a road
connection or perform earthwork within a state highway or freeway must obtain an
encroachment permit from Caltrans.
Caltrans is a major actor in highway facilities planning in Butte County. Current and planned
projects include:
• Preparation of a project study report to refine costs and begin the approval process for the
proposed designation of Route 70 as a freeway between Sacramento and the Route
70/149 merger point north of Oroville. Construction of the Butte County portion of the
“Marysville-Oroville Freeway” and the Route 70/149 interchange near Oroville has been
scheduled.
• Caltrans is also planning several maintenance and rehabilitation projects in Butte County,
including improving Route 149 and the intersection of Route 99/149 to a limited access
freeway. Construction was targeted for this project in 2004, but the project has been
delayed.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
55
The United States Army Corps of Engineers, pursuant to the Rivers and Harbors Act, maintains
jurisdiction over all navigable waterways (including non-navigable streams, creeks, marshes, and
diked lands) and requires a permit for any work within these waterways.
Agencies with Review Authority
The following agencies, while they do not issue permits, maintain review authority and may
comment on aspects of a development proposal that are related to their particular areas of
expertise.
The State Department of Boating and Waterways comments on river-oriented features of a
riverfront project such as potential for navigation hazards, relation to existing or planned boating
facilities, and the public trust doctrine. This department also administers grants and loans for
marina development and boat ramps, and reviews federal and local ordinances regulating boating
activities.
The State Department of Water Resources (DWR) built and now operates the State Water
Project, which, through Oroville Dam, supplies half of the water delivered as far south as
Riverside County. Under the auspices of the Federal Power Commission, the DWR participates
in the operational decisions affecting Lake Oroville, Oroville Dam, and associated State Water
Project facilities. The DWR also coordinates CEQA and NEPA comments for many departments
within the State Resources Agency. Some of the DWR’s original duties have been turned over to
the State Department of Fish and Game and the State Department of Parks and Recreation. These
agencies cooperate with DWR as subcontractors for specialized services, in the provision of fish,
wildlife, and habitat management, and recreational operations and enhancement.
The State Department of Parks and Recreation reviews development projects in relation to State
recreation facilities, including Lake Oroville, the Thermalito Forebays (North and South), and
Bidwell Canyon. Within the Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Office of Historic
Preservation is the designated State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and monitors State- and
Federally-registered historic resources, as well as carrying out other statutory responsibilities.
The State of California Native American Heritage Commission reviews projects and comments
on potential impacts to Native American archaeological resources. The Commission is directly
involved if Native American artifacts or remains are discovered during construction activities.
The State Department of Fish and Game, as a trustee agency, reviews projects and comments on
potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources in general, and identifies potential impacts to
endangered or threatened plant or animal species under the California Endangered Species Act.
The Department is required to issue a written finding indicating whether a proposed project
would “jeopardize” the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species, or result in
the destruction or adverse modification of habitat essential to the continued existence of the
species. If the Department makes this “jeopardy” finding, it is then required to develop
“reasonable and prudent alternatives” to conserve the endangered or threatened species.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
56
The California State Clearinghouse, within the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, is
the point of contact for review of environmental documents where one or more State agencies
will be a responsible or trustee agency. The Clearinghouse circulates environmental documents
among State agencies, coordinates review, and forwards comments to the lead agency.
The State Mining and Geology Board reviews petitions (by an individual or organization) to
classify specific lands that contain significant mineral deposits and that are threatened by land
use incompatibilities. Mineral lands classified as having regional or statewide significance, in
accordance with California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), ultimately must
be recognized in the County General Plan through adoption of appropriate and compatible land
use designations and through establishment of policies and implementation programs for
conservation and development of these resources.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has review authority over
environmental documents that are prepared and circulated pursuant to the National
Environmental Projection Act (NEPA). The EPA can comment on draft environmental impact
statements (EISs), and NEPA procedures require filing of final EISs with the EPA. The EPA has
authority over development projects pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, an
authority that overlaps with that of the Army Corps of Engineers. Generally, the EPA reviews
Department of Army permits for compliance with guidelines for implementing Section 404
requirements. The EPA can, in rare cases, override an Army Corps of Engineers decision on a
Department of Army permit in order to prohibit discharges into waterways.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service must be consulted on all federal projects, such as the
Army Corps of Engineers/Department of Army permits, pursuant to the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act. The Service comments on potential project effects on “endangered or
threatened” plant and animal species under the Federal Endangered Species Act. In reviewing a
project, the Fish and Wildlife Service could issue a “jeopardy” determination and would propose
reasonable alternatives to the permitting agency, in a manner similar to the State Department of
Fish and Game process. The Fish and Wildlife Service also comments generally on potential
effects on fish and wildlife resources.
The National Marine Fisheries Service is also consulted on all Department of Army Permits as
part of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. The National Marine Fisheries Service reviews
development projects in relation to overall effects on anadromous fish such as salmon, striped
bass, and steelhead. The Service also considers any endangered or threatened anadromous fish
that may exist in the area.
Agencies that Own Land
The U.S. Forest Service is a major landowner in Butte County. Its holdings include Plumas
National Forest (81,972 acres) and Lassen National Forest (49,240 acres). The Forest Service’s
Land and Resource Management Plan (1993, as amended) guides all Forest Service activities on
these lands. The Forest Service is in the process of reevaluating the portion of the plan that
addresses timber harvesting, in order to determine potential adverse effects on the spotted owl;
this reevaluation is expected to have more effect on timber harvesting in Plumas County than in
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
57
Butte County, however. The Forest Service is currently upgrading existing campgrounds, but has
no plans for new facilities in Butte County.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) owns 18,600 acres, consisting of scattered foothill
lands, in the county. The Bureau completed a draft Resource Management Plan (RMP) in 1990.
The final Record of Decision was completed in June 1993. The RMP is a 15-year strategy on
where and how BLM will administer public lands within the Redding Resource area, which
includes Butte County. According to the Plan, if fully implemented, BLM public land ownership
patterns will dramatically shift from more than 1,000 scattered parcels to less than 25 large
aggregates of accessible and useful public lands. This will be achieved through land exchanges
and some interjurisdictional transfers between other agencies and organizations. The RMP would
affect lands in Butte County only in so far as changing ownership, as in shifting from one
governmental agency to another. BLM will ensure that exchanges will meet long term objectives
for land preservation. Also, as part of the RMP, studies were conducted on the Big Chico and
Butte Creek drainages to ensure their preservation as wild and scenic rivers. An inventory of
these streams was conducted with the intent to include them in the National Wild and Scenic
Rivers System. The RMP classified these streams as follows:
Butte Creek: Butte Creek between its confluence with the West Branch of Butte Creek and the
Centerville Bridge is classified as SCENIC.
Big Chico Creek: Big Chico Creek between the road crossing near Campbell Creek and the
Ponderosa Way bridge is classified as WILD.
Streams determined to be eligible for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System will be
managed by BLM to protect all public land within 1/4 mile of normal high water. If Congress
designates the above mentioned stream corridors, BLM will consider acquisition of available,
unimproved private land within these areas.
The plan also identifies several specific transfers, as follows:
1. Transfer to the City of Chico or Butte County seven parcels approximately 520 acres in size
in the Big Chico Creek canyon between Highway 32 and Musty Buck ridge.
2. Transfer or exchange to a qualified state/local agency or non-profit organization six parcels
at approximately 800 acres in the West Branch Feather River between Magalia Reservoir
and Lake Oroville.
3. Transfer to a qualified organization approximately 35 acres in lower Butte Creek near Honey
Run Bridge.
4. Transfer to the State all surface and submerged lands encompassing approximately 6,400
acres within and adjacent to the Lake Oroville Recreation Area.
5. Transfer to a Federally-recognized Indian tribe approximately 200 acres near the Middle
Fork of the Feather River as a reservation for community development purposes.
Chapter 1: Land Use
Public Review Draft August 8, 2005
Butte County General Plan Background Report
58
6. Transfer to Butte County or other qualified organization administration of the Forbestown
Cemetery being about 2.5 acres.
The State of California (various agencies) is also a major landowner in the county. State-owned
lands include Lake Oroville State Recreation Area (42,000 acres), the Thermalito
Forebay/Afterbay (5,230 acres), the Oroville Wildlife Area (5,500 acres), the Graylodge Wildlife
Area (8,375 acres), Chico State University (119 acres), Bidwell River Park (180 acres), and over
750 miles of rivers and streams.