Butte County General Plan 2030 Meeting #1-4, the Board of Supervisors Study Session, was held on May 8, 2007.  This meeting is the fourth in the four-part meeting series focused on issue identification.  All Supervisors were present.  Butte County Development Services staff Tim Snellings, Pete Calarco, Chuck Thistlethwaite and Dan Breedon attended, as well as David Early and Tanya Higgins of Design, Community & Environment, the lead General Plan consultant.  In addition, two members of the Citizens Advisory Committee and several members of the public attended.

The Board of Supervisors reviewed the community input provided at the Public Workshop (Meeting #1-1), Citizens Advisory Committee meeting (Meeting #1-2), and Planning Commission Study Session (Meeting #1-3), which was arranged by Guiding Principle.  The Board discussed, refined and added to this public input, as summarized below.

There were a few issues that the Board indicated are not appropriately addressed by the General Plan, such as the annexation of unincorporated islands and ski lakes.  There were also some issues that the Board indicated have already been addressed or are being addressed, such as regional coordination on transit services and transportation, second unit policies, and the promotion of solar energy.

The Board supported the need to develop a better connection to Interstate 5, and suggested working with Glenn County to allow truck traffic on Highway 162 and address the intersection in Butte City. 

The Board expressed concern about the suggestion to establish student housing around Butte College, which implies denser development patterns.  In general, County plans should reflect the public’s input from individual communities, as some are resistant to growth.  The Board expressed a need to maintain large parcel sizes for agriculture, and noted that rural ranchette development involves the conversion of parcels to 10- and 40-acre lot sizes in addition to 5-acre parcels.  However, there are legitimate uses for 5-acre parcels, such as equestrian uses.  The Board expressed a need for compensation programs for farmers to counter development pressures.  In addition, when clustered development creates open space for agricultural purposes, such agricultural uses should be of an appropriate intensity given their proximity to housing.  The Board also expressed opposition to the location of the proposed Mechoopda casino, and clarified that the Highway 149/99 improvements are to improve safety and allow through traffic.

The Board clarified that agricultural, mining, timber and water resources should be conserved rather than protected, implying that may potentially be used.  The Board indicated that the principle value of open space in Butte County is related to its agricultural uses, and that when open space is taken out of agricultural production, its maintenance becomes an issue.  The Board also emphasized the need for close coordination of General Plan 2030 with the Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Communities Conservation Plan.  In addition, the Board noted that Chico and other areas experience water supply shortfalls.

The Board felt that a County park and recreation department is unnecessary due to the independent park and recreation districts in the county.  The Board also emphasized that there are other agencies that own land for public access in Butte County, and suggested that the County work with these other agencies to promote and enhance public access on these lands.

The Board was concerned about economic development being directed to the municipalities and suggested a need for economic engines in the unincorporated county, such as high intensity/clean industries, or for adequate tax-sharing agreements with the cities.  The Board also noted that railroads are an asset for manufacturing uses in Butte County.

The Board was concerned about regulations that would force people to use solar energy and green building techniques, especially if such techniques are not economically feasible.  However, the Board did support the use of education and incentives to promote these techniques.  The Board also highlighted the County’s solar array facility as an example of its promotion of solar energy.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Dan Breedon at 530-538-7629 or Tim Snellings at 530-538-6821. We look forward to seeing you or hearing from you soon.