Butte County General Plan 2030 Community Meeting Summary

The Butte County General Plan 2030 Community Workshop for the Durham, Dayton and Nelson Area was held on Wednesday, April 25^th, 2007 at 6:00 pm at the Durham Memorial Hall.  This meeting is one of 20 community meetings scheduled to take place in locations covering all of the unincorporated parts of Butte County.  The meetings are designed to take input directly from community members about their area’s assets, issues, and consideration of land use changes during the General Plan 2030 process.

About 65 people attended the Central Buttes meeting.  Also in attendance were five members of Butte County's Citizens Advisory Committee.  David Early, Founding Principal of Design, Community & Environment (DC&E), the lead General Plan consultant, introduced the workshop and gave an overview of the meeting content and format.  Butte County Department of Development Services Principal Planner Dan Breedon then provided an overview of the Butte County General Plan 2030 process and General Plan 2030’s Guiding Principles, which were approved by the Butte County Board of Supervisors on February 13, 2007.  Tanya Higgins, Project Planner of DC&E then presented a summary of existing conditions in the Durham, Dayton and Nelson Area and of issues that were raised during prior public workshops and meetings.  For the next 45 minutes, County and DC&E staff facilitated seven breakout discussion groups about the area's assets, issues, and areas for potential future change.  The following summarizes the assets and issues discussed at this meeting:

Workshop participants emphasized that they like the small town and rural character of the communities, including its neighborliness, slower pace of life and families.  They praised the Durham Park and Recreation District and the local schools, although they were concerned about declining school enrollment.  They also appreciate the proximity of their communities to the services of Chico and the open space of the countryside.  Many people expressed appreciation for the open space characteristics of the area and the wildlife and recreational opportunities it supports.  The agricultural base of these communities was highlighted as an asset, although some were concerned that the towns were transitioning to bedroom communities and losing their agricultural connections and downtown cores.  Some specifically called out the need for redevelopment, new commercial uses, and parking requirements in downtown Durham.  Other participants already think of Durham, Dayton and Nelson as bedroom communities and would like to maintain that role with limited commercial and industrial development.

When discussing the future of the area, many workshop participants praised the County’s Durham-Dayton-Nelson Area Plan.  In general, participants would like to contain growth in the area to the existing communities in order to protect agricultural and open space lands, and several growth boundary locations were suggested.  Several people emphasized the need for master planning for new growth, in part to ensure adequate services and infrastructure are provided.  Others focused on maintaining low density development, with some disagreement over whether 5- to 10-acre ranchettes are appropriate.  There were also several comments about lot size inconsistencies between the County’s General Plan and Zoning Code, and some felt that additional representation for the towns is needed.  Several participants were also concerned about rising housing costs and the lack of affordable housing in proximity to employment.

To maintain an agricultural identity into the future, participants discussed several agricultural preservation techniques, including a possible extension of the greenline into Durham, large-lot zoning, and right-to-farm ordinances.  Extra attention was given to the agriculture/urban interface, where it was noted that trespassing, dumping and theft harm agriculture, and spray drift, dust, smoke and noise harm urban uses.

A common concern raised by the workshop participants was a lack of adequate police, fire and rescue services in the area.  In particular, residents are concerned about crime, drugs, vandalism and drag racing, as well as unpredictable emergency response.  These concerns were also related to a need to improve road safety and emergency access.  There were some suggestions for road improvements and extensions, in part to address traffic congestion, which was noted along the Midway and Durham-Dayton Highway, and around the Durham school and railroad.  It was noted that there is a lack of adequate public transit options in the area.  Although several people appreciated the existing bicycle facilities, many suggested expansions and improvements to these facilities.

Many participants also focused on flooding issues with Butte Creek, and called out the need to address drainage issues, impeded water flow, brush removal, gravel migration, floodplain development and floodplain mapping.  Other water quality and supply issues were raised, including nitrate contamination and issues surrounding wastewater, water supply for irrigation, opposition to groundwater export, and protection of recharge areas. 

Several people expressed opposition to specific development proposals, including a gravel mine west of Dayton, which participants felt should remain open space, and the Mechoopda casino, which participants felt would adversely affect County services, Native American artifacts, water supply for agriculture, and flooding issues.

Provide the detailed list of Community Assets, Issues and Change Areas
 

Asset or Issue Identified at meeting (sorted in order of Guiding Principle)	Guiding Principle		Sub Topic
Asset: Durham Park & Recreation District	1	Cooperative Planning	Relationships with unincorporated communities
Durham is unincorporated	1	Cooperative Planning	Relationships with unincorporated communities
Formation of Municipal Advisory Committee (Advisory Council) needed	1	Cooperative Planning	Relationships with unincorporated communities
Additional town representation needed	1	Cooperative Planning	Relationships with unincorporated communities
Need committee specific to Durham (e.g. Town Council) to represent town	1	Cooperative Planning	Relationships with unincorporated communities
Expand bike lanes on River Road, Jones Avenue, and downtown Durham	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Potential for bike path along Ord Ferry Road west of Dayton?	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Midway bike path needs extension into Durham	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Walking to school: high traffic, fee for bus	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Poor bike facilities: narrow bike lanes, especially on the Durham/Dayton Highway	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Need east-west bike lane to college	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Bike lane down Lott Road needed	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Asset: existing bike paths	2	Circulation	Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Multiple access routes	2	Circulation	Circulation
Railway overpass needed	2	Circulation	Circulation
Roads near Durham School	2	Circulation	Circulation
Need east-west bypass of downtown Durham	2	Circulation	Circulation
Extend road: new connector of Durham/Dayton Highway north of Durham	2	Circulation	Circulation
No stop light	2	Circulation	Circulation
Asset: no stop light	2	Circulation	Circulation
Railroad safety/hazardous material transport	2	Circulation	Public safety
Need traffic safety improvements around school, in particular on Dayton Highway north of the school	2	Circulation	Public safety
Lott Road is dangerous	2	Circulation	Public safety
Lack of public transit and B-line frequency	2	Circulation	Public transit
Traffic congestion: along the Midway between Chico and Durham; along the Durham/Dayton Highway between Durham and Butte College; and along Highways 99 and 149 south of Chico.	2	Circulation	Road capacity and quality
Traffic in the Durham school area and Stanford at the Durham/Dayton Highway	2	Circulation	Road capacity and quality
Railroad creates traffic congestion	2	Circulation	Road capacity and quality
Trucks and industrial traffic	2	Circulation	Road capacity and quality
Peak hour school traffic	2	Circulation	Road capacity and quality
Asset: beautiful Midway lined with mature trees	2	Circulation	Road capacity and quality
Asset: two lanes are sufficient, little traffic	2	Circulation	Road capacity and quality
Railroad divides community	2	Circulation	Transportation planning
If growth occurs, it should be limited to existing town areas with master planning at densities appropriate for services - high quality yet reasonable affordability (cluster, PD)	3	Growth, Urban Development and Housing	Direct growth to urban areas
Concentrate residential development in Durham	3	Growth, Urban Development and Housing	General growth management
Growth will happen; need planning to ensure agriculture is not broken up	3	Growth, Urban Development and Housing	General growth management
Consider clustering, especially in the area bordered by the Midway, Chico city limits, Highway 99, and just south of the Durham/Dayton Highway	3	Growth, Urban Development and Housing	General growth management
Durham should stay contained	3	Growth, Urban Development and Housing	General growth management