INTRODUCTION

The Circulation Element of the Butte County General Plan is a guide to managing and developing the future transportation and circulation system in the County. Our transportation system is a basic support network for providing the mobility needed to sustain our social, economic, and recreational life. Continued maintenance of this transportation system is vital for insuring that we continue our present level of mobility, while given the chance to develop and improve upon it in the future. The intended time frame of the Element carries to the year 2000, with analysis, evaluation, and planning focused on policies and programs within five and ten year time frames.

Transportation is a huge capital investment: An important aspect to appreciate about the Butte County transportation system is the huge capital investment that it represents. All levels of government; federal, state, and local, hold in trust a huge public investment in managing, maintaining and planning our transportation system. In Butte County, the state highways form the backbone and lifeline of the County's highway network, while the County and its five incorporated cities serve to provide the transportation network's local requirements. For all of this, there must be coordination and planning both between and within public road and transportation agencies and their departments. The risk of improperly developing a transportation system can create problems that negatively affect present and future mobility; creating potential for safety hazards, wasted and unnecessary public and private expenses, and waste or poor utilization of other wise useful land and open space. With adequate information and prudent forethought we have the opportunity to avoid many problems that could cost us more in the future, meanwhile seizing on opportunities that can help insure a more pleasant and stable transportation future.

Need for revision: These fundamental concerns bring to us the reasons why to revise and update the General Plan's Circulation Element. As road financing, land use, and public transportation issues have changed over time, the original Circulation Element can no longer adequately serve to help guide the County's transportation goals, objectives, and policies for the long term (Butte County's Circulation Element was drafted in 1971). A formidable challenge to the County's Circulation Element is to clearly indicate how we intend to maintain and develop a transportation system which will help to improve our quality of life here in Butte County. This Circulation Element was prepared for Butte County by staff of the Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG), who worked in conjunction with the Butte County Planning Department staff. The five cities of Butte County and the California Department of Transportation were consulted throughout this plan's development regarding their input and concerns.

Organization of the Circulation Element: The Element is organized into three basic components and should be read accordingly. The first component, Part One-Basis for Policy, is intended to be an analytical and descriptive basis for developing a transportation policy, and includes Sections 1.0 through 6.0.

The second component, Transportation Issues and Policies, is found in Section 7.0 and sets forth Butte County's countywide and urban area transportation goals, objectives, policies, and programs to the year 2000. The Appendices contains additional information and data supplements referred to by the previous text, including the Element's environmental impact report.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Basic Planning Requirements: A number of state planning laws and regulations relate directly and indirectly to the development of the Butte County Circulation Element. Among these are state requirements involving the development of general plans, local regional transportation plans, state transportation plans and environmental impact review and reporting. It is also important to coordinate transportation plans as they relate to each city's general plan and its spheres of influence. Also, consistency should be fund between the Circulation Element and the Butte County Regional Transportation Plan and County Air Quality Plan. Although state planning requirements leave local government's substantial discretion regarding the level of citizen participation during preparation of their plans, and active citizen participation program regarding planning issues is always a benefit to the local planning process.

General Plans: Each incorporated city and county in California is required to prepare and maintain a comprehensive general plan which sets forth objectives, principles, standards, and plan proposals regarding its future development (State statutes covering local planning laws are found in the California Government Code commencing with Title 7 - Planning and Land Use).

The general plan must contain nine mandatory elements and must meet minimum standards in the law. One of these required elements is a circulation element, which shall consist of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the land use element of the general plan (Government Code Section 65302). The Circulation Element must be consistent with other portions of the General Plan and its elements comprising of an integrated, internally consistent, and compatible statement of policies (Government Code Section 65300.5). It is the option of Butte County to combine elements to its General Plan as long as they still comply with the minimum requirements set forth for each of the mandated elements.

Planning law requires that the County's zoning be consistent with the General Plan (Government Code Section 65860 (a)). Zoning which is not consistent with the General Plan shall be changed so that it is consistent with the plan.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

State and Regional Transportation Plans: Transportation planning agencies involved in developing and maintaining Butte County's regional and countywide circulation system include the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and the Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG). Caltrans is responsible for implementing statewide policy of the CTC. Both the CTC and BCAG are required to develop and maintain respective state and regional transportation plans which rely on input from local city and county government general plans, including their respective circulation elements.

The major emphasis of the Butte County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) regards transportation improvements which are needed during the next five years. New transportation projects that plan to utilize state or federal monies must be included in the RTP. Projects for maintenance, rehabilitation and reconstruction are not included in the RTP (Government Code Section 65082). The Butte County RTP is prepared and updated by BCAG and used as a guide for preparing BCAG's annual Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The Butte County RTIP annually describes and sets priority for new transportation projects proposed and needed in Butte County during the next five year period, and the FTIP sets priorities for federally funded transportation projects in the Chico urban area.

The planning relationship between the RTP and the County's Circulation Element is parallel. The Circulation Element's countywide guidance and programs, however, should precede and influence those programs stated in the RTP. The principle differences between the Circulation Element and the RTP is that the former is intended to provide more long-term transportation planning guidance as part of the County's General Plan while the later focuses on shorter term transportation development programs that include both city and county plans.

State law has been interpreted to allow county circulation elements and regional transportation plans to be written as one document, as long as the mandated requirements of each plan is adequately covered in the combined document. The Circulation Element should act as a major source of information for future RTP updates.

Environmental Requirements: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the federal Clean Air Act are the most significant pieces of environmental legislation affecting local transportation planning in Butte County. CEQA requires that an environmental impact report (EIR) be written when a proposed action could have a significant effect upon the environment. An EIR is a public disclosure document and compliance should lead to an attempt for complete and substantiated information which describes the range of potential environmental impacts that could be caused by a proposed action or project; and the methods and extent of commitments to implement mitigation of any significant environmental impacts. Some of the significant environmental impacts typical of transportation projects include cumulative impacts caused by growth accommodation, direct and indirect impacts on air quality, noise, wildlife habitat, open space, scenic quality, and water quality.

The Clean Air Act requires that non-attainment air quality areas such as Butte County development and implement a non-attainment air quality plan which shows how to meet federal air quality standards by no later than 1987. The Act affects transportation plans by requiring that certain air quality enhancing transportation planning measures be implemented if the air quality standards can not be met by controls on stationary and area sources and motor vehicle emissions. Butte County is a marginal non-attainment area for ozone, carbon monoxide, and total suspended particulate, but is presently not required to implement any transportation programs to improve its air quality to meet federal clean air standards.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Citizen Participation: Public participation and involvement in the planning process is the keystone to an open and democratic process of government. The public's involvement through information meetings, publicity, and public hearings is an essential component to developing a comprehensive general plan, including any of its mandatory elements. To this end, the development of this Circulation Element included a number of informative workshop meetings and publicity releases throughout the County at the beginning of the formal public review process.

EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

This section describes the existing Butte County transportation system. The general physical situation and capacity of the County's road, street and highway network is described, as well as current programs involving public transportation, transportation systems management, bicycle ridership, pedestrian access, aviation and commercial goods transportation, including utility corridors.

Roads, Street and Highways: Roads, streets and highways provide the backbone to circulation in and through Butte County. The following describes basic characteristics of the County's road system, its traffic levels, and maintenance programs.

Basic Road and Highway Network: Butte County's road and highway network provides land access at a regional countywide, urban area and local level. This network is classified functionally under Road Classifications and Standards. Improvement standards and programs are related according to the kind of traffic service and accessability they are to provide. The functional classifications described in Road Classifications and Standards briefly include:

Principal Arterials (Urban and Rural) - Including major state highway routes connecting Butte County to the rest of the region and largest intra-city streets.

Minor Arterials (Urban and Rural) - Including major urban area streets and highways and major rural roads and highways that connect the County's cities, communities and many rural population centers.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Collectors (Urban, Major and Minor Rural) - Including roads and streets which provide access from local streets and roads to arterials.

Local Streets and Roads (Urban and Rural) - Including roads and streets that provide direct access to properties and are not intended to service large amounts of traffic. Streets serving commercial and industrial traffic often function like local streets, but are built to different standards to serve commercial and industrial access needs.

Figure CIR-1 on the following page illustrates the network of State and County Highways and Roads.

In rural valley areas, arterials serve to connect communities and rural service centers to regional arterials and larger communities and cities. The main purpose of rural valley collectors is to provide efficient farm to market access for agricultural goods, services, and commodities.

In the rural foothill and mountain areas, arterials provide the direct surface transportation link between foothill and mountain communities and major arterials and population centers located in the Sacramento Valley.

The only paved highways which cross the mountains east of Butte County from the Sacramento Valley are State Routes 32 and 70.

There are eight governmental jurisdictions in Butte County who are responsible for public road maintenance and construction. All total, there are approximately 2,230 public road miles in Butte County, of which the County is responsible for 1,377.4 miles. Road miles by jurisdiction are listed in the following table:
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Table CIR - 1 ROAD MILES IN BUTTE COUNTY BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction	Road Miles
State of California	181.3
Butte County	1,377.4
City of Biggs	8.7
City of Chico	100.1
City of Gridley	21.7
City of Oroville	71.0
Town of Paradise	88.1
U.S. Forest Service	402.0
Totals	2,250.3

Source: Butte County Regional Transportation Plan, Butte County Association of Governments, 1982.

The 1982 Butte County RTP estimates that there were slightly more than two million average daily vehicle miles of travel (VMT) in 1978 (Butte County Regional Transportation Plan, BCAG, 1982, pg. II-7).

Travel in the County's rural areas accounted for 49.9 percent of the total VMT, while urban area travel accounted for the remaining 50.1 percent, including; Chico, 26.8 percent; Oroville, 13.9 percent; Paradise, 7.2 percent; and Gridley, 2.2 percent. Also, 1978 vehicle registration data for Butte County shows over 63,000 automobiles, about 26,500 commercial trucks, and about 5,300 motorcycles (Butte County Regional Transportation Plan, BCAG, 1982, pg. II-7).

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Traffic Conditions: As expected, Butte County's busiest highways are those that serve as urban area arterials in Chico, Oroville, and Paradise.

In the Chico area, a number of city maintained streets and a few County maintained streets exceed annual average daily traffic (AADT) counts of 20,000.

Generally, segments of most 4-lane surface streets will approach or exceed the 20,000 AADT level in Chico. In Oroville, peak traffic counts over 20,000 AADT occur on Oroville Dam Boulevard (SR 162) east of SR 70. Traffic volumes in the remainder of the Oroville area are significantly lower than along State Route 162. Peak traffic volumes in the Paradise area occur on the Skyway between Pearson and Billie Road. Traffic counts on the Skyway in county Jurisdiction at the southern and northern town limits are both in the range of 10,000 AADT. In Gridley, peak traffic volumes occur on State Route 99.

Traffic growth in Butte County has roughly paralleled population growth since the early 1970's. The County's largest traffic volume growth occurred in and between the Chico, Oroville, and Paradise urban areas during that period. Butte County traffic growth is discussed further in Section 6.0 - Transportation Forecast.

Presently, Butte County's arterial roads and highways generally have adequate capacity to accommodate existing traffic volumes. However, several major highways are presently nearing capacity, including State Route 99, south of Chico to Pentz Road; and the Skyway, north of the Paradise town limits to approximately Coutolenc Road. In Oroville, roadway constrictions caused by two railroad over crossings on Oro Dam Boulevard (west of Lincoln) present a safety and capacity problem which is in need of immediate correction. Another existing safety problem occurs at the historical, but narrow, Gianella Bridge on State Route 32 at the Butte-Glenn County line on the Sacramento River. Other existing highway improvement needs are related to road maintenance and safety projects in the County. Future road and highway needs and forecasts are further developed in Section 6.0.

Existing Highway Construction and Maintenance Programs: Highway construction and maintenance programs respond to existing highway needs in two general ways. First, there are on-going, unscheduled road programs that respond to maintenance needs caused by unpredictable road wear or failure, damage from accidents or vandalism, or damage from natural events such as floods, wind, slides, and freezing temperatures. Second, there are scheduled road maintenance and construction programs which respond to planned roadway maintenance and safety improvements, as well as to demands from new roads and capacity increases. In recent years, the availability of local, state, and federal road funds has often been a major constraint to implementing an adequate and timely road maintenance and construction program. Respective city, County, regional, and state governments in Butte County each develop annual or semi-annual road maintenance and construction program schedules for roadways under their jurisdiction.

At the state level, Caltrans annually updates and submits to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) a proposed State Transportation Improvement Program (PSTRIP), the CTC adopts a final STIP annually, as described in subsection 1.22.

The Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG is responsible for a number of county-wide planning concerns, including air quality planning and regional transportation planning.

Part of BCAG's responsibility is to prepare and update the County's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), as mentioned in subsection 1.22.

Also, at the County level, the Public Works Department is responsible for proposing a list of priority rural road projects which are anticipated to be funded by federal secondary road funds (Federal Aid to Secondary - FAS). Butte County's FAS priority list currently presents one project per year. The FAS priority list is included in the RTP. The County's FAS designated roads are indicated by Figure CIR-2.

In urban areas, streets and highways which serve as major arterials or collectors are usually designated as Federal Aid to Urban (FAU) routes. Projects on these urban streets and highways may be proposed for federal FAU funding.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Public Transportation: The level of public transportation service in Butte County increased dramatically in 1981 and 1982 with the start-up of three fixed route and scheduled bus systems. The intercity Butte County transit System (BCT) began service in June, 1981, by providing weekday service between the communities of Chico and Oroville, Chico and Paradise, and Oroville and Palermo-Gridley-Biggs. The Oroville Transit System (OTS) began serving the Oroville urban area in July, 1981, with a weekday, 2-bus, fixed route system. The Chico Area Transit System began serving the Chico urban area in February, 1982, with a five route, full week bus service.

The first year of operation was highly successful for the BCT system as ridership increased steadily into the second year, exceeding minimum fare box requirements set by the state (BCT Operating Data for Fiscal Years 1981-82, 1982-83 to 12/31). By the second half of 1982, BCT commuter ridership had increased beyond the capacity of the system and temporary relief was sought by a bus sharing agreement with the City of Chico which made larger 30-passenger Chico buses available while the County applied for funding of larger buses. It is estimated that BCT carried about 1.5 percent of all personal trips between Chico and Paradise and near 2.0 percent of the personal trips between Chico and Oroville in 1982.

The bus systems serving the Chico and Oroville urban areas have experienced increasing ridership rates since their start-ups. The Chico system should continue to expand its ridership as a result of improved routing and scheduling. The Oroville system has had steadily improving fare box revenue since its start-up.

Other public transportation programs currently in Butte County include the following:

Chico Clipper - This is a taxi dial-a-ride service to the elderly and handicapped and operates daily in the Chico area.

Oroville Express - This is a dial-a-ride service to the elderly and handicapped and operates daily in the Oroville area.

Paradise Express - This is also a dial-a-ride service to the elderly and handicapped and operates daily except Sunday, in the Paradise area.

Gridley Golden Feather Flyer - This daily dial-a-ride service operates in the Gridley area.

The only private bus carrier operating in Butte County is Greyhound Bus Company, which serves Chico, Gridley, Oroville, and Paradise on a regional and state-wide basis. Traditionally, the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has set routes for private interstate bus companies operating within the state on the basis of providing much needed regional and state-wide bus connection to the state's small, rural communities. However, the federal Buss Regulatory Reform Act of 1982 allows these bus companies to cut or reduce service on unprofitable routes such as those serving lightly populated rural areas. The immediate effect has been for companies like Greyhound to begin dropping smaller, remote communities from their service and reduce service to other cities. The full implications of the Bus Regulatory Reform Act on Butte County is still unclear.

Regional and state-wide passenger rail connections are provided by Amtrak, with its twice-a-day stop at Chico. Butte County began receiving Amtrak services after spring, 1982, when the Re-routing of the Cost Starlight (Seattle to Los Angeles) included more heavily populated east side Sacramento Valley communities including Chico, Marysville, Roseville and Sacramento.

The effect of the re-routing was to increase mid Sacramento Valley patronage by about a third during the first six months.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Transportation Systems Management: Transportation Systems Management (TSM) is a composite term used to define a variety of transportation programs which help to make better use of existing services and facilities. The benefits of TSM are realized through increasing system efficiency while decreasing capital costs. TSM includes such transportation concepts as ride sharing and car pooling, park-and-ride lots, traffic flow improvements and signal synchronization, and bimodal integration and route scheduling between public transit, ride sharing and urban bicycle programs.

Caltrans has also constructed a limited number of bus turnouts and shelters on state highways in Butte County urban areas. The cities of Butte County have been active, as the need arises with traffic flow improvements and signal synchronization.

Formal park-and-ride lots have been constructed on State Route 70 at Grand Avenue in Oroville (30 parking places and 4 bike lockers) and on State Route 32 at Fir Street in Chico (44 parking places and 8 bike lockers). Also, Caltrans has identified eleven informal park-and-ride lots along or near state highways in the County, as indicated in the following table:
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Table CIR - 2 Informal Park and Ride Lots on State Highways Butte County

1. SR 70 at Robinson's Center (southsest side).

2. SR 70 at Palermo Road (gravelled lot on southeast corner).

3. SR 70 at Oroville Dam Blvd. (In front of Caltrans Maintenance Station).

4. SR 70 at Montgomery Street (on gravelled shoulder).

5. SR 70 at SR 149 (on gravelled shoulder).

6. SR 99 at Edgars Slough and Skyway (on gravelled shoulder).

7. SR 99 at Pentz-Durham Road (on soft shoulder).

8. SR 99 at SR 149 (parking on gravel).

9. SR 99 at SR 162 (parking on gravel).

10. SR 32 at Bartlett (along street and in adjacent lot at Shell Station).

11. SR 99 at East Park Ave. (Parking along street).

Source: Park and Ride Locations within District 03, Caltrans, January 22, 1981.

Caltrans' ride sharing program has consisted of ridesharing matching efforts at Chico State and at Butte College for students and faculty. Butte County has not been formally involved with ridesharing matching, to date.

Two bills were passed by the state legislature in 1981-82 which are important to rides haring:

SB 321 - The bill creates financial incentives for employees to ride share while reducing the cost to employers. The bill includes employer tax credits, accelerated depreciation and other tax benefits to employers providing rides haring inducements to their employees.

SB 320 - This bill will allocate funds to the Butte County Association of Governments for the purpose of implementing rides haring programs. The first allocation was expected to occur in March, 1983, and annual allocations will be made each July 1st through 1987. The estimated 1983 allocation to Butte County was $22,194, but has been cut in the Governor's 1983-84 state budget.

Bicycle Ridership: Bicycle ridership offers citizens one of the cheapest and most efficient forms of transportation, particularly within urban areas. Bicycle ridership for work and school commuting, general utility, and recreation has increased significantly throughout the County during the last decade.

Bicycle ridership rates in the Chico urban area are by far the greatest in the County due to the role of Chico State and the urban area's more compacted and young population. The City of Chico has designated specific streets as bicycle routes and recently established improved on-street bicycle parking facilities in its down-town area. It is estimated that average daily bicycle ridership constitutes 4 to 8 percent of the total trips in the Chico urban area during the six month (May through October) warm season.

The Town of paradise and the Cities of Oroville and Chico have recently completed bicycle plans. At present, there are no rural bicycle programs in Butte County.

For planning purposes, bicycle routes are categorized into three classifications. Class I bike routes involve lanes where the right-of-way is physically separated from competing motor vehicle and pedestrian conflicts. Class II bike routes involve the marking and striping of separate bike lanes along existing streets. Class III routes involve the signing and assigning of local and collector streets as bike routes.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Pedestrian Access: Separation of pedestrian and vehicle traffic is required by safety considerations, but often the result is to reduce pedestrian access and mobility in lieu of vehicle traffic. Issues related to pedestrian access are almost exclusively found in urban situations and pedestrian planning usually occurs on a case-by-case basis while conforming to general development standards set by the public agency of jurisdiction.

Most often, pedestrian access is relegated to the issue of providing sidewalk construction along city streets. Pedestrian considerations are also important site planning concerns when developing large commercial and employment centers. The issue of pedestrian corridors for intracity recreational opportunities is one that has emerged recently in the Town of Paradise, in that a system of foot trails are called for in the community's general plan (Town of Paradise General Plan, 1982). Similar long-term opportunities exist along water courses in the Chico urban area such as Little Chico creek and Lindo Channel and the Feather River around Oroville.

Aviation: Aviation serves three purposes in a region like Butte County. First, commercial service provides fast and easy access to other regions by providing connection to major air carriers at metropolitan airports. Second, general aviation facilities meet the needs of private aircraft users for commercial and recreational uses. Third, aircraft are an indispensable tool for the County' agricultural sector.

The major airports in Butte County are owned and operated by city government, including the Chico Municipal Airport and the Oroville Airport.

Development and maintenance of these two airports are the responsibility of their respective city governments and airport land use plans are required for each facility.

The Chico airport is classified as a basic transportation airport (including capacity for scheduled commercial service) and has a lighted and paved parallel runway with a precision electronic approach system (The California Aviation System Plan, Volume II, May, 1981, App. C). The Oroville airport is classified as a general utility airport and has a lighted and paved single and cross-wind runway. Two privately owned general aviation airports are located in Butte County and include Ranchero airport west of Chico, and Paradise Sky airport southwest of the Town of Paradise. Both of these private airports are classified as public use airports and consist of a single paved runway without electronic approach systems.

In 1980, 149 aircraft were based at the Chico airport, 55 at Oroville, 28 at Ranchero, and 23 at Paradise Sky (The California Aviation System Plan, Volume II, May, 1981, App. C). The Chico airport recorded approximately 80,000 takeoffs and landings in 1981.

As Butte County's only scheduled commercial passenger airport, the Chico airport has been subject to a number of recent service changes because of national deregulation of the commercial airline industry and the 1981 air traffic controllers strike. Airline deregulation left Chico without a major commuter air carrier as larger airlines concentrated the focus of their service in larger metropolitan areas. Chico is now served by two smaller commuter airlines; West Air and Pacific Express. The air traffic controllers strike forced closing of the Chico control tower in 1981 an dit has not been reopened to date.

State law requires airport plans, including for airport land use and clear zones, to be developed for general purpose airports such as Chico and Oroville. These plans are to be adopted by the County's Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), which is the County Planning Commission.

The City of Chico developed an airport environs plan for Chico Municipal Airport in 1978 and a similar plan for the Oroville airport is now being developed. Butte County presently does not exercise controls on the location, development, and use of private airstrips and landing fields, although a use permit is required. Controls should be developed to ensure that private airstrips do not permanently preclude use of prime farmlands, that they are outside of the flight paths of existing airports, and that they do not provide a hazard or annoyance for neighboring areas.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Commercial Goods Transportation: Trucking, rail, and gas and electrical utility transmission corridors constitute the bulk of the transportation of commercial goods transported in and through the Butte County area.

Trucking: It is estimated that trucking accounts for approximately 10 percent of the average daily traffic on Butte County's major state highway network.

Railroads: There are presently three railroads serving the Butte County area, including Southern Pacific Railroad, Western Pacific Railroad, and Sacramento Northern Railroad (The Souther Pacific Transportation Company is parent company to the Southern Pacific Railroad. The Union Pacific Railroad Company is parent to both Western Pacific and Sacramento Northern Railroads). Both the southern Pacific and Western Pacific traverse through Butte County near State Routes 99 and 70 respectively, and the Sacramento Northern terminates near the Chico Municipal Airport after serving Durham and points south in Setter and Yuba Counties (see Figure CIR-3).

Southern Pacific's rail system in Butte County consists of 45.6 miles of main line and 8.8 miles of branch line servicing moth through freight and local service to Chico, Gridley, and Oroville. Typical daily operations consist of approximately 10 through freight trains, 3 local freights, and 2 Amtrak passenger trains.

Western Pacific's railway mileage consists of 54.8 miles of main track with spurs which service Oroville. Recent typical daily operations consist of eight to ten through freight trains which vary considerably in size. Both Southern Pacific and Western Pacific freight shipments have declined recently due to economic conditions.

The Sacramento Northern spur originates in Setter County to provide local shipping to Durham and Chico. Freight traffic on this line has declined significantly during the last year, primarily due to a shift to local trucking brought about by recent deregulation of that industry.

Gas and Electrical Utility Corridors: The large scale transportation of natural gas and gasoline by pipeline and electricity by transmission lines must be considered in a circulation element.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) provides piped natural gas to all of Butte County's larger urban areas and also to the communities of Durham, Richvale, Palermo, Biggs, and to Butte Community College, as shown in Figure CIR-3. Areas of higher population density not served by PG&E include Paradise Pines and Oroville's eastern foothill planning area. Natural gas lines also service several natural gas production fields in western Butte County. The main natural gas line through the Sacramento Valley, which connects the PG&E service area to Canadian gas fields, is located in the western portions of the Valley, west of Interstate 5.

Gasoline is piped into Butte County from the south (from Bay area refineries) to the Chico tank farm near Hagen Lane and the Midway, and is distributed from this point by truck. Southern Pacific Transportation Company is owner of both the gasoline pipeline and tank farm facility.

PG&E, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA), a branch of the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Oroville Wyandotte Irrigation District (OWID), are each responsible for portions of the major electrical transmission lines that cross through or originate in Butte County.

PG&E operates and maintains the bulk of the transmission line system in Butte County. Nearly all of the electricity passing through or generated in Butte County is routed through PG&E's Table Mountain substation or the smaller Palermo substation (see Figure CIR-3) . Major PG&E transmission line corridors in Butte County include two parallel 500 KV lines running from the Tehama County line in the lower foothills to table Mountain (servicing the Pit River Project and Pacific Inter Tie), five lines totaling 920 KV running from the Feather River Canyon (Feather River Project) to both Table Mountain and Palermo, and two 115 KV lines which connect the Chico area and Table Mountain. PG&E transmission lines which generally transmit electricity to population centers south of Butte County include three lines totaling 1230 KV from Table Mountain, two 115 KV lines from Palermo and a single 230 KV line from the Rock Creek Substation in the Feather river Canyon.

The DWR operates and maintains three lines from its Lake Oroville Hyatt Powerhouse totaling 690 KV, which lead directly to the nearby Table Mountain substation. The DWR also operates lines from its Thermalito forebay powerhouse to Table Mountain.

The federal WAPA operates and maintains a single 230 KV transmission line system which runs the entire north-south length of Butte County and traverses an area near the break in slope between the Sacramento Valley floor and the foothills. The OWID operates and maintains a 115 KV line from its South Fork Project to Palermo.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

TRANSPORTATION AND ENERGY

No energy use is more important to Butte County citizens than that for transportation. Nearly all of our business and trade activity somehow depends on the ;movement of people and goods, and this requires substantial amount of petroleum dependent transportation fuels. In the last decade, with its oil embargos and dramatic energy price increases, there has been a growing public awareness and some adjustment to the role played by energy availability and price. However, we still do not have a clear view of the size of timing of future energy problems, or of future energy costs. The importance of adequate transportation energy supplies can not be dismissed in transportation planning and, therefore, this section serves to provide information and input which could assist in developing transportation objectives and policies.

In addition to the tremendous importance of easily accessible and relatively low cost transportation fuels to our local economy, the availability of transportation energy is also important in maintaining our sense of mobility. Also, certain land use patterns become more or less attractive as transportation energy cost and supply scenarios change. A past era of low cost petroleum with its nearly unrestrictive supply has dramatically influenced how our present day land use and transportation patterns developed. It is, therefore, imperative that discussions considering land use and transportation planning consider, as best they can, the implications of energy to our transportation future. The goal of having a future of safe, efficient, and well maintained streets and highways and an adequate public transportation system can not be separated from transportation energy concerns.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Energy Use in Transportation: The significance of petroleum to our transportation sector can be appreciated by the following facts:

Petroleum accounts for 97 percent of the energy used in California transportation and even more in semi-rural Butte County.

The private automobile uses about 60 percent of our total transportation energy budget statewide (California Energy Commission, 1981 Biennial Report, p. 61). Passenger travel consumes about 70 percent of the nation's transportation energy and goods movement accounts for about 25 percent (U.S. Congress Committee on Energy and Commerce, Report on Building a Sustainable Future, Vol. 1, April, 1981, p. 130).

In California, the transportation sector uses 62 percent of all petroleum used in the state. Petroleum accounts for 61 percent of all energy used in the state (California Energy Commission, 1981 Biennial Report, Figure 1-1 California Energy Consumption 1979). California transportation, alone, consumed 47 percent of the state's net energy supplies in 1981 (California Energy commission, Forecast of California Can and Truck Fuel Demand, January, 1983).

Annual gasoline consumption in Butte County is estimated to be approximately 60 million gallons (Letter from California Board of Equalization to Butte County Planning Department, September, 1982). The relative value of this investment is slightly more than that of recent Butte County government budgets.

Given the fact that there is no immediate large scale alternative to automobiles for many personal transportation needs and that approximately 80 percent of all statewide person miles traveled are by auto (even more in Butte County), petroleum will remain the key to fueling the transportation sector throughout the remainder of the century. The potential ramifications of a serious shortfall of petroleum supplies would have severe adverse affects upon personal transportation and upon the economy, as a whole, if prolonged (See Impacts of a 6, 12, 25, and 40 percent shortfall in Petroleum Supplies on the U.S. and California Economies, prepared for the California Energy Commission, Larry J. Kimbell, Ph.D, UCLA Business Forecasting Project, January, 1981).

Energy and Mobility: Fundamental to the transportation planning process is the need to keep our society's mobility and reduce congestion. Moreover, our current transportation system has deeply affected the physical structure of our society as well as social convention in everything from mores to funerals. The automobile has shaped modern cities, creating suburban environments where personal vehicles are essential for the most basic functions (U.S. Congress Committee on Energy and Commerce, Report on Building a Sustainable Future, Vol. 1, April, 1981, P. 122). Citizens prize the sense of personal freedom and mobility offered by the automobile.

Large amounts of personal travel are indispensable and citizens have shown a continued willingness to invest significant amount of their income in travel. The fraction of each person's disposable income invested in travel has actually increased in recent years and is now estimated to be more than 14 percent, despite significant reductions in gasoline demand since 1978 (U.S. Congress Committee on Energy and Commerce, Report on Building a Sustainable Future, Vol. 1, April, 1981, P. 122). One particularly interesting feature of statewide travel demand is the increasing use of light duty pick ups for personal travel.

A study of national driving habits indicates, as expected, that people in upper income groups use relatively less of their discretionary income on automobiles than people with low incomes (U.S. Congress Committee on Energy and Commerce, Report on Building a Sustainable Future, Vol. 1, April, 1981, p. 130-132). Higher fuel prices will place a disportortionate burden on low income people. This group uses a much higher percentage of its income for transportation energy than any other income level. Unless properly mitigated, this inequity could compound a multi-decade trend of decreased mobility for the poor, elderly, and physically handicapped driving in and between urban areas. As with most social welfare issues, there are no easy or clear solutions to these transportation hardships.

Butte County's response to these problems currently involves low income transportation assistant grants, dial-a-ride services for the elderly and physically handicapped, and subsidized bus services.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Efficiency and Conservation Aspects: As mentioned in previous sections, Butte County's street and highway system represents an enormous long-term public investment. However, putting this investment to good use in the future by ensuring the freedom of mobility which low-cost transportation has provided for many years will require skillful use of many efficiency and conservation technologies that are already in hand. Conservation is a necessary component to the efficient utilization of the enormous investment contained in our current transportation system, both publicly and privately. The immediate and cheapest opportunities to maintain mobility while reducing energy use is through conservation. In contrast, it is clear that rising fuel prices are always most harmful where efficiency is lowest. This plan makes the basic assumption that citizens will respond favorably to market demands and incentives that promote increased automobile efficiency and transportation fuel conservation, if given the opportunity, during the planning period. This assumption is very important to many Butte County residents because of the higher rate of automobile dependency required in semi-rural regions.

Automobile Efficiency and Fuel Demand: Increasing automobile efficiency has had a substantial effect on reducing the total amount of gasoline consumed since 1978. The public has been both driving less and buying more efficient vehicles that use less gasoline. To further illustrate; a typical 1981 model car was 61 percent more fuel efficient and produced one-tenth the pollution of the typical 1974 model auto (California Energy Commission, 1981 Biennial Report, p. 207).

Federal law currently requires vehicle manufacturers to produce automobiles and light trucks in compliance with an industry-wide schedule of gradually increasing annual Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards established by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The CAFE standards for automobiles are to culminate in a corporate average fuel economy of at least 27.5 miles per gallon (mpg) in 1985. It is entirely possible to extend fuel and consumer savings by developing further programs for vehicle efficiency to at least 40 mpg by 1995. Butte County and the area's federal state representatives should support such programs, as to the long-term local benefit gained from vehicle efficiency programs. Many vehicle efficiency programs. Many vehicles exceeding 40 mpg efficiency are already on the market and certain low cost light weight automobiles yet to be marketed in the United State Exceed rates of 60 mpg (An example of such light weight automobiles would be Honda Motor Company's 4-passenger "Honda City" model which is presently blocked for sale in the U.S. by voluntary auto import restrictions).

The potential consumer savings due to increased fuel efficiency standards is further underscored by the fact that gasoline savings of about 20 percent are typical when autos are driven at 55 miles per hour (mph) instead of 70 mph (It should be noted that gasoline costs account for about 25 percent of the cost of running an automobile.

As expected, this percentage generally increases with increasing weight of similar model year's autos).

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

At present, it appears that a shift to most types of mass transit systems (with the exception of van and car pools) will not result in major energy savings (U.S. Congress committee on Energy and Commerce, Report on Building a Sustainable Future, Vol. 1, April, 1982, p. 128). The objectives of public transit programs should be to assure the continued mobility of transportation disadvantaged persons and to serve the need for basic urban and intercity commuter needs.

Extending Highway Capacity Trough Transportation Efficiency: There are a number of techniques for potentially increasing a transportation system's localized street and highway capacity without resorting to extensive roadway expansion. Together, these techniques apply transportation system management (TSM), and generally require little or no increase in local government expenditures while providing an increase in traffic capacity, locally. In addition to the potential to increase local traffic capacity, TSM techniques usually provide small increases in transportation fuel efficiency. The following are a few of the TSM techniques available for use by Butte County and other local governments:

Integration of routes and schedules of different transportation modes, including for public transit, rides haring, park and ride lots, and urban area bicycle programs.

Improve roadway design and the ways it is used. Examples include better roadway grading, separation of competing traffic modes where required for safety purposes, reducing traffic friction in areas of heavy strip commercial development, and providing extended center turning lanes in commercial strips.

Expand public transportation to meet growth demands. Transit growth could represent a capacity expansion which could absorb part of the expected additional travel demand. Also, reducing need for travel through land use planning tools could represent a similar increase in capacity (For an example of how coordinated transit and land use planning can help reduce projected traffic capacity, see the Rancho Arroyo Specific Plan, Chico, May, 1982)

Improvement in traffic control systems and synchronization. An average car achieves optimum energy efficiency by maintaining a constant speed between 35 and 45 mph. Typical city street traffic, however, is characterized by frequent stopping and starting, which reduces energy efficiency and increases vehicle emission rates (California Energy Commission, 1981 Biennial Report. P. 65).

Individuals can also help to increase city street capacity by planning their auto trips as efficiently as possible.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Transportation and Energy Related Assumptions: Transportation, energy, and economic issues are all linked. Funding for the Butte County's transportation system must give greater consideration to energy efficiency than in the past. The following are some of the energy related assumptions that are considered and incorporated into this plan's strategy section.

Major increases in travel are predicted in Butte County during the next 15 to 20 years (Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are forecasted to increase between 50 and 60 percent in Butte County by year 200. Truck VMT will increase slightly faster than for automobiles).

The price of gasoline will rise by an average annual rate of 3 percent greater than the inflation rate (California Energy Commission, Forecast of California Car and Truck Fuel Demand, Chapter I: Summary, January, 1983, p. 1). Federal, state, and local taxes on gasoline to pay for maintaining and constructing our transportation system will increase substantially during the planning period.

Gasoline demand will continue to decline slowly during the planning period, despite more vehicles and increased vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in Butte County (Statewide gasoline demand is forecasted to decline approximately one percent per year during most of the 1980's. Additional declines in gasoline demand to year 2000 will depend on the extent to which existing fuel economy improvement technologies are implemented). Increases in vehicle fuel efficiency and the efficiency of personal transportation choices and modes will be chiefly responsible for declining gasoline demand. It is assumed that the automobile fleet will average at least 40 mpg by the late 1990's.

The average weight of passenger vehicles will continue to decline during the planning period.

It is assumed that it takes about ten years for a rise in the price of oil to have its full effect on improving energy efficiency in business and for personal use.

Periods of energy price plateaus will not be a disincentive to further energy conservation, although the rate of conservation will slow during these periods.

The transportation sector will continue to be highly dependent on petroleum throughout the planning period. Oil will be increasingly used for only those purposes to which it is best suited.

FINANCING ISSUES RELATED TO BUTTE COUNTY'S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

The following section deals with financial issues affecting Butte County's transportation planning efforts over the short and long-term course. This section should be used in conjunction with background discussions found in sections on existing and future transportation needs and road classifications and standards.

Past and Present Financing: Historically, Butte County's Transportation system financing has come from a mix of federal, state, and local government revenue sources. However, beginning with 1) the 1978 passage of Proposition 13, which significantly reduced property tax revenues for California's local governments, and followed by 2) a trend of reduced federal and state road designated funds caused by a slowed economy and significant declines in gasoline usage since 1978, coupled with 3) rapidly inflated costs of road maintenance and construction, Butte County and its cities have been faced with increasing revenue constraints which have negatively impacted traditional rates of road maintenance and construction (Inflation in highway construction and maintenance costs has risen approximately 250 percent in 10 years. Gas tax revenue had increased a mere 24 percent in the same period, prior to 1983). In Butte County's case, budget constraints have lead to the complete elimination of the use of non-restricted road monies for road maintenance and improvement projects. In fiscal year FY 1982/83 motor vehicle in-lieu funds were eliminated from funding Butte County road operations for the first time, as this revenue source was needed elsewhere to fund County operations. Also, federal road maintenance and construction apportionments for both Butte County's urban and rural areas have declined slowly during the last several years. This overall decline in revenue for local transportation projects has led to a sharp slowdown of needed Butte County road maintenance projects and a near halt to any traditionally funded new road construction in the near future by the County.

As a result of declining revenues, Butte County's FY 1982/83 road maintenance and construction was funded exclusively from road specified sources, this for the first time in recent years. Two revenue sources, the highway users (gasoline) tax and Local Transportation Fund from sales tax, accounted for approximately 77 percent of the County's road maintenance and construction revenue. The following table shows the FY 1982/83 revenue breakdown for the County Public Works Department's road maintenance and construction operations.

The only revenue category expecting any significant increase in the near future is the highway users tax; this due to new state (SB 215) and federal taxes on gasoline during 1983. Future increases in TDA funding and fines and forfeitures are expected to parallel population growth and inflation rates, so the net gain to the County's road program revenue will be minimal. Future federal FAS revenues are extremely difficult to forecast, in that allocations will depend largely on future federal budgets, nationwide road and transit priorities, and the future state of the economy and revenues from gasoline sales. Forest reserve revenue, which result from timber and recreation revenues from Lassen and Plumas National Forests in Butte County, are expected to continue declining slightly as logging activity in the area slowly declines.

HUD (U.S. Housing and Urban Development) grants, for road reconstruction in blighted areas, are expected to play a minor role in the overall future of Butte County's road maintenance program, as are federal bridge rehabilitation funds. The above discussion and projection of poor prospects for substantially increased road revenues to balance Butte County's current road maintenance needs leads to a forecast of future years of increasing road maintenance deficits in the County, as discussed later in this section.

Table CIR - 3 Estimated Butte County Road Maintenance and Construction Revenue FY 1982/83
Source	Amount	% of total
Highway Users	$2,071,693 (1)	44.7
Forest Reserve	215,000	4.6
HUD Funds	89,6000	1.9
TDA Funds	1,490,861 (2)	32.2
Misc. Sales	18,000	--
Road Permits	230	--
Interest	30,000	0.7
Fines and Forfeitures	270,000	5.8
FAS	450,000	9.7
Total	4,635,384	100.0

(1) Includes $300,000 of SB 215 funds. (2) Includes carryover from previous fiscal year.

Public and specialized transportation system funding for Butte County and its cities had historically come from the Transportation Development Act (TDA, SB-325) which has been in existence since 1972. Beginning in 1979, funds become available under the State Transit Assistant Program (STA).

The public transit systems in Butte County use a mix of TDA and STA funds for their operations. Chico Area Transit System buses and their ancillary equipment were purchased utilizing an UMTA (Section 18) grant in conjunction with local transit funds. During FY 1982/83 approximately $548,600 of transit funding was utilized to operate public transportation programs by Butte County.

Under the 1982 Federal Highway Improvement Act, UMTA Section 9 funds are available for public transportation systems that serve an urbanized area of 50,000 or more. Section 9 funds are to be used for Capital improvements and operating costs for urban public transit development. Recent annual appropriations for the Chico urban area have been in the range of $400,00+. UMTA Section 18 monies are now utilized for public transportation systems and services outside of urban areas. Section 18 has helped to finance capital improvements and operating costs of BCT and OATS. Section 18 is also used for other demand oriented transit services such as dial-a-ride programs.

The 1983 increase in the federal gasoline tax will benefit urban public transportation systems such as the Chico Area Transit System, by ensuring a stable source of federal transit funds in future years.

Funding of bicycle facilities and planning can come from a variety of local, state or federal sources. Local street and road revenues and general revenues can be utilized. The state Bike Lane Account is reserved by Caltrans for grants to local governments for development of bike lanes and bike ways. It should be noted that TDA and FAU monies can also be used for bike lanes and bicycle planning.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Cost Factors in Maintaining the County Road System: The understanding of how different road maintenance and construction operations vary with respect to costs is important when considering and evaluating different objectives, policies and programs contained in the Transportation Element. Roadway costs discussed below are generalized and based on 1982 dollar estimates (All cited roadway costs are rough estimates obtained from various discussions with the Butte County Public Works Department and are furnished for general planning purpose, only).

Butte County maintains approximately 1377 miles of roads which average approximately $50,000 in value per mile. This would place the 1982 value of Butte County's roadways at approximately $69 million. The estimated value of state highways, streets in city jurisdictions, and private roadways are not included in this figure. The per mile value of the State highways is considerably higher than for Butte County roadways because of much higher average design standards and ;maintenance requirements. Slightly over 800 miles of Butte County maintained roadways are paved, while the remainder are dirt or gravel.

New roadway construction costs, including for substantial reconstruction of existing roads, average approximately $350,000 per mile for a standard width 2-lane road. This average cost varies greatly with terrain. It is estimated that a new 2-lane road on the valley floor will cost an average of $100,000 per mile; while the same roadway will cost approximately $250,000 per mile in the foothill areas and approximately $500,000 per mile in mountainous areas. This suggests a tremendous cost is involved in foothill and particularly, mountainous area roadway construction; as much as five times more than valley floor roadway construction costs.

Higher foothill and mountain road construction costs result largely from increased surveying and cut an fill costs.

Oroville-Quincy Highway, Forbestown Road, and Cohasset Road are examples of higher costs-per-mile roads in Butte County's road system.

The cost of asphalting for new roads averages close to one dollar per square foot, however, these actual costs are extremely variable due to variable terrain and other engineering factors.

Adequate road maintenance is important in keeping the value of Butte County's roadway investment over the long-term. However, in FY 1982/83, an average of approximately $1600 per mile was

Budgeted for roadway ;maintenance on County roads. Approximately double this amount, or nearly $3000 per average mile is needed to keep pace with annual road maintenance needs. Inflation of road maintenance costs and reduced roadway budgets have led to increasing road maintenance deficits since about 1978, for Butte County.

A newly constructed paved road should be seal coated no later than 10 to 15 years after its construction, and sooner, if possible. Seal coats, which cost approximately $8000 per average mile, are now typically applied only about every 20 years, due to financing constraints. The above shortfall in seal coat maintenance cycles parallels the road maintenance deficit just suggested.

Assuming that the FY 1982/83 level of road revenue remains constant with future inflation rates while road maintenance needs remain the same, the accumulated road maintenance deficit for Butte County would be approximately $19.5 million (in 1982 dollars) in ten years (The amount of $19.5 million should be used generally, and only as a method to illustrate the significance of Butte County's potential for an accumulated road maintenance budget deficit). The implication of the present and future road maintenance deficit is that the County's road maintenance program is going to be increasingly forced to set priorities regarding which roads are to be adequately maintained and which roads are going to be allowed to deteriorate and, on occasion, be converted to gravel.

Other road maintenance costs incurred by the County include for road striping and signing, roadway reflective markers, road vandalism, snow plowing, traffic signals, road drainage, and torts. Yearly road striping maintenance costs about $50,000. The County maintains about 10,000 roadway signs, which have an average value of about $100. In 1981, about $20,000 in vandalism occurred to road signs. Reflective pavement markers involve an approximate $100,000 long-term investment below the snowline while in FY 1982/83, $143,000 was spent for snowplowing on County roads. New traffic signals cost about $80,000 each. Road drainage problems in certain urban areas such as Palermo, Thermalito, the Avenues in Chico, and Chapmantown add to the County' maintenance costs.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Future Road and Highway Financing: New state and federal taxes on gasoline are expected to increase Butte County's road revenues, however, not nearly to the extent for which County residents pay gasoline taxes. The County is expected to continue as a donor county with regard to balancing gasoline taxes and revenue.

This will be particularly true in the poor return of federal gasoline taxes back to Butte County, as the bulk of this tax will be allocated to other areas, particularly large metropolitan areas where the national need is perceived to be greatest.

Based on the assumption that present taxable gasoline sales in Butte County amount to near 60 million gallons per year, the new two cent state gasoline tax will increase Butte County and its five cities' road revenue by a county-wide total of $600,000 per year, per the formula in SB 215 of 1981. The remaining $600,000 collected by SB215 will be used by the state where it perceives the greatest need.

However, prospects for a fair return of new five cent federal gasoline tax revenues to Butte County seems poor. Based on current rates of gasoline consumption, all of Butte County would pay about $3.0 million in new federal gasoline taxes yearly. However, the 1982 federal gas tax legislation did not authorize increased funding levels for FAU or FAS designated roads, thus no increase in federal funding for these two important road categories in Butte County (The federal Highway Improvement Act of 1982 retained current levels of FAU and FAS funding). Most of the new federal gas tax road allocation has been earmarked for interstate and state primary highways (FAP), which will benefit only the state highways in Butte County. It would appear that the new federal gas tax will increase the rate at which Butte County is a donor gas tax county, as new federal gas taxes collected in Butte County are spent elsewhere. The likelihood of equalizing or reducing Butte County's donor status appears poor, as it would take additional federal legislation to remedy this problem.

From the above discussion it is concluded that the prospects for continued long-term and increasing road maintenance deficits appears likely for Butte County unless new revenue sources are developed by the County over the short and long run. Several road revenue generating techniques are currently available, including a local Butte County gasoline tax, fees on new developments to pay for increased road maintenance and construction that they will generate, and assessment districts to pay for new road construction related to newly developing areas.

Butte County is authorized by SB 215 of 1981 to charge a per gallon tax on gasoline sold within the County in order to increase road maintenance revenue. Butte County and its five cities would have to agree on how to apportion (usually by population) such a local gas tax and two-thirds county-wide voter approval would be needed. If Butte County were to set a two cent per gallon tax on gasoline, the County and its cities could annually divide approximately $1.2 million for local road purposes. To date, no California county has adopted a local gasoline tax, and voters have overwhelmingly rejected it when placed on the ballot.

Fees on new developments to pay for increased road maintenance and construction that they will generate and assessment districts to pay for new road construction related to newly developing areas are two revenue generating mechanisms that appear most equitable and easy to adopt. Both the off-site development fee and road assessment district concept encompass a pay-as-you-go strategy for new development and, if applied uniformly, could allow existing county road revenues to be focused exclusively on maintenance of existing roadways. The combined implementation of these two financing mechanism could help to reduce the County's road maintenance deficit in the future. Other nearby counties which utilize road development fees include; Nevada County, which has implemented a county-wide program that charges fees according to the road needs found in eight planning sectors in the County, and ; El Dorado County, which has implemented a program that assesses and charges road development fees for development projects which will have large off-site traffic impacts.

Two other potential revenue sources for road maintenance could possibly be implemented over the long-term, one at the local level and another at the state level. Locally, establishment of roadway drainage assessment districts in previously mentioned urban problem areas could help extend road maintenance monies while providing a solution to these local urban drainage problems.

Also, truck weight-distance fee schedules should be reformed to pay a fair cost of roadway and highway damage (Present highway user taxes, including the truck-related taxes added in the federal Highway Improvement Act of 1982 (new federal gas tax), favor heavy trucks. Truck user charges do not recover the costs heavy truck traffic imposes on the highway system. Numerous highway cost allocation studies have confirmed that heavy trucks underpay. Even with the new federal gas tax, heavy trucks will still be paying about 70 percent of their full highway cost responsibility. Also, the heavier trucks allowed by the 1982 federal gas tax bill ill, on the average, increase pavement damage by 15 percent). Heavy duty trucks are cause for most of the road damage and, in fact, if fees were proportioned to use-related road wear and vehicle type, truck fees would play nearly all of the road maintenance cost (Payment deterioration is the most important cost heavy trucks impose on the highways. Trucks over 50,000 pounds cause roughly 85 percent of the use-related damage to the nation's highways. Pavement stress increases sharply with increased axle loads: a five-axle, 80,000 pound truck causes about 600 percent more stress than the same truck loaded to 50,000 pounds. One 80,000 pound truck does the same damage as about 9,600 automobiles). The opposing argument suggests that such truck weight fees would be passed on to the consumer who would end up paying for truck caused road damage, anyway. Any change in truck weight fee schedules would have to occur at the state and federal level.

The possibility of utilizing community facilities districts for generating road construction revenues for newly developed areas is not yet clear. Legislation enabling community facilities districts, which was signed by the Governor in 1982, does not clearly specify road construction as a fundable service.

Also, large questions remain as to how much money the County can afford to spend on "advanced" financing of community facilities districts and what affect such financing would have on the County's future bond and credit ratings.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Implications of Future Road and Highway Financing Shortfalls: While public transit systems in Butte County appear to have adequate funding through the planning period, road and highway financing for maintenance and construction will be facing continued revenue shortfalls. These anticipated shortfalls imply the need to develop road maintenance and construction strategies which help to extend road designated revenues while maintaining basic road service levels.

Some strategies that should be considered during the planning period include the following:

If reduced levels of road maintenance continue, there will be increasing need to formally allocate reduced road maintenance cycles throughout the County, particularly in rural areas.

Some rural roads will have to be converted to gravel or dirt, over time, if the road maintenance deficit continues to increase, over time.

Other road maintenance and construction cost reductions will require increased engineering economy. Such techniques could include keeping rural roads informal and urban street widths as narrow as particularly possible.

The issue of "implied subsidies" with regard to road maintenance and construction will become increasingly important, over time. The issue of how to equitably allocate road revenue resources between more expensive foothill and mountain roads and valley floor roads, now plowing programs, and between large development projects, particularly for large rural subdivisions, and their off-site traffic impacts will require increasing attention as road maintenance demands increase, over time.

A system of off-site development fees and assessment district financing to pay for the traffic impacts caused by new development in the County will need to be increasingly considered, particularly if road maintenance programs continue to fall behind their needs.

In certain urban situations, well planned public transportation may help to marginally reduce street congestion, thus creating a slight increase in street capacity. This opportunity will have to be examined case-by-case for each transit system, as the possibilities arise.

Also, subdivision design criteria which increases opportunities for transit patronage should be incorporated into urban area transit planning programs.

With the reduced ability to adequately maintain roads that are currently part of the County's road system, addition of any new roads to the system will only further tax the County's road maintenance abilities.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

ROAD CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS

The functional classification of roads and the application of road design standards are key tools to 1) ensuring adequate access and road design for present and future development and 2) setting affective priorities for use of road monies.

Since finances prevent every highway in a functional classification from being developed to optimum design standards, it is necessary to identify the relative importance of each highway segment from a system perspective in order to establish a plan that will maximize the effectiveness of future improvements.

Functional Highway Classification: Urban and rural streets and highways in Butte County are grouped functionally according to the character of service they are intended to provide. The classification of streets and highways helps to 1) determine the importance of a particular highway segment in relation to the overall network and 2) maintain a balance between the issues of access to land and traffic mobility for various transportation facilities when developing programs for highway improvements. A functional highway classification is also valuable in helping to determine priorities for road and highway maintenance policy. It is necessary to distinguish the functional classification between urban and rural areas, since the services they provide can differ greatly. Urban and rural functional classification characteristics are described by the two tables on the following pages. Cross-section illustrations of functionally classified roads as they relate to Butte County's road improvement standards are shown in Figure CIR-4A and CIR-4B.
[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Level of Development Priorities - The need to concentrate on essential rather than desirable improvements has lead some public agencies to devise a method of allocating highway improvements and maintenance according to the importance of the highway. The goal has been to define road and highway programs so that the greatest benefits are obtained with a minimum of limited financial resources.

The basic premise of a "level of development" highway maintenance program is that the most important highways should be designed and maintained to the highest possible level to provide the highest level of traffic service, operational safety and efficiency. The least important highways should receive only the improvements necessary to maintain their structural integrity and operational safety. An example of a level of development program is summarized in Appendix B.

Table CIR - 4 Functional System Characteristics - Urban Areas

Urban Principal Arterial

The principal arterial system should carry the major portion of trips entering and leaving the urban area, as well as the majority of through movements desiring to bypass the central city. In addition, significant intra-area travel, such as between central business districts and outlying residential areas, between major inner city communities or between major suburban centers should be served by this class of facilities.

Urban Minor Arterial Street

The minor arterial street system should interconnect with and augment the urban principal arterial system and provide service to trips of moderate length at a somewhat lower level of travel mobility than major arterials.

Urban Collector Street

The collector street system differs from the arterial systems in that facilities on the collector system may penetrate neighborhoods, distributing trips from the arterials through the area to the ultimate destination which may be on a local or collector street.

Urban Local Street

Local streets are limited to serving lots fronting such streets and should have a curvilinear and/or discontinuous alignments, such as loops and cul-de-sacs, so as to discourage through traffic, but carry traffic conveniently and as directly as possible to collector streets.

Commercial and Industrial Streets

These streets are designed to serve employment, business, and trucking traffic in urban commercial and industrial areas.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Table CIR - 5 Functional System Characteristics - Rural Areas

Rural Principal Arterial

The rural principal arterial system will serve corridor movements having trip length and travel density characteristics indicative of substantial statewide or interstate travel. They generally serve urban areas of 50,000 and over population and a large majority of those with population of 25,000 and over.

Rural Minor Arterial

The rural minor arterial road system links cities and larger towns, and will be spaced at such intervals, consistent with population density, so that all developed areas of the County are within a reasonable distance of an arterial highway. Minor arterials provide service to corridors with trip lengths and travel density greater than those predominantly served by rural collector or local systems. Minor arterials constitute routes whose design should be expected to provide for relatively high overall travel speeds, with minimum interference to through movement.

Rural Collector Road

The rural collector routes generally serve travel which is primarily intra county rather than of regional or statewide importance and constitutes those routes on which predominant travel distances are shorter than on arterial routes.

Major Collector Road

(1) Provide service to any county seat not on an arterial route, to the larger towns not directly served by the higher systems, and to other traffic generators of equivalent intra county importance, such as consolidated schools, shipping points, county parks, important mining and agricultural areas, etc.; (2) link these places with nearby larger towns or cities, or with routes of higher classification; and (3) serve the more important intra county travel corridors.

Minor Collector Road

(1) Be spaced at intervals, consistent with population density, to collect traffic from local roads and bring all developed areas within a reasonable distance of a collector road; (2) provide service to the remaining smaller communities; and (3) link the locally important traffic generators with their rural hinterland.

Rural Local Road

Rural local roads serve primarily to provide access to adjacent land and provide service to travel over relatively short distances as compared to collectors or other higher systems.

[RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE]

Road Standards

Existing Standards: Butte County's road improvement standards define roadway requirements for land divisions, including for subdivisions and parcels splits. A separate set of road standards have been developed for the County's urban, rural valley, and foothill and mountainous areas.

The Butte County Improvement Standards Ordinance indicates by map, the boundaries where each urban area and the foothill-mountainous standard is applied. For urban area subdivisions, Butte County standards are to conform to the incorporated city of each area.

Butte County will maintain only roads which meet county standards, unless otherwise stated in a maintenance or development agreement. Private subdivision roads which are developed to less than county standards are to be maintained as to the conditions of a maintenance agreement between the County and subdivider. The County no longer assumes the maintenance of new roads which consist of gravel or dirt road surfaces. Private roads which are developed without a land division are not subject to Butte County's improvement standards. Road permits are required when a new private road in some way affects the status or characteristics of an existing county maintained road.

Access and Road Standard Issues: There is a need to sort out, sensibly and publicly, which roads should be part of the County road system, and which should be the responsibility of private owners. But this can't be done until the County can afford to adequately maintain the roads already existing in its system. Beyond the main county road network, County residents ultimately must be responsible for building their own access roads, and for maintaining them.

New access roads will probably ha