TEHAMA COUNTY
DRAFT GENERAL PLAN
2005- 2025
APRIL 2007
TEHAMA COUNTY
COURTHOUSE ANNEX, ROOM 1
444 OAK STREET
RED BLUFF, CALIFORNIA 96080
TEHAMA COUNTY
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
2005 - 2025
Prepared for:
TEHAMA COUNTY
Courthouse Annex, Room 1
444 Oak Street
Red Bluff, CA 96080
Prepared by:
PMC
140 Independence Circle, Suite C
Chico, CA 95973
530- 894- 3469
Fax: 530- 894- 6459
www. pmcworld. com
Adopted by Resolution:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page i
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 County overview......................................................................................................... 1.0- 1
1.2 Purpose and Vision ..................................................................................................... 1.0- 5
1.3 Legal Basis and Requirements .................................................................................. 1.0- 5
1.4 Tehama County General Plan Overview................................................................ 1.0- 8
1.5 Implementation and Amendment ........................................................................ 1.0- 11
2.0 LAND USE ELEMENT
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 2.0- 1
2.2 Planning History and Trends ...................................................................................... 2.0- 2
2.3 Existing Land Use Setting............................................................................................ 2.0- 4
2.4 Land Use Issues and Values....................................................................................... 2.0- 5
2.5 Planning Areas ............................................................................................................ 2.0- 5
2.6 Community Organization ........................................................................................ 2.0- 11
2.7 Land Use Designations ............................................................................................. 2.0- 14
2.8 Land Use Diagram.................................................................................................... 2.0- 24
2.9 Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures................................................... 2.0- 36
3.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3.0- 1
3.2 Transportation Setting ................................................................................................ 3.0- 1
3.3 Circulation plan........................................................................................................... 3.0- 5
3.4 Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures................................................... 3.0- 12
4.0 PUBLIC SERVICES ELEMENT
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 4.0- 1
4.2 Overview...................................................................................................................... 4.0- 1
4.3 Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures..................................................... 4.0- 4
5.0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 5.0- 1
5.2 Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures..................................................... 5.0- 2
6.0 OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT
6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 6.0- 1
6.2 Overview...................................................................................................................... 6.0- 1
6.3 Goals, Policies, and Implementation MEASURES ................................................. 6.0- 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page ii April 2007
7.0 AGRICULTURE AND TIMBER ELEMENT
7.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 7.0- 1
7.2 Overview....................................................................................................................... 7.0- 1
7.3 Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures ..................................................... 7.0- 4
8.0 SAFETY ELEMENT
8.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 8.0- 1
8.2 Overview....................................................................................................................... 8.0- 1
8.3 Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures ..................................................... 8.0- 7
9.0 NOISE ELEMENT
9.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 9.0- 1
9.2 Overview....................................................................................................................... 9.0- 1
9.3 Goals, Policies, and implementation measures ..................................................... 9.0- 2
10.0 HOUSING ELEMENT..................................................................................................... 10.0- 1
Printed Under a Separate Cover
11.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ................................................................................................. 11.0- 1
APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLANS
Morgan Ranch ............................................................................................................................ A- 1
Battle Creek Ranch .................................................................................................................... A- 2
Sunset Hills Estates ....................................................................................................................... A- 3
Moore Ranch.......................................................................................................................... .... A- 4
Jelly’s Ferry South Option 1 ( Lower Density) ........................................................................ A- 5. a
Jelly’s Ferry South Option 2 ( Medium/ Lower Density)........................................................ A- 5. b
Jelly’s Ferry South; Option 3 ( Maximum Density) ................................................................ A- 5. c
APPENDIX B: APPROVED SPECIFIC/ MASTER PLANS
Sun City Tehama Specific Plan.................................................................................................. B- 1
Lake California Master Plan ....................................................................................................... B- 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2- 1 Land Ownership, Tehama County.............................................................. 2.0- 3
Table 2- 2 General Plan Acreage by Land Use Type................................................. 2.0- 4
Table 2- 3 Community Types by County Communities............................................ 2.0- 13
Table 2- 4 Land Use Designation by Community Types........................................... 2.0- 23
Table 2- 5 General Plan/ Zoning Compatibility.......................................................... 2.0- 35
Table 3- 1 Tehama County Paved Roadway Miles .................................................... 3.0- 2
Table 3- 2 Generalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions.............................. 3.0- 7
Table 3- 3 Generalized Roadway Level of Service Definitions ................................. 3.0- 8
Table 4- 1 Policy Matrix for Location of Land Uses Relative to Water Supply......... 4.0- 8
Table 4- 2 Policy Matrix for Location of Land Uses Relative to Wastewater
Treatment........................................................................................................ 4.0- 9
Table 6- 1 Soil Capability Classification ........................................................................ 6.0- 8
Table 6- 2 Natural Resource Conservation Land Use Classifications..................... 6.0- 18
Table 7- 1 Ag- Related Policies Located in Other Elements....................................... 7.0- 4
Table 9- 1 Requirements for an Acoustical Analysis Prepared in Tehama
County............................................................................................................. 9.0- 2
Table 9- 2 Noise Standards for New Uses Affected by Traffic and Railroad Noise,
Tehama County Noise Element................................................................... 9.0- 4
Table 9.3 Noise Standards for New Uses Affected by Non- Transportation Noise. 9.0- 6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.0- 1 Regional Location Map................................................................................ 1.0- 3
Figure 1.0- 2 Tehama County Map ................................................................................... 1.0- 4
Figure 2.0- 1 Tehama County Planning Areas Map........................................................ 2.0- 9
Figure 2.0- 2 Tehama County Land Use Map................................................................ 2.0- 25
Figure 2.0- 3 Tehama County Land Use Detail Map..................................................... 2.0- 27
Figure 2.0- 4 Vina Land Use Diagram.............................................................................. 2.0- 29
Figure 2.0- 5 Paskenta Land Use Diagram..................................................................... 2.0- 29
Figure 2.0- 6 Rancho Tehama Land Use Diagram........................................................ 2.0- 30
Figure 2.0- 7 Los Molinos Land Use Diagram.................................................................. 2.0- 30
Figure 2.0- 8 Gerber Land Use Diagram......................................................................... 2.0- 31
Figure 2.0- 9 Mineral Land Use Diagram......................................................................... 2.0- 31
Figure 2.0- 10 Dairyville Land Use Diagram...................................................................... 2.0- 32
Figure 2.0- 11 Manton Land Use Diagram........................................................................ 2.0- 32
Figure 2.0- 12 Antelope Land Use Diagram..................................................................... 2.0- 33
Figure 2.0- 13 Lake California Land Use Diagram .......................................................... 2.0- 34
Figure 3.0- 1 Circulation Map............................................................................................. 3.0- 9
Figure 3.0- 2 Roadway Master Plan Proposed Safety and Circulation
Enhancements............................................................................................. 3.0- 11
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 1.0- 1
1.1 COUNTY OVERVIEW
CHARACTER
Tehama County’s location in the upper Sacramento Valley has cultivated its develop-ment
as an agrarian and rural community. As of January 2005, the County boasted a
population of approximately 58,700 people, as estimated by the California Department
of Finance, ranking it 41st among the 58 counties in California. A large part of the popu-lation,
approximately 24 percent ( 14,059 persons according to the U. S. Census Bureau),
resides in the City of Red Bluff with the remainder distributed throughout the Cities of Te-hama
and Corning, as well as several unincorporated communities and rural areas
throughout the County.
Tehama County’s strong agricultural background grew from the fertile valley lands
along the Sacramento River and the expansive foothills where grazing activities are
prevalent. Development and growth over the years were possible due to the ability to
move goods up and down the Sacramento River and, in more recent times, Interstate 5.
Recently, growth pressures from outlying counties have spurred new housing and com-mercial
developments.
HISTORY
Tehama County was occupied by two tribal groups at the time of European- American
contact. For approximately 4,500 years, archaeological records state that the Yana and
their predecessors occupied the area from the Round Mountains near the Pit River in
Shasta County, to Deer Creek in Tehama County. The Nomlaki ( Central Wintun) were
relative newcomers by comparison, having arrived from the north only 400 years ago.
This tribe generally occupied the area spanning 10 miles east of the Sacramento River
into the coastal range, in what is now Glenn and Tehama Counties.
The Mexican Land Grants of the mid- 1800s brought many European- Americans to pre-sent-
day Tehama County in 1844. The first major landowners in the area included Josiah
Beldon, William George, Job F. Dye, Robert Hasty Thomes, Albert G. Toomes, and Peter
Lassen. In honor of Senator Thomas H. Benton of Missouri, Lassen laid out the original
townsite of Benton City, located near today’s community of Vina. However, due to the
discovery of gold, most of the settlers were drawn to the hills, and the town of Benton
City eventually folded.
When the Gold Rush commenced in the late 1840s, European- Americans began arriv-ing
in great numbers. The town of “ Red Bluffs” was soon established as the head of river
navigation on the Sacramento River. Steamboats brought provisions up the river to
“ Red Bluffs,” where they were transferred to wagons and mules and carried overland to
the Shasta and Trinity mining camps. “ Red Bluffs” soon changed its name to Red Bluff.
Tehama County was formed April 9, 1856 from parts of the three surrounding counties
( Butte, Colusa, and Shasta). The name “ Tehama” was most likely derived from a local
Native American word meaning “ high water” or “ low land”; probably referring to the
Sacramento River.
There are three incorporated cities within Tehama County: Red Bluff, Corning, and the
City of Tehama. In 1856, the City of Red Bluff was elected as the County seat. As stated
above, its location along the Sacramento River had historically enabled it to serve as a
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 1.0- 2 April 2007
transportation hub to export Tehama’s agricultural and lumber products by steamships
up and down the river. Corning, the County’s second largest city, was incorporated in
1907. It originally served as an agricultural hub for Tehama County, producing olives,
plums, almonds, walnuts, and peaches, as well as cattle and sheep. Corning is home to
the Lindsey Olive Company and Bell Carter Foods. The City of Tehama, which was es-tablished
in 1846, is both Tehama’s oldest and smallest incorporated city at approxi-mately
0.8 square miles. The City was originally established as a trading hub due to its
proximity to the Sacramento River.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Tehama County is located in the northern Sacramento Valley, approximately midway
between the City of Sacramento and the Oregon state border. The western boundary
of Tehama County is located in the Pacific Coast Range, and the eastern boundary is in
the Cascade Mountains. The County is approximately 2,950 square miles and contains
rolling foothills, fertile valleys, flat- topped buttes, and vast rangelands. Surrounding
counties include Shasta County to the North, Plumas and Butte Counties to the east,
Glenn County to the south, and Trinity and Mendocino Counties to the west. Tehama
County is generally bisected by the Sacramento River Valley, which cuts a 20- mile- wide
swath through the central portion of the County. Additionally, the County contains large
amounts of National Forests in the hills and mountains to the east and west.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 1.0- 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 1.0- 4 April 2007
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 1.0- 5
The climate of Tehama County varies significantly between the valley and mountain
areas, depending primarily on elevation. Hot, dry summers and temperate winters gen-erally
characterize the valley regions, while mountainous areas experience warm, dry
summers and colder winters. In 2002, the average maximum temperature in July was
97.8 degrees in the valley city of Red Bluff, and 80.8 degrees in the mountain town of
Mineral. The average maximum temperature in January was 54.7 degrees in Red Bluff,
and 40.9 degrees in Mineral. Average annual precipitation is 23.0 inches in Red Bluff
and 55.1 inches in Mineral, with annual snowfall at 2.1 inches in Red Bluff and 151.9
inches in Mineral ( CED, 2004).
1.2 PURPOSE AND VISION
The purpose of the project to update the Tehama County General Plan is to review and
revise the 1983 General Plan, to reflect upon changing conditions and issues, and to
provide a direction for the future growth of the County in the next twenty years. The Te-hama
County General Plan is a comprehensive document that provides policies and
guidelines for the future expansion and development of the community. The General
Plan helps express how the citizens of Tehama County wish to see development in their
community occur, and it serves as a planning guidebook to decision- makers, staff, and
citizens. The General Plan serves as the foundation for various planning documents that
help support and implement the General Plan including: the Tehama County Zoning
Ordinance; the Tehama County Subdivision Ordinance; area plans; and other planning
documents.
It is the intent of this document that agriculture remains one of the primary uses of land
in Tehama County. This General Plan, as did the plans before it, emphasizes agriculture
as a way of life and the foundation of the quality of life in Tehama County. Perhaps
more than any other land use, agriculture depends on the land upon which it is sits, and
relies on policies in documents such as this General Plan to protect it from incompatible
land uses. Urban uses are encouraged in this plan, but only in areas with existing ser-vices,
or where services can be provided efficiently.
1.3 LEGAL BASIS AND REQUIREMENTS
Every county and city in the State of California is required by law to adopt a general
plan for the “ physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its
boundaries which bears relation to its planning.” ( California Government Code Section
65300.) Called the “ constitution for future development” by the California Supreme
Court, the General Plan is a guideline for growth and policy decisions. The General Plan
is intended to serve as a comprehensive, long- term document establishing land use
and development policy for the next 10 to 20 years. This document will address the
County’s planning for the next 20 years and is an update to the County’s 1983 General
Plan.
State law requires that every General Plan be comprehensive in nature and cover the
entire planning area, and that it address a broad range of issues associated with a ju-risdiction’s
physical growth and development. Specific topics known as “ elements” are
required by law and are necessary to be included in every General Plan. These re-quired
elements include: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space,
noise, and safety. Additional or “ optional” elements addressing specific issues of con-cern
within the jurisdiction may also be included, as well as the combining of required
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 1.0- 6 April 2007
and optional elements where appropriate ( e. g., combining the conservation and open
space elements).
REQUIREMENTS AND SCOPE OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan is a statement of the jurisdiction’s long- term vision or ultimate physical
form. Although the General Plan is mandated by the State of California, Government
Code 65301( a) allows the jurisdiction to organize the required elements in any manner
chosen, as long as all of the required topics are addressed.
All of the elements in the General Plan, whether required or optional, must have equal
legal status. This means that no one element is superior to another. Additionally, all ele-ments
must be internally consistent with each other.
In addition to addressing all of the required elements, the General Plan must have the
following functions:
Long- Term
The General Plan is intended to take a long- term perspective and to establish enduring
policies that help guide the day- to- day decision- making for years to come. Time frames
for various topics and policies differ throughout the General Plan with the Housing Ele-ment
requiring update every five years. The General Plan considers goals, objectives,
and policies that will impact the County for the next twenty years.
Comprehensive
The General Plan must incorporate all major components of the County’s development
and address all unincorporated areas. The County should consider the General Plans
and relevant planning issues of every city as well as those planning and resource man-agement
issues that extend beyond the County’s jurisdictional boundaries. Additionally,
the plan must identify and address the broad range of issues associated with the
County’s physical development.
Internal Consistency
Policies within the General Plan are not allowed to conflict with other policies. There are
five dimensions of consistency that must be addressed in order to meet the require-ments
of internal consistency, including:
• Equal status among elements
• Consistency between elements
• Consistency within elements
• Area plan consistency
• Text and diagram consistency
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 1.0- 7
General
Due to the broad scope and long- term perspective of this document, the general plan,
as its name implies, must be general in nature. The purpose of this document is to pro-vide
a broad framework for the goals and policies for both public and private devel-opment.
USE OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The Tehama County General Plan is intended to serve as a tool to inform and assist citi-zens,
developers, and decision- makers in formulating and implementing the County’s
rules that guide development and programs. As such, the Plan has four main objectives
in achieving those outcomes. These objectives include the following:
1. To enable the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission to reach
agreements on long- range development policies.
2. To provide a basis for judging whether private development proposals and pub-lic
projects are consistent with County policies.
3. To allow other public agencies and private developers to design projects that
are in harmony with County policies or to seek changes in those policies through
the process of amending the General Plan.
4. To provide for agreements among different agencies concerning development
in the unincorporated areas of Tehama County.
CONSISTENCY IN ACTION
The General Plan provides the basis for all of the County’s regulations, polices and pro-grams
that relate to issues addressed in this Plan. In addition to requiring the General
Plan to be internally consistent, the State also requires what may be called vertical con-sistency.
An action, program, or project is consistent with the General Plan if, consider-ing
all its aspects, it will further the objectives and policies of the General Plan and not
obstruct their attainment. This requirement clarifies that consistency does not require all
subsequent County actions to be specifically anticipated by the General Plan. Because
the Plan is both broad and long- range, there are many circumstances where future
County actions will be addressed only briefly in the Plan, or perhaps not specifically ad-dressed
at all. Nevertheless, the County can still weigh the consistency of those actions
with the objectives and policies of the General Plan that relate to the action in general.
GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL STUDIES
The General Plan contains certain polices and programs that describe the need for fur-ther
studies and plans. The preparation of these studies and plans is necessary to fully
implement the General Plan and the community’s vision of Tehama County for the next
twenty years.
The General Plan by definition is a comprehensive and long- range guide to the
County’s physical, economic, and social development. It is expected that the actions
set forth within the General Plan may be undertaken by the County at any time in the
next twenty years. Therefore, it is impossible to establish a schedule or timeline for the
preparation of particular studies and plans. The County will undertake proposed actions
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 1.0- 8 April 2007
and will provide both staff and financial resources to complete those actions as it
deems necessary and feasible.
CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE
One of the primary tools for implementing the General Plan is the County’s zoning ordi-nance.
A zoning ordinance regulates land use in a jurisdiction by dividing the commu-nity
into specific districts or “ zones”. These districts specify the uses that are permitted,
conditionally permitted, or prohibited within each zone. Consistency requirements be-tween
the General Plan and zoning ordinance are important and can be broken down
into three components:
A. Uses and Standards
Land use classifications in the General Plan are not as specific as zoning ordinance clas-sifications.
For example, the Tehama County General Plan has five different categories
for residential use, whereas the zoning ordinance has more than twelve. Multiple zoning
districts may be consistent with a single General Plan land use classification, as long as
the densities and unit types allowed within each zoning district are also permitted in the
relevant General Plan category.
B. Spatial Patterns
The Zoning Map should reflect the general pattern of land use depicted on the General
Plan Diagram. However, the two need not be identical. The boundaries of land use
classifications represented on the Land Use Diagram are generalized; boundaries on
the Zoning Map are usually more precise and parcel- specific.
C. Timing
California State law allows a “ reasonable amount of time” for reconciling any inconsis-tencies
between the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. ( See Government Code
Section 65860.)
1.4 TEHAMA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN OVERVIEW
The Tehama County General Plan is organized into nine element chapters, which ad-dress
all of the elements mandated by the State of California, as well as several optional
elements applicable to Tehama County. The nine element chapters are discussed be-low,
and the topics addressed in each section are highlighted.
Each chapter of the General Plan contains: an introduction; an overview summary of
background information pertinent to the subject matter; and a section of goals, policies
and implementation measures.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 1.0- 9
Important terms to consider within this General Plan include:
GOAL
A broad statement describing a desired future condition or achievement reflecting a
community’s values and ideal future vision.
Policy
A clear and specific statement in the form of text or diagram that guides de-cision-
making, in accordance with the General Plan.
Implementation Measure
An action, program, or procedure that carries out a General Plan pol-icy.
Implementation measures are specific actions that may be easily
quantifiable. Each policy generally requires at least one implementa-tion
measure.
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
Though State law specifies which topics are required to be addressed in the General
Plan, each jurisdiction can determine the organization and structure within their plan
based on the particular local conditions and needs of the community. The following
descriptions of the elements contained in the Tehama County General Plan provide a
brief overview of what is included in each section. These elements address significant
issues concerning Tehama County and satisfy the legal requirements of the General
Plan, as defined by California State law.
1.0 Introduction
This introduction provides a short overview of Tehama County and its physical setting,
history, and character. General Plan requirements and structure are briefly reviewed
with a description of the general format and elements included in this General Plan.
2.0 Land Use Element
Perhaps the broadest section of the General Plan, the Land Use Element functions as a
guide to the physical form of the County. The Land Use Diagram is supported by de-scriptions
of allowed uses and development densities for each land use designation.
Additionally, the Land Use Diagram identifies those areas where Tehama County antici-pates
growth in the future, with the intent of avoiding incompatible land use changes
involving cities within the County and neighboring agencies and jurisdictions.
3.0 Transportation and Circulation Element
The Transportation and Circulation Element provides a plan to guide the County’s plan-ning
as it relates to the movement of people, goods, energy, and other commodities.
Within the Tehama County General Plan, the Transportation and Circulation Element
has a direct correlation and relationship to the Land Use, Public Services, Economic De-velopment,
Noise, and Housing Elements. Topics of discussion include roads and high-ways,
public transit, non- motorized transit including bicycles and pedestrians, and rail,
air, and movement of goods.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 1.0- 10 April 2007
4.0 Public Services Element
The Public Services Element, which is an optional general plan element, addresses con-cerns
associated with growth and development as it relates to public services and infra-structure
including: schools, libraries, water supply, wastewater, solid waste disposal, and
other services.
5.0 Economic Development Element
The Economic Development Element, which is another optional general plan element,
provides policy guidelines for the economic stability and development of the County.
This section was primarily developed by the Tri- County Economic Development Corpo-ration
and addresses economic development issues through the advancement of poli-cies
aimed at economic development programs, economic development funding,
employment, infrastructure, agriculture, and natural resource preservation.
6.0 Open Space and Conservation Element
The Tehama County General Plan combines the required Open Space Element and
Conservation Element. The Open Space and Conservation Element provide guidance
for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources and open space
land within the County. Specifically included in this section are policies pertaining to ag-ricultural
lands, timber resources, water quality, wildlife resources, mineral resources, his-toric
and archeological resources, visual resources, and open space resources in gen-eral.
7.0 Agriculture and Timber Element
In addition to the Open Space and Conservation Element, due to the importance of
agricultural lands and timberlands in Tehama County, an Agriculture and Timber Ele-ment
has been prepared to expand in more detail on those two resource topics.
8.0 Safety Element
The primary purpose of the Safety Element is to reduce the potential dangers and
damages associated with fire, floods, earthquakes, landslides, and other hazards. It is
the intent of this section to craft programs and polices that reduce the risk of death, in-jury,
property damage, and the economic and social dislocation related to the above
hazards.
9.0 Noise Element
The Noise Element addresses potential noise- related issues within the County, as well as
ways to limit noise exposure to the community. Programs and policies developed in the
General Plan include protection of noise- sensitive land uses, consideration of noise-impacted
areas, and noise associated with airports.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 1.0- 11
10.0 Housing Element
As mandated by the State of California, the Housing Element is required to be updated
at least every five years and must be approved by the State’s Department of Housing
and Community Development. The Housing Element includes: a section on the Sum-mary
of Needs and Constraints; a Housing Program with goals and policies; and a
background report highlighting demographics, resources, and a review of the accom-plishments
in implementing the previous Housing Element. The Tehama County Housing
Element has been completed as a separate process from the rest of the General Plan.
It has been adopted by the County and approved by the State.
11.0 Glossary of Terms
In order to define specific terms related to this General Plan, a Glossary of Terms has
been provided.
1.5 IMPLEMENTATION AND AMENDMENT
A General Plan is not intended to be a static document, enduring time without change.
Instead, the document should be regularly reviewed and amended as needed to meet
the needs of the County. A number of the policies and implementation measures con-tained
in this document may later be found to be unnecessary, or need strengthening
to meet the associated goal. The County should not shy away from keeping the plan
current and relevant to the citizens of Tehama County. The plan should be reviewed
annually, and the review should be a public process open to everyone. All groups
should be encouraged to participate, as should property owners, resource agencies,
ranchers and residents.
State law requires that an amendment to the General Plan occur after public hearings
before both the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Notices for these hear-ings
are published in a newspaper available to everyone. Policies in the Agricultural
Element specifically suggest that some changes to the plan have additional notification
procedures. The intent is not to make the process more difficult, but to ensure that the
dialog is complete and that both the Planning Commission and the Board have com-plete
information before they are asked to make related decisions.
2.0 LAND USE ELEMENT
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 1
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The Land Use Element of the General Plan establishes the goals, policies, and imple-mentation
measures that will help guide the growth and development of Tehama
County for the next 20 years. Tehama County has experienced a slow to moderate rate
of growth during the past 20 years but has seen increased interest and proposals for
new development in the past five years. This element, and the General Plan as a whole,
will help the County and its elected and appointed officials determine where, how and
to what degree increases in population can be accommodated.
In addition to the goals, policies and objectives contained within this Element, the Land
Use Element also contains the General Plan Land Use Diagram. The General Plan Land
Use Diagram delineates those areas of the County where future residential develop-ment,
of varying densities, and non- residential growth is anticipated, and/ or will be di-rected.
In some cases, these areas may reflect the expansion or growth of an existing
community or developed area of the County. In other cases, these areas may repre-sent
opportunities for the future expansion or creation of new communities within the
County.
Historically, growth has been located primarily in the central portion of County around
the incorporated cities and unincorporated developed communities, as well as along
Interstate 5 and Highways 99 E & W. Generally speaking, development within the estab-lished
communities of the County and near the various unincorporated communities
has been of a relatively compact nature, with lot- sizes conforming to County minimum
lot size standards. Conversely, development outside of the central corridor area is typi-fied
by larger lots and a more dispersed rural development pattern.
During the General Plan public participation process, residents generally agreed that
compatible infill and cluster development patterns within the more developed commu-nities
helped to maintain the rural character of the County, thereby protecting and pre-serving
the County’s rural character while maintaining the identities of the various
communities. The public participation process also recognized the importance of pro-viding
a balance between an increase in residential development and the provision of
non- residential services to support new growth.
LEGAL BASIS AND REQUIREMENTS
The Land Use Element is one of seven required elements mandated by State Law. Gov-ernment
Code Section 65302( a), requires that the General Plan include:
“… a land use element which designates the proposed general distribution and
general location and extent of all uses of the land including land for housing,
business, industry, open space, agriculture, natural resources, recreation and en-joyment
of scenic beauty, education, public buildings and grounds, solid and
liquid disposal facilities, and other categories of public and private uses of land.
The land use element shall include a statement of the standards of population
density and building intensity recommended for the various districts and other
territory covered by the plan. The land use element shall identify areas covered
by the plan which are subject to flooding and shall be reviewed annually with
respect to those areas.”
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 2 April 2007
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS
The Land Use Element has the broadest scope of the mandatory general plan ele-ments.
Because of this, the Element is often viewed as being the most representative of
the General Plan as a whole. However, all of the individual elements contained within
the General Plan are required to maintain consistency between all of the other individ-ual
elements contained within the General Plan. Because of the nature of the topics
addressed in the Land Use Element, all other elements of the General Plan overlap land
use issues and topics to varying degrees.
2.2 PLANNING HISTORY AND TRENDS
PLANNING HISTORY
Land use and development regulations in Tehama County are governed by various
codes, regulations, and policies. Over time, these policies and regulations have
evolved, but it was not until after World War II that Tehama County planning activities
really commenced. This was the time that the first Planning Commission was appointed,
which resulted in the first Zoning Enabling Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Setback
Ordinance, Master Plan of Parks and Recreation, and additional planning documents.
Since that time, the County has revised these planning documents at various stages to
reflect the changing conditions and times. The following are the major planning and
land use documents and their respective history:
• Tehama County Zoning Ordinance – The most recent zoning ordinance was re-vised
and adopted in 1983.
• Tehama County General Plan – In 1962, the first Tehama County General Plan
was completed and incorporated the essential elements of a General Plan to
ensure for orderly growth and development. This plan was revised in 1970 and
included sections on land use, circulation, recreation, and public services and
facilities. Again, four years later, the General Plan was revised and included sec-tions
on conservation, open space, safety, seismic safety, noise, and scenic
highways. The most recent version of the General Plan was adopted in 1983.
• Tehama County Housing Element – The first housing element was adopted in
1971.
• Tehama County Subdivision Ordinance – The most recent subdivision ordinance
was revised and adopted in 1975.
EXISTING LAND BASE
Tehama County covers an area of approximately 2,957 square miles, or approximately
1,892,500 acres. Of the lands in Tehama County, the Federal Government manages
approximately 26 percent. Approximately 74 percent is in private ownership. Much of
the land in the County is resource- based, taking the form of cropland, rangeland, pas-ture
land and woodland.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 3
TABLE 2- 1
LAND OWNERSHIP, TEHAMA COUNTY
LAND OWNERSHIP ACRES PERCENT OF TOTAL
LAND AREA
Federal
Mendocino National Forest 114,188.0 6.0%
Lassen Volcanic National Park 4,191.0 0.2%
Lassen National Forest 181,491.0 9.6%
Shasta- Trinity National Forest 76,515.0 4.0%
Bureau of Land Management 49,493.0 2.6%
Native American 1,984.0 0.1%
Other 61,198.0 3.2%
Total 489,060 25.7%
State, County, and Municipal 8,176.0 0.4%
Private 1,395,264.0 73.7%
Total all land 1,892,500 100.0 1
Source: Tehama County General Plan; Tehama County Assessor’s Office; Bureau of Land
Management; U. S. Forest Service
Note: 1) Percentage total does not equal exactly 100% due to rounding
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 4 April 2007
TABLE 2- 2
GENERAL PLAN ACREAGE BY LAND USE TYPE
LAND USE DESIGNATION ACRES
Residential
Rural Large Lot 25,203.9
Rural Small Lot 35,472.8
Suburban 14,904.8
Urban 1,797.2
Commercial
Commercial Recreation 180.0
General Commercial 1,152.2
Industrial
General Industrial 3,348.0
Agricultural
Upland Agriculture 666,285.6
Valley Floor Agriculture 357,938.8
Resource
Timber 239,447.8
Habitat Resource 7,345.7
Resource Lands 12,443.3
Public 488,181.9
Miscellaneous
Public Facilities 667.7
Tribal 1,984.8
Water 2,084.5
City 7,764.8
Special Plan ( Overlay Designation)
Special Plan/ General Commercial 1,108.7
Special Plan/ Public 195.8
Special Plan/ Habitat Resource 27.9
Special Plan/ Rural Large Lot 785.5
Special Plan/ Rural Small Lot 4,330.6
Special Plan/ Suburban 10,916.6
Special Plan/ Valley Floor Agricultural 6,295.7
Source: Vestra Resources, Inc.
2.3 EXISTING LAND USE SETTING
Tehama County is largely rural in nature, with isolated pockets of population primarily
concentrated along the valley’s major transportation corridors. As the County extends
westward and eastward from these populated areas and into the County’s margins,
large ranches and government land holdings dominate the terrain.
The existing land use pattern within Tehama County consists primarily of a combination
of upland agricultural, exclusive agricultural, and public lands. As stated previously, the
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 5
major incorporated and unincorporated developed areas within Tehama County are
located in or adjacent to major county or state transportation corridors, the majority of
which are located near Interstate 5 and Highway 99 E & W.
Additionally, commercial land uses for the most part occur along these major State and
County roadways, most of which are located in Red Bluff, Corning, and Los Molinos.
Residential land uses within the developed portions of the County often tend to be lo-cated
behind or beyond the commercial and service uses that are directly adjacent to
the major street network.
2.4 LAND USE ISSUES AND VALUES
Throughout the General Plan preparation process, numerous community and planning
advisory group meetings were held to obtain comments and input from interested resi-dents,
groups, and decision- makers. In total, ten public meetings were held throughout
the County with an attendance of approximately 402 persons. During these meetings,
participants were able to express their opinions and provide comments regarding land
uses and the future of Tehama County. The following is a condensed list of the issues
and concerns, which were identified throughout these meetings:
• Requests to allow smaller minimum lot sizes.
• Concerns about increased urbanization.
• Conditions of area roads and impacts to area roads and I- 5 due to increased
growth.
• Concerns with growth in the Lake California area.
• Loss of ranching and agricultural lands.
• Lack of infrastructure to accommodate future growth.
• Requirements for new regulations for retention ponds.
• Increased requirements for and restrictions on natural gas wells.
• Requests for parks/ community centers.
• Increased fire safety.
These community comments serve an important purpose in the General Plan process. In
addition to providing valuable insight about the area and residents’ beliefs and values,
they assist in the preparation of County- wide goals and policies that are incorporated
into the General Plan.
2.5 PLANNING AREAS
The Tehama County General Plan divides the County into five planning areas:
• North I- 5 Corridor
• Central I- 5 Corridor
• South I- 5 Corridor
• Eastern Planning Area
• Western Planning Area
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 6 April 2007
These planning areas are illustrated in Figure 2.0- 1. Each planning area is unique and
offers different patterns and levels of development. The following discussion details the
five planning areas and addresses the development pattern for each area. Land use
policies for these planning areas are outlined following the County- wide goals, policies,
and implementation measures below.
NORTH I- 5 CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA
The North I- 5 Corridor Planning Area is located in the north- central portion of the County
along the Interstate- 5 corridor. It includes the City of Red Bluff, the Lake California
planned community, and the unincorporated Bowman Area. Other unincorporated
communities within the planning area include the community of Bend and the Dibble
Creek area. The development pattern for this area reflects its role in accommodating a
significant portion of the growth projected for the County.
Numerous large master- planned communities and developments are proposed within
this corridor. Projects in this area include: the proposed Del Webb community of Sun
City Tehama, which is projected to add approximately 3,300 new dwelling units upon
buildout; the Rolling Hills project, consisting of a plan for 80 residential dwelling units and
various local and regional commercial land uses; the Sunset Hills project, planned to
contain 800 residential dwelling units; the Lake California planned community, currently
consisting of 2,500 planned residential units and various support commercial uses; and
the proposed Morgan Ranch project, which is proposed to add approximately 3,950
residential units and approximately 200,000 square feet of retail commercial develop-ment.
While much of the North I- 5 Planning Area is planned to accommodate a large portion
of the growth in the County within the next 20 years, the planning area provides for the
maintenance of the “ status quo” in the community of Bend. Within and around the
community of Bend, existing croplands would be maintained and residential develop-ment
would be limited to a combination of rural residential and large- and small- lot
land uses.
Located throughout the North I- 5 planning area to the west of Interstate- 5 and to the
north of Red Bluff are several large existing subdivisions that are generally characterized
by 10- acre or larger lots and are served by gravel roads. Development within this area is
anticipated to continue at a slower rate of buildout.
Outside of the communities mentioned above, grazing and undeveloped open lands
are the dominant land uses in this planning area. Grazing lands are located in the
northern half of the planning area, both east and west of Interstate 5. In addition to their
important function as an agricultural resource, grazing lands also provide an important
open space resource. Additionally, the Sacramento River is identified as an important
natural resource in this planning area.
Road access within the North I- 5 Planning Area is provided in a north- south direction
primarily by Hooker Creek Road, Jelly’s Ferry Road and Interstate 5. East- west travel is
provided by several major and minor collectors, as well as smaller local roads, including
Bowman Road, Lake California Drive and Highway 36 W.
As indicated above, the North I- 5 Planning Area is intended to accommodate a large
portion of growth within the County over the next 20 years. As a result, new roadways
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 7
will need to be constructed to provide alternative and parallel routes to the use of I- 5
for local area traffic movement.
As can be seen in Figure 3.0- 2 of the Circulation Element, substantial new roadways
and new linkages will be required within the North I- 5 area. New facilities would include
a southerly exit out of Lake California, as well as new roads providing a connection be-tween
Jelly’s Ferry Road and Lake California Drive. In addition, a new east- west con-nector
street at the Hooker Creek Road intersection is proposed.
CENTRAL I- 5 CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA
This planning area is located within the central portion of the County, south of Red Bluff
and generally north of Corning along Intestate 5 and Highway 99 E & W. It includes the
City of Tehama and the communities of Proberta, Gerber, Dairyville, and Los Molinos.
This Planning Area contains large areas of orchards and tree crops and the General
Plan reflects the need to preserve this area of highly- valuable soil resources. Future ur-ban
residential and commercial development would be directed towards the existing
communities. The General Plan land use concept for this area focuses on the mainte-nance
of higher density residential areas, with local and regional commercial uses an-ticipated
to serve area growth. Surrounding the higher- density land use in the core ar-eas,
land use would become less intensive transitioning into crop and grazing lands.
The basis for this concept is to preserve the abundance of highly valuable and produc-tive
agricultural soils deposited on the valley floor by the historic Sacramento River
floodplain. Large portions of this planning area are held under Williamson Act contracts.
In addition to the value of the area for agricultural purposes, land along the river pro-vides
valuable habitat for a wide variety of wildlife and provides abundant outdoor rec-reation
opportunities.
Road access within the Central I- 5 Planning Area is provided by six primary north- south
roads: State Routes 99E and 99W, San Benito Avenue, Rawson Road, Hall Road and In-terstate
5. East- west travel is provided by several major and minor collectors as well as
smaller local roads including Gyle Road and Flores Avenue.
SOUTH I- 5 CORRIDOR PLANNING AREA
This planning area is located in the southern portion of the County and includes the in-corporated
City of Corning and the unincorporated communities of Richfield and Vina.
The predominant land use in this planning area is agriculture. Croplands extend along
both sides of the length of the Sacramento River and cover extensive portions of the
planning area. Richfield and Vina are surrounded by cropland and grazing lands.
Grazing lands occur toward the periphery of the planning area. Additional lands with
substantial resource values include sites of mineral extraction along Thomes Creek and
the riparian and habitat resources along the Sacramento River.
Most of the population growth for this planning area is projected to occur and will be
accommodated within the City of Corning and in the area directly east of the City to-wards
the Sacramento River.
Road access within the South I- 5 Corridor Planning Area is provided by four major north-south
roads: State Routes 99E and 99W, Black Butte Road and Interstate 5. East- west
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 8 April 2007
travel is provided by several major and minor collectors as well as smaller local roads
including South Avenue and Corning Road.
EAST COUNTY PLANNING AREA
This planning area is located in the eastern portion of the County and includes the unin-corporated
communities of Manton, Mineral, Paynes Creek, and Ponderosa Sky Ranch.
This area is typically characterized by large tracts of public land, land under timber pre-serve
contracts, and large holdings utilized primarily for grazing. Limited growth oppor-tunities,
primarily resulting from the limited availability of services, are provided for in and
near the existing communities.
Road access within the East County Planning Area is primarily provided by four state
highways. State Highway 36, which runs east- west across the northern portion of the
County, is the primary vehicular route of travel in northeastern Tehama County. State
Highways 89 and 172 also serve as localized traffic routes in the northeast portion of the
County. State Route 32, located along the southeast boundary of the County, provides
access to the southwestern portion of the County. The primary County Road in the
northern portion of the County is Manton Road, which provides access to the commu-nity
of Manton, located off of State Highway 36.
WEST COUNTY PLANNING AREA
This planning area is located in the western portion of the County and includes the
communities of Paskenta, Flournoy, Henleyville, and the Rancho Tehama subdivision.
Similar to the Eastern Planning Area, this area supports large land areas held in public
ownership, timber preserve, and lands utilized for grazing. Most of the growth in this area
is directed towards the community of Paskenta and the Rancho Tehama subdivision.
Road access within the West County Planning Area is provided primarily by State High-way
36, which runs east- west across the northern portion of the County. The primary
east- west running County Roads in the West County Planning Area are Paskenta Road,
Lowery/ Red Bank Roads, Reeds Creek Road and Cannon Road. Currently, there are no
improved north- south roadways within the West County Planning Area.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 9
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 10 April 2007
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 11
2.6 COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
Throughout Tehama County, diverse communities that provide unique services are im-portant
to the overall lifestyle of the County. Within the General Plan, these communities
are recognized and divided into four primary groups. Each of these groups is distinct in
the services and lifestyle they provide. They are defined as follows:
• Urban Centers ( Incorporated) – This type of community provides the full range of
urban services within the boundary of an incorporated city. There are two urban
centers in Tehama County: Red Bluff and Corning. Urban services include:
community water distribution systems and wastewater treatment; full- time police
and fire service; public facilities, including libraries and schools; and emergency
medical services. Urban centers function as major employment and retail trade
centers and have access to major transportation routes and rail lines. The Gen-eral
Plan recognizes the function of urban centers by locating rail- served indus-trial
land uses in proximity to Southern Pacific rail access points. Also, commercial
land uses have been sited in areas where major residential growth is planned,
thereby reducing trip lengths to meet commercial and service needs.
Overall, residential living opportunities in urban centers range from single- family
detached housing on large lots within suburban neighborhoods, to multi- family
apartments or condominium complexes. In Tehama County, an urban
neighborhood could be described as a contiguous developed area, with dwell-ing
units on building sites which are served by sewer and water systems, includ-ing
features such as streetlights, sidewalks, curbs, and gutters.
• Town Centers ( Unincorporated and Incorporated) – Town centers are similar to
urban centers, with the primary distinction being that town centers are generally
not within incorporated areas. The City of Tehama is the exception to this distinc-tion.
There are four town centers within Tehama County, including Lake Califor-nia,
Los Molinos, Gerber, and the City of Tehama.
County governments or special districts provide public services in town centers.
The level of service available varies from town center to town center. For exam-ple,
Lake California has a wastewater treatment facility whereas the residents of
Los Molinos and Tehama rely on septic tanks. Generally, the level of service
available in town centers is less than that found in urban centers. Potential ser-vices
could include: small community water systems, schools, law enforcement
through the Tehama County Sheriff’s Department, and fire protection through
paid and volunteer fire personnel.
Town centers function as secondary trade centers and contain commercial ar-eas
of smaller scales than those typically found in urban centers. Residential
neighborhoods contain the same variety of housing types found in urban cen-ters,
though the scale of the built environment is much lower and natural fea-tures
are more prominent in the landscape.
• Rural Community Centers ( Unincorporated) – Rural community centers provide
only a few of the basic services that are normally provided by urban or town
centers. Varying levels of service, including wastewater treatment and water
services, are found throughout the rural community centers. Most rural commu-nity
centers contain schools and often require school bus service to transport
children. Additional services that can be found in rural community centers in-
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 12 April 2007
clude law enforcement by the County Sheriff and fire protection by volunteer
fire companies. Commercial services available in rural community centers are
small- scale in nature and provide services specific to local residents. There are
six rural community centers within Tehama County, which include Bowman,
Bend, Manton, Mineral, Paynes Creek, Rancho Tehama, and Ponderosa Sky
Ranch.
In rural community centers, the natural environment is emphasized over the built envi-ronment,
which is part of the draw to these communities. Access to and use of the
natural environment for recreational purposes is an important component of commu-nity
character. In addition to providing recreational opportunities, the natural setting
also serves as a resource base for agriculture, timber, and tourism.
Due to the limited services available in rural community centers and the extent of sur-rounding
resource lands, limited population growth can be accommodated in these
areas. Lot sizes and residential development are dependent on the services available.
The concept of smaller developed lots to larger rural lots within rural community centers
allows for an opportunity to meet lifestyle objectives. The physical design and standards
in these areas are typically less stringent than those in town or urban centers.
• Rural Service Centers ( Unincorporated) – Rural service centers provide a small
number of “ convenience” services and products, which are tailored to residents
who live within and near these centers. Limited public services including
schools, sheriff, and fire protection are provided within these centers. Most often,
residents need to travel to urban or town centers in order to meet their primary
retail and commercial needs. Rural service centers within Tehama County in-clude:
Dairyville, Flournoy, Paskenta, Proberta, Richfield, and Vina.
The physical surroundings of the environment as well as the valuable agricultural lands
of adjacent parcels limit growth in these areas. Therefore, the residential living opportu-nities
vary greatly from center to center. To encourage compact development of these
service centers, the land use plan provides local convenience commercial centers.
Table 2- 3 identifies the community type, service availability, and the employ-ment/
economic function of each of the communities within Tehama County.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 13
TABLE 2- 3
COMMUNITY TYPES BY COUNTY COMMUNITIES
COMMUNITY
TYPE
APPLICABLE
COMMUNITIES
INCORPORATION
STATUS SERVICES
EMPLOYMENT/
ECONOMIC
FUNCTION
Red Bluff Yes
Urban Center
Corning Yes
All urban services Major employment
and retail trade center
Tehama Yes
Los Molinos No
Lake California No
Town Center
Gerber No
Most urban services
Secondary employ-ment
and retail trade
center
Bowman No
Bend No
Manton No
Mineral No
Paynes Creek No
Ponderosa Sky Ranch No
Rural Community Center
Rancho Tehama No
On- site wastewater
treatment ( Mineral has
limited community col-lection);
on- site or
shared water systems
Minor employment
with limited or no retail
trade
Dairyville No
Proberta No
Vina No
Richfield No
Flournoy No
Paskenta No
Kirkwood No
Rural Service Center
Capay No
Limited or no urban
services
Minor employment,
little or no retail trade,
primarily agricultural
and agricultural-related
support
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 14 April 2007
2.7 LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
To translate the goals, objectives and policies of the Land Use Element into graphical or
map form, a set of land use designations must be adopted to serve as a guide for des-ignating
the General Plan land use distribution. Each land use designation has been de-fined
and its purpose stated. Uses that would typically be permitted in each designation
are identified and density and building intensity standards for each are established.
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
The Tehama County General Plan land use designations are described below. Existing
uses have greatly influenced the designation of land uses within the County. The goals
and policies established within other General Plan elements have also guided the as-signment
of land use designations. A range of physical constraints and development
issues have been considered, and the land use diagram and land use designations pre-sent
a workable plan for achieving the County’s land use goals. In addition to the de-velopment
densities that are described below, the General Plan observes limits to the
amount or intensity of development that will be allowed in areas of future develop-ment.
The following descriptions apply to the land uses designated on the General Plan Land
Use Diagrams.
Agriculture
As agriculture is the dominant land use in Tehama County, it is the intent of the two Ag-ricultural
Land Use Classifications ( Upland Agriculture and Valley Floor Agriculture) to
provide for and designate lands for continuing agricultural use. The preservation and
protection of agricultural land uses, including timberland, grazing areas and orchards,
are necessary to ensure the long- term well being of agriculture in the County.
There are three categories of land use designations that recognize, and are associated
with, Agriculture: Upland Agriculture, Valley Floor Agriculture, and Timber.
Upland Agriculture ( UA):
Definition and Purpose. The Upland Agriculture land use designation is used to preserve
lands capable of supporting grazing activities; provide for areas of intensive and exten-sive
agriculturally- compatible uses; identify and conserve areas of important open
space, recreation, scenic, and natural value; and to accommodate the use of land for
compatible non- agricultural uses to include commercial recreation, hunting and fishing,
resource protection and management and habitat management.
On the western side of Tehama County, the Upland Agriculture land use designation is
generally located along a north- south running boundary, approximately 8 miles west of
I- 5, in the northern portion of the County. This designation runs south along the eastern
side of Rancho Tehama and generally follows Black Butte Road to the southern bound-ary
of the County. On the eastern side of the County, the Upland Agriculture land use
designation is generally located along a north- south running line, located east of Te-hama
and Vina and Foothill Roads, and runs along the Sacramento River north of
Highway 36. See Figure 2.0- 2, Land Use Map.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 15
General Uses. The primary use of land in this designation is for the grazing of livestock.
Secondary uses include: tree, row, and field crops; farming; animal husbandry; diaries;
nurseries and greenhouses; commercial recreation, including hunting and fishing; min-eral
exploration; and residential uses supporting agricultural and commercial recreation
operations.
Minimum Parcel Size. Williamson Act Contracted and Non- Contract Lands: 160 gross
acres.
Maximum Dwelling Density. One dwelling unit per legal parcel. County review and ap-proval
is required for more than one dwelling or structure per legally created parcel.
Valley Floor Agriculture ( VFA):
Definition and Purpose. The Valley Floor Agriculture classification is intended to be ap-plied
to lands which are suited for, and are appropriately retained for, the production of
orchard and field crops. The classification includes lands with present or future potential
for significant agricultural production, availability of water, and on which contiguous or
intermixed smaller parcels having non- compatible uses could jeopardize the agricul-tural
use of agricultural lands. Permitted non- agricultural uses, to the greatest extent
possible, should not occur on lands that might otherwise be devoted to agricultural
production.
General Uses. Residential uses accessory to an agricultural use; grazing; processing and
sale of agricultural products; uses determined to be related to, and compatible with,
agriculture; conservation; processing and development of natural resources; commer-cial
recreation; and mineral exploration.
Minimum Parcel Size. Williamson Act Contracted Lands: 40 gross acres.
Non- Contract Lands: 20 gross acres.
Maximum Dwelling Density. One dwelling per legal parcel. County review and approval
is required for more than one dwelling or structure per legally created parcel.
Timber:
Definition and Purpose. Tehama County recognizes the value of its timber resources by
affording protection through the use of Timberland Production Zoning ( TPZ). Virtually all
of the County’s timber resources are protected from conversion to other uses and from
adjacent land use conflict under the TPZ provisions. The Timber Land Use Designation is
intended to apply to those properties and lands having Timber Preserve Contracts.
General Uses. Uses permitted under this designation include: uses integrally related to
the growing, harvesting and processing of forest products; management for watershed;
fire and erosion control; management for fish and wildlife habitat; grazing; camp-grounds;
outdoor recreation; and dwellings subject to a conditional use permit. Addi-tional
uses may be determined by the planning director to be consistent and compati-ble
with the foregoing uses and the Timberland Productivity Act of 1982, as amended
Minimum Parcel Size. 80 gross acres, or 40 gross acres, provided it is a part of at least
eighty ( 80) acres of contiguous timberland zoned TPZ, for which a single joint timber
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 16 April 2007
management plan has been prepared, as required by the Timberland Productivity Act
of 1982, as amended.
Maximum Dwelling Density. Only those dwelling units that existed on the parcel prior to
being identified in a TPZ district are allowed, or dwellings found by the Planning Com-mission
to be compatible with the management, growing, harvesting or processing of
forest products.
Residential
Residential uses can vary widely in development intensity. Characteristics of develop-ment
intensity are: the number of dwelling units per acre; the number of people per
dwelling unit; and dwelling height and dwelling coverage per acre. These and other
factors combine to create distinctive living environments.
Residential land use designations in Tehama County are divided into four classifications
based on dwelling unit density and corresponding population density: Rural Residential
Large Lot, Rural Residential Small Lot, Suburban Residential and Urban Residential.
Rural Residential- Large Lot:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this land use designation is to provide for living envi-ronments
that receive no urban services and are located in areas of the County that
are characterized by: a proximity to timber, grazing, or croplands; uncertain long- term
availability of water; remoteness from rural service centers or rural residential community
centers; severe limitations on septic tank use; and inaccessibility via County maintained
roads.
General Uses. Single family dwellings, guest cottages, crop and tree farming, grazing,
nurseries and greenhouses, stables, parks and open space.
Minimum Parcel Size. 10 gross acres.
Maximum Dwelling Density. One ( 1) single- family detached dwelling unit per 10- acre
parcel or one dwelling unit per legal parcel. Additional residential units may be allowed
pursuant to CA Government Code 65852.2.
Rural Residential- Small Lot:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this land use designation is to provide for living envi-ronments
that receive only limited or no urban services and are located within rural ser-vice
centers or clearly defined rural residential communities.
General Uses. Single- family dwellings, guest cottages, crop and tree farming, nurseries
and greenhouses, stables, parks and open space.
Minimum Parcel Size. 2 gross acres.
Maximum Dwelling Density. This classification allows for the development of one ( 1) sin-gle-
family detached dwelling unit per 2- acre parcel or one dwelling unit per legal par-cel.
Additional residential units may be allowed pursuant to CA Government Code
65852.2.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 17
Suburban Residential:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this land use designation is to provide for living envi-ronments
that are located in close proximity to urban areas. These areas should have
access to many or all urban services.
General Uses. Uses permitted under this designation include: single- family detached
and semi- detached dwellings with single- family attached, two units, and multi- family
attached, at a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre, conditionally permitted.
Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size is 10,500 square feet ( 1/ 4- acre minimum).
Maximum Dwelling Density. This classification allows for a density of not less than 1 dwell-ing
unit per 2- acre parcel and not more than 4 dwelling units per acre, or one dwelling
unit per legal parcel.
Urban Residential:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this land use designation is to provide for living envi-ronments
that have access to all urban services.
General Uses. Uses permitted under this designation include single- family and multi-family
dwelling units.
Minimum Parcel Size. The minimum parcel size is 5,000 square feet,
Maximum Dwelling Density. This classification allows for development at a density of not
less than 3 dwelling units per acre and not more than 16 dwelling units per acre, or one
dwelling unit per legal parcel.
Commercial
Commercial land uses include office buildings, retail sales, personal services, and com-mercial
services. Varying levels of commercial uses and services are allowed in the
three categories of commercial land use designations; Neighborhood Center, General
Commercial, and Commercial Recreation. A description of these categories is as fol-lows,
including permitted uses, services, and general development standards.
Neighborhood Center:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this land use designation is to provide a limited se-lection
of convenience goods within either walking distance or brief driving distance for
residents.
General Uses. The primary use is typically a small grocery store, possibly supplemented
by a gas station. This land use designation also includes small restaurants and/ or bars.
Additionally, this designation provides for a selection of agricultural supplies and ser-vices
necessary to support the needs of agricultural activities such as the sale of agricul-turally-
related construction materials and supplies, agricultural and farm equipment and
supplies, feed and grain supplies, and agricultural related service providers.
Location Requirements. Local convenience is intended to be located along arterials,
major collector streets, or at the junction of an arterial and collector typically in rural
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 18 April 2007
service centers. The market area required to support these services is typically a popula-tion
of 250 to 500 persons within approximately two to three minutes driving time, with
no other convenience center within the market area. Market areas for agricultural ser-vices
vary according to level of agricultural or forestry activity in the area and proximity
to urban areas.
Size and Scale. Typical size varies from 1,500 to 5,000 square feet of retail space on ap-proximately
1/ 8 to 1/ 2- acre. However, projects may vary in size from this size and scale
standard, as stated above, based upon location attributes, characteristics of surround-ing
land uses, and unique or local circumstances.
General Commercial:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this land use designation is to provide for a wide
range of goods and services, as required by residents or businesses, that are inappropri-ate
in community or neighborhood centers due to size or operating characteristics, or
are not economically feasible in such centers.
General Uses. Example of uses includes the sale of construction and building materials,
auto parts, construction equipment, and trucks and automobiles. Services include ve-hicular
repair, plumbing, electrical, and fabrication of woods or metals.
Location Requirements. General commercial uses are intended to be located along
arterial streets or in conjunction with business parks.
Size and Scale. Typical sizes vary based on market area and include the following: 1)
Up to 25,000 square feet of retail space on a site up to 2.5 acres in area for a population
of between 4,000 and 7,500 persons within in a five minute driving time; 2) up to 50,000
square feet of retail space on a site up to 5 acres in area, for a population between
15,000 to 30,000 persons within a ten minute driving time. However, projects may vary in
size from the “ typical” size and scale standard stated above based upon location at-tributes,
characteristics of surrounding land uses, and unique or local circumstances.
Commercial Recreation:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this land use designation is to provide for the de-velopment
of privately- owned lands in areas that have exceptional recreation re-sources
( e. g. forests, rivers, reservoirs) for the purpose of providing commercial recrea-tion
services to the public.
General Uses. To provide commercial recreation services to the public.
Location Requirements. This land use is intended to be located in close proximity to ex-ceptional
recreation resources.
Size and Scale. Size and scale depends upon both the size and type of resource.
Industrial
Industrial land uses typically involve processing, handling, and manufacturing of prod-ucts.
General Industrial is the only industrial land use classification designated in Tehama
County. This land use designation is described below:
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 19
General Industrial:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of this classification to provide for industrial land uses,
including light and heavy manufacturing, industrial parks, support wholesale energy
production, related office uses, and industrial uses of similar character. This designation
allows for non- industrial firms that provide materials and services related to industrial
uses. Additional non- industrial uses may be permitted on an interim basis with conditions
that provide for reversion to industrial uses.
General Uses. Examples of uses include light to heavy manufacturing, fabrication, stor-age
and warehousing, processing of goods and resources, energy facilities, equipment
sales and storage yards, business and office parks and other such uses which because
of their operations, may create noise, light or glare, dust or odor which are not com-patible
with residential or service and retail commercial uses. Non- accessory residential
uses shall be strongly discouraged.
Location Requirements. General Industrial should be located in proximity to I- 5 or Hwy.
99 W corridors and their access points, in order to provide opportunities for highway-dependent
industrial uses.
Size and Scale. Areas designated with the General Industrial land use designation shall
not cover more than 75% of the site and shall provide adequate areas for on- site park-ing,
waste disposal and storm drainage ( as applicable). Outdoor storage areas shall be
screened from public view.
Site Planning Requirements. Residential and retail commercial land uses adjacent to
General Industrial uses shall require a site- appropriate buffer to offset potential impacts
to and from the adjacent land use.
Natural Resource Lands
Natural resource lands have been set aside in order to protect and preserve the abun-dant
natural resources of the County, and to provide for the recreational and aesthetic
enjoyment of the County’s residents. The value of natural resource lands lie in their di-versity.
These lands are significant contributors to County economy ( tourism); enhance
the quality of the environment ( plant and animal habitat, watershed, water quality);
provide buffers between conflicting land uses; contribute to the County’s scenic
beauty; and enhance the quality of life experience in Tehama County. This land use
includes the following land use designations: Habitat Resource and Resource Lands.
Habitat Resources:
Definition and Purpose. Intended for the protection and preservation of the County’s
wildlife resources, to prevent their wasteful destruction, and to recognize their ecologi-cal,
recreational, and aesthetic values.
General Use. Lands in this designation shall remain in their natural states, yet allow low
intensity recreational activities such as hiking or nature study, if these activities do not
threaten the integrity of the habitat.
Criteria. This designation is applied primarily to areas adjacent to the Sacramento River
that are considered to be of ecological or aesthetic value.
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 20 April 2007
Planning Considerations. Due to the sensitive nature of wildlife resources, the impacts of
inadequately planned development can be disruptive to wildlife habitats. Land use
regulations limiting the use of such areas are very effective in terms of habitat preserva-tion,
yet frequently conflict with the land use plans of private property owners. As such,
the protection of wildlife habitat must be balanced with the rights of private property
owners to develop their property. As a result, full environmental reviews shall be required
for all proposed new developments in this land use designation.
Resource Lands:
Definition and Purpose. This land use designation is intended to protect the natural re-source
base of Tehama County for its economic, aesthetic and ecological value.
General Use. Land uses would be limited to very large lot rural residences subject to de-velopment
regulations. No residential uses are allowed in this designation without a use
permit.
Criteria. This designation would be applied to private lands with limited value as timber-land,
grazing land, or cropland, but with general value as an open space resource.
These lands are also characterized by limited road access and public facilities/ services,
and moderate to severe geographic hazards ( slope, soil stability, etc.)
Planning Considerations. Residential development on Resource Lands shall be limited to
single- family detached residences with a use permit. Minimum parcel sizes for division
would be 160 acres.
Other
Public Facility:
Definition and Purpose. The Public Facility classification is intended to be applied to
lands presently being used for major public service facilities, and lands appropriately
reserved for expansion of, or construction of, new public- serving facilities.
General Use. Parks, recreation areas, schools, fairgrounds, civic centers and similar sites
and uses, public forest and reservoirs, public utilities facilities including solid waste land-fills,
and historical and cultural sites and monuments.
Minimum Parcel Size. Not applicable
Special Planning:
Definition and Purpose. The intent of the SP – Special Planning land use overlay designa-tion
is to provide for, and identify, areas in the County that require or would benefit from
the development of detailed planning efforts such as the preparation of Specific
and/ or Master Plans. These areas may include areas of large land holdings that could
be developed as large planned communities, and/ or areas proposed for development
that are not currently served by roadways or community services that would benefit
from detailed planning efforts.
In these areas, the preparation of Specific Plans and Master Plans would benefit future
development by providing a cohesive and planned program of roadway and public
service improvements to assure that growth is undertaken in a logical and orderly fash-
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 21
ion. It is contemplated that, within an area designated with the Special Planning over-lay
designation, higher density development may be achieved to balance the costs of
increased services that will be expected. Where Specific Plans or similar Master Plans
are not prepared, the County shall work with landowners to assure that development
does not preclude future planning efforts or result in inadequate right- of- ways or access.
The primary areas designated with the SP – Special Planning land use designation in-clude
large single- owner or contiguous tracts of land primarily located in the North I- 5
Corridor Planning Area. This area was identified for application of the SP – Special Plan-ning
land use overlay designation, due to factors that include: the area land ownership
pattern; topographical opportunities and constraints; reduced natural resource and
protected species concerns; the reduced potential for agricultural operations due to
geology and soils types; and the lack of existing development within the area.
Consistent with the intent of the SP – Special Planning land use overlay designation,
various property owners have prepared Conceptual Land Use Plans that have been
included in the Tehama County General Plan ( see Appendix A – Concept Land Use
Plans). The preparation and inclusion of these plans is intended to show the conceptual
land use intentions of the owners of these properties and to provide an opportunity for
advance planning efforts in and around the areas for which Conceptual Plans have
been prepared. Through the preparation of these Conceptual Land Use Plans and their
inclusion as a part of this document, County residents, property owners, County staff
and County decision- makers can make informed decisions about land use through an
understanding of area- wide land use intent.
The inclusion of the various Conceptual Land Use Plans as appendices to this document
is not intended to confer or convey any advanced approval or consent to the various
properties or their plans, and is not intended to infer or suggest that such development
intent will be achieved in the near- term. Those areas for which a Conceptual Land Use
Plan has been included are still required to fulfill the obligations and requirements of the
various master planning approaches that will define and provide the specific analysis
and details necessary to prove that such plans can be carried out as conceptually
proposed.
Those properties and/ or geographic areas for which Conceptual Land Use Plans have
been included as Appendix A in this document are as follows:
• Morgan Ranch
• Battle Creek Ranch
• Sunset Hills Estates
• Moore Ranch
• Jelly’s Ferry South ( three variations)
Additionally, properties and/ or geographic areas for which Specific/ Master Plans have
been included as Appendix B in this document are as follows:
• Sun City Tehama
• Lake California Master Plan
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 22 April 2007
Water:
Definition and Purpose. The Water land use designation refers to the large bodies of wa-ter
in the County, including Black Butte Lake and the Sacramento River.
Non- Jurisdictional
City:
Areas with the “ City” land use designation represent incorporated areas under the juris-diction
of either the cities of Corning, Tehama, or Red Bluff. The County has no land use
authority over these areas.
Public:
The Public land use designation represents those lands under the jurisdiction of a federal
or state agency such as Lassen National Forest, Lassen Volcanic National Park, U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, Department of Fish and Game,
Shasta- Trinity National Forest, and the Bureau of Reclamation ( i. e. Black Butte Lake).
Tribal:
The Tribal land use designation represents Native American tribal lands. These lands are
under the jurisdiction and authority of a Native American tribe and the County has no
authority over these lands.
Table 2- 4 generally illustrates the land use designations applicable to the four commu-nity
types.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 23
TABLE 2- 4
LAND USE DESIGNATION BY COMMUNITY TYPES
COMMUNITY TYPE
LAND USE DESIGNATION URBAN
CENTER
TOWN
CENTER
RURAL
COMMUNITY
CENTER
RURAL
SERVICE
CENTER
Residential
Urban X X
Suburban X X
Rural Residential Small Lot X X
Rural Residential Large Lot X X
Commercial
Commercial Recreation X X
General Commercial X X
Neighborhood Center X X X X
Industrial
General Industrial X X
Miscellaneous
Public Facility X X X X
Special Planning X X
Natural Resources
Habitat Resources X X X X
Resource Lands X X X X
Open Space X X X X
Scenic Easement X X X X
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 24 April 2007
2.8 LAND USE DIAGRAM
This Section presents the Land Use Diagram – Figure 2.0- 2. The diagram is intended to: 1)
graphically define the land area that is allocated for each land use designation; 2) pre-sent
the land use plan for the County of Tehama in an easy to understand format; and
3) show the relationship of land use patterns throughout the County.
The Land Use Diagram depicts the distribution of land uses throughout the County,
thereby utilizing the land use classifications set forth in Section 2.7, Land Use Designa-tions.
The Diagram is composed of several parts in order to aid readability. A county-wide
diagram, Figure 2.0- 2, encompasses the entire county, including its communities.
Individual Community Diagrams are also provided in this Section as Figures 2.0- 3
through 2.0- 12. The Community Maps are provided for specific areas of the County to
provide enhanced readability and to allow for the more precise identification of land
uses within each community that may not be available from the overall Countywide
map due to scale. The planned land uses for the incorporated cities of the County ( Red
Bluff, Corning and Tehama) are not shown on the County’s Land Use Diagram and ref-erence
should be made to the respective City plans for this information.
While an attempt has been made to follow parcel lines and major geographical fea-tures
to the extent possible on the various Land Use Diagrams, it must be recognized
that the land use designations depicted on these diagrams are not required to be as
precise or as specific as zoning maps, and allowance is made for some interpretation
based upon site- specific information.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 25
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 26 April 2007
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 27
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 28 April 2007
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 29
Figures 2.0- 4 to 2.0- 13: Community Land Use Diagram
Figure 2.0- 4: Vina
Figure 2.0- 5: Paskenta
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 30 April 2007
Figure 2.0- 6: Rancho Tehama
Figure 2.0- 7: Los Molinos
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 31
Figure 2.0- 8: Gerber
Figure 2.0- 9: Mineral
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 32 April 2007
Figure 2.0- 10: Dairyville
Figure 2.0- 11: Manton
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 33
Figure 2.0- 12: Antelope
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 34 April 2007
Figure 2.0- 13: Lake California
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 35
GENERAL PLAN / ZONING RELATIONSHIP
In addition to maintaining consistency within the General Plan, the General Plan and
the County’s zoning designations must also be consistent and compatible. The following
zoning districts have been established by the County:
Upland Agricultural ( U- A), Valley Floor Agriculture ( V- A), Residential Estates ( RE), One-
Family Residence ( R- 1), Two- Family Residence ( R- 2), Neighborhood Apartment ( R- 3),
General Apartment ( R- 4), Neighborhood Commercial ( C- 1), Community Commercial
( C- 2), General Commercial ( C- 3), Local Convenience Center Commercial ( C- 4), Gen-eral
Recreation ( G- R), Light Industrial ( M- 1), General Industrial ( M- 2), Public Agency ( PA),
Planned Development ( PD), Natural Resource ( NR), and Timber Production Zoning ( TPZ).
Please note; the combining districts are not listed as the underlying district relates to the
General Plan land use designation.
The General Plan land use designations and the related zoning classifications, as cur-rently
established by the County, are identified on Table 2- 5, General Plan/ Zoning
Compatibility. The County may, in the future, adopt new zoning districts to be applied in
certain areas that may not be listed in this table. This is permissible, provided the intent
and standards of the new zoning district are consistent with the provisions of the related
land use designation.
TABLE 2- 5
GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING COMPATIBILITY
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION COMPATIBLE ZONING
Agricultural
Upland Agriculture U- A
Valley Floor Agricultural V- A
Timber TPZ
Residential
Rural Residential- Large Lot R- 1, R- E
Rural Residential- Small Lot R- 1
Suburban R- 1
Urban R- 1, R- 2, R- 3, R- 4
Commercial
Neighborhood Center C- 1, C- 4
General Commercial C- 2, C- 3
Commercial Recreation G- R
Industrial
General Industrial M- 1, M- 2
Natural Resource
Habitat Resource NR
Resource Lands NR
Recharge Zones NR
Open Space NR
Scenic Easement NR
Miscellaneous
Special Planning PD
Public Facility PA
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 36 April 2007
2.9 GOALS, POLICIES, AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES
COUNTYWIDE LAND USE
The following County- wide goals, policies, and implementation measures provide a ba-sis
for evaluating development proposals and other land- use related activities within
Tehama County. Individual Planning Area policies are also established in this General
Plan and are listed in Section 2.9 Individual Planning Area Policies.
GOAL LU- 1
To plan development within the County in a manner which will provide opportunities
for current and future residents to enjoy rural, community oriented living environments
that are similar to those currently found in the County. Encourage higher densities,
where appropriate, and promote in- fill development to discourage agricultural land
conversion demands.
Policy LU- 1.1
The County shall encourage future residential development to be located
adjacent to existing communities and established residential areas or within
areas for which Specific or Master Plans have been prepared. Small, isolated
housing tracts in outlying areas shall be discouraged as they disrupt surround-ing
rural and productive agricultural lands, forests, and ranches and are diffi-cult
to provide with services.
Implementation Measure LU- 1.1a
Encourage all new residential development projects with fifteen or
more parcels to be located adjacent to a community that can pro-vide
basic infrastructure and services or require that the project pro-vide
their own internal project infrastructure services.
Policy LU- 1.2
The County shall encourage in- fill development and build- out of existing de-veloped
areas.
Implementation Measure LU- 1.2a
Establish a database which identifies vacant and underutilized parcels
within existing developed areas. Make this information available to the
public.
Policy LU- 1.3
The County shall allow for and promote increased housing densities within ex-isting
developed areas.
Implementation Measure LU- 1.3a
In suitable areas where adequate water, sewer and fire protection ser-vices
are or can be made available, rezone 30 acres to the R- 4 zoning
designation to accommodate higher density residential use. This
measure corresponds to Housing Element Implementation Program
HE- 3. A.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 37
Implementation Measure LU- 1.3b
Amend the zoning and subdivision regulations to allow for rural small
lot residential development, minimize rural large lot development, and
provide for conservation and cluster subdivisions.
Policy LU- 1.4
County zoning and subdivision regulations shall protect agricultural lands,
open space, and natural resources which include: grazing, timber, and wild-life
lands, by not allowing land divisions intended for residential use to be de-veloped
in areas which are not specifically designated for in the General
Plan.
Implementation Measure LU- 1.4a
Update the Zoning Code to ensure that areas designated for agricul-tural
uses are limited to those uses directly related to agricultural pro-duction
or support of agriculture.
Implementation Measure LU- 1.4b
Prohibit the use of clustering of residential or non- agricultural land uses
on agriculturally designated lands.
Implementation Measure LU- 1.4c
Encourage the merger of antiquated subdivisions.
Implementation Measure LU- 1.4d
The County shall limit land uses in areas designated for agricultural use
to those uses directly and indirectly related to agricultural production
or the support of agricultural operations.
Policy LU- 1.5
The County shall allow variations in lot size limitations for pre- existing legal lots
in the Rural Residential Small- Lot and Rural Residential Large- lot land use des-ignation.
Implementation Measure 1.5a
The lot size limitations described in Section 2.7 Land Use Designations
for Rural Residential Small and Large Lot categories do not apply to
pre- existing legal lots established prior to March 1, 1983. Such lots will
be permitted to develop at a density of at least one dwelling unit per
lot, provided all Zoning and Land Division Standards are met.
GOAL LU- 2
To manage development and ensure that an individual( s) action( s) do not adversely
impact the health, safety, and welfare of the County's citizens.
Policy LU- 2.1
The County shall develop a land use model that will provide for the preserva-tion
and conservation of agricultural lands.
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 38 April 2007
Implementation Measure LU- 2.1a
Agricultural lands in Tehama County are classified according to three
general land use categories Upland Agriculture, Valley Floor Agricul-ture,
and Timber. These land use designations were based on the fol-lowing
criteria:
• Lands capable of supporting grazing, such as
o Existing grazing lands for this purpose, or
o Grazing lands under Williamson Act Contract.
• Lands capable of supporting crop production, such as
o Lands classified by the U. S. Soil Conservation Service Important
Farmlands Study maps as P, S, U, L, and LP; or
o Lands classified by the U. S. Conservation Service Capability
Classification System as Class I or II; or
o Croplands under Williamson Act contract.
• In addition to these designations, these lands shall be more pre-cisely
located for zoning map and other purposes using other exist-ing
available maps.
Implementation Measure LU- 2.1b
Divisions of agricultural lands shall comply with criteria established in
the Zoning Code and parcel sizes as delineated in Section 2.7 Land
Use Designations of this General Plan.
Implementation Measure LU- 2.1c
All lands classified as Agricultural lands ( Valley Floor Agriculture, Up-land
Agriculture, Timber) shall be considered eligible to be placed
within the Agricultural Preserve program, and shall be eligible to enter
into a contract, as provided by the Williamson Act ( also known as the
California Land Conservation Act of 1965), upon compliance with the
minimum parcel sizes, as delineated in Section 2.7.
Policy LU- 2.2
The County shall protect and preserve existing agricultural and natural re-source
lands from residential development.
Implementation Measure LU- 2.2a
Require the establishment of a minimum 300- foot residential building
setback between any new residential land divisions ( subdivision or
parcel map) and classified agricultural lands, agricultural processing
facilities, or industrial lands.
Implementation Measure LU- 2.2b
In support of the 300- foot residential building setback ( discussed in LU-
2.2a), the County shall adopt policies, standards and guidelines outlin-ing
specifics of the setback, including special circumstances for varia-tions
in distance and permitted uses within the setback.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 39
Implementation Measure LU- 2.2c
Support regulatory assurances programs, such as the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service’s Safe Harbor and the California Department of
Fish and Game Local Voluntary Program.
GOAL LU- 3
To promote a development pattern which, whenever possible, maximizes the use of
existing infrastructure prior to the construction of new infrastructure. Develop a land
use pattern which, to the maximum extent feasible, minimizes the expenditure of
public funds for infrastructure construction and maintenance.
Policy LU- 3.1
The County shall require the use of existing infrastructure for new develop-ment
whenever possible.
Implementation Measure LU- 3.1a
Require the use of existing infrastructure of all new development. If ex-isting
infrastructure is not available or adequate, require new devel-opment
to pay their reasonable fair- share towards the construction of
infrastructure for roads, water, sewer, drainage and other infrastruc-ture
necessary for the completion of the development
Policy LU- 3.2
The County shall develop a land use pattern that, to the maximum extent
feasible, minimizes the expenditure of public funds for water, sewer, flood
control and road construction and maintenance.
Implementation Measure LU- 3.2a
Identify existing County water, sewer, drainage, and roadway facilities
and infrastructure, whether private or public, and include this informa-tion
on the County’s GIS database making this information readily
available for public and/ or private inquiries. Use this information to de-velop
a land use pattern that maximizes this infrastructure.
Policy LU- 3.3
The County shall encourage development to locate adjacent to areas where
fire and safety protection services exist or can be efficiently and economi-cally
provided.
GOAL LU- 4
To designate lands for commercial and industrial development that are appropriate
for these purposes and allows opportunities for business and industrial firms. Encour-age
compact development contiguous to existing urban centers, discourage linear
and leapfrog development patterns.
Policy LU- 4.1
The County shall provide adequate amounts of land in urban and town cen-ters
to be designated and zoned to allow for and support commercial and
industrial development.
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 40 April 2007
Implementation Measure LU- 4.1a
Update Zoning Code to be consistent with General Plan land use des-ignations
allowing for a variety of commercial and industrial uses ad-jacent
to urban and town centers.
Implementation Measure LU- 4.1b
Promote the development of frontage roads for commercial devel-opment.
Implementation Measure LU- 4.1c
For those lands deemed appropriate for commercial and industrial
uses, improve access to all public infrastructure in a cost- effective
manner to facilitate their economic development.
Policy LU- 4.2
The County shall allow for limited local convenience centers within rural ser-vice
centers upon approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Typically, the build-ing
in these centers are small in size varying from 1,500 to 5,000 square feet
and may include a grocery store, gas station, small restaurant, and/ or bar.
Implementation Measure LU- 4.2a
Amend the Zoning Code to allow limited local convenience commer-cial
centers in rural service centers upon approval of a Conditional
Use Permit.
Policy LU- 4.3
For those lands deemed appropriate for commercial and industrial uses, the
County shall strive to improve access to road, rail and air transportation in a
cost- effective manner to facilitate their development.
Implementation Measure LU- 4.3a
Investigate funding opportunities and development agreements
which will provide for access improvement for industrial and commer-cial
uses.
GOAL LU- 5
To promote a development pattern that will accommodate growth, consistent with
other stated goals and for the growth projected for the planning period ( 2005- 2025).
Policy LU- 5.1
The County shall incorporate into the Land Use Diagram, land uses that ac-commodate
projected growth in the County. Residential land uses shall be
located in areas that currently provide the infrastructure, services and facili-ties,
if feasible, to accommodate projected County growth.
Implementation Measure LU- 5.1a
Incorporate an adequate supply of General Plan residential land use
designations in the updated Land Use Diagram. These land use desig-nation
should be located within adopted urban and adopted sphere
of influence boundaries of cities, unincorporated communities and
other urban centers or areas currently identified for accommodating
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 41
a significant portion of the County’s projected growth ( i. e. I- 5 North
Planning Area).
Implementation Measure LU- 5.1b
Inventory the available developable lands to ensure a sufficient
amount to accommodate growth projected for the planning period
( 2005- 2025).
Implementation Measure LU- 5.1c
Monitor, on a yearly basis, the rate at which the developable land in-ventory
is being consumed, the population and employment growth
of the County, and other pertinent indicators to gauge the County’s
growth.
Implementation Measure LU- 5.1d
In 2010 and thereafter every five years, the County shall examine the
results of the monitoring process ( defined in LU- 5.1c) for the previous
period and via the amendment process, make appropriate adjust-ments
in the inventory of disposable land to accommodate the
growth projected for the subsequent 20- year period. The intent of this
measure is that the developable land inventory shall never have less
than a 15- year supply. Five- year adjustments in the developable land
inventory may include either additions or reductions in this inventory,
but the latter will occur only when new information indicates that this
land is not suited for development and it is replaced in the inventory
by other lands.
Policy LU- 5.2
The procedure for adding lands not now in the inventory of developable
lands shall be by the amendment process which can occur three or four
times per year and can be initiated by either the County or property owner.
Policy LU- 5.3
The County shall recognize the Airport Land Use Plans as the overriding land
uses for the City of Red Bluff and City of Corning Municipal Airports.
Policy LU- 5.4
Accommodate urban growth and other non- agricultural development by di-recting
new growth to lands that do not exhibit characteristics which would
support agricultural uses and to areas for which service and infrastructure
have been planned to support new urban and non- agricultural growth.
GOAL LU- 6
To govern new development with subdivision, zoning, and other regulations that ex-plicitly
define government and private sector responsibilities and expectations with
regard to an acceptable balance between public facility and service costs.
Policy LU- 6.1
All new development projects shall be required to pay their reasonable fair
share for all improvements necessary to public services and utilities.
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 42 April 2007
Implementation Measure LU- 6.1a
Adopt Development Impact Fees including an affordable housing
fund component for new residential, commercial and industrial de-velopment
and construction.
Implementation Measure LU- 6.1b
Work with community service providers, such as school districts, water
districts, and park and recreation districts, to identify impacts from new
development to their service and identify ways to mitigate the im-pact.
GOAL LU- 7
To accommodate growth in a manner that preserves the predominate rural lifestyle
and unique qualities that make the County an attractive place to live and that rec-ognizes
that a rural lifestyle does not always necessitate the provision of the full com-plement
of services normally found in urban communities.
Policy LU- 7.1
The General Plan shall provide for four general types of communities and shall
distribute the developable land inventory amongst them so that future resi-dents
have available the full range of lifestyle opportunities. These community
environments are described in Section 2.6 Community Organization. Table 2.4
provides information relating these communities to General Plan land use
designations.
Implementation Measure LU- 7.1a
Analyze and, if necessary, amend the zoning map to associate zoning
districts that relate to the land uses identified in Table 2.4 for the four
community types.
Implementation Measure LU- 7.1b
Provide the necessary and appropriate zoning code and zoning map
changes to insure consistency with the valley floor agricultural land
use designations.
GOAL LU- 8
To develop land use patterns which minimize travel to jobs and services.
Policy LU- 8.1
The County shall require lands for moderate- to large- scale industrial and
commercial development to be located within or near the Urban Center and
Town Center community types, within areas for which Specific Plans or Master
Plans have been prepared or within areas that contain infrastructure ade-quate
to support the use of the property for a non- residential purpose and
shall consider the location of such land uses where appropriate to reduce
travel and commute times and where appropriate to minimize the need to
utilize Highways and Interstate Roadways for service trips.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 43
Implementation Measure LU- 8.1a
Incorporate within the Land Use Diagram and Zoning Map appropri-ate
uses industrial uses within vicinity of residential uses while consider-ing
the health and safety of the County’s residents.
Policy LU- 8.2
The County shall provide for opportunities for small scale businesses and indus-trial
firms through appropriate zoning.
Implementation Measure LU- 8.1a
Accommodate urban growth, opportunities for small- scale businesses
and industrial firms and other non- agricultural development by utilizing
lands that do not have agricultural viability.
Implementation Measure LU- 8.1b
Provide the necessary and appropriate zoning code and zoning map
changes to promote and accommodate small scale business and in-dustrial
firms.
GOAL LU- 9
To accommodate cellular tower facilities while requiring siting provisions that protects
the visual quality and character of the County.
Policy LU- 9.1
The County shall provide tower location requirements, tower criteria in the
County’s Zoning Code.
GOAL LU- 10
To promote development patterns that recognize the need to preserve water re-sources,
consistent with other stated goals.
Policy LU- 10.1
The County shall promote the implementation of the County’s Groundwater
Management Plan.
Implementation Measure 10.1a
Implement the management and monitoring actions of the GWMP
and identify and quantify the appropriate water production, quality,
and groundwater recharge activities.
INDIVIDUAL PLANNING AREA POLICIES
The following section lists policies for the individual Planning Areas; North I- 5 Planning
Area, South I- 5 Planning Area, Central I- 5 Planning Area, East I- 5 Planning Area, and
West I- 5 Planning Area. While this section only provide policies for these areas, con-sideration
of these policies should be taken into account during the implementation
of the Countywide goals, policies and implementation measures listed previously.
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 44 April 2007
North I- 5 Planning Area
Policy NI- 5.1
The development pattern shall recognize this planning area’s major role in
accommodating growth experienced by the County.
Policy NI- 5.2
The development pattern, to the extent feasible, shall provide for growth ac-commodation
primarily along the I- 5 corridor, within and adjacent to the City
of Red Bluff, adjacent to and within Lake California, and on lands designated
Rural Residential- Small Lot in the Bowman area.
Policy NI- 5.3
The development pattern north and west of Red Bluff shall recognize, and to
the extent feasible, utilize existing roadways for access, such as Walnut Street,
Reeds Creek Road, Wilder Road, Live Oak Road, Red Bank Road, and Mon-roe
Avenue.
Policy NI- 5.4
The development pattern shall accommodate growth within the rural com-munity
of Bend and the rural service center of Dairyville in a manner that pre-serves
the agricultural values of lands surrounding these communities.
Policy NI- 5.5
The development pattern shall recognize areas that have already experi-enced
some development such as the Antelope Valley area, Wilcox Road,
Jelly’s Ferry South, Bend District, and Surrey Village and provide levels of ser-vice
appropriate for their density and intensity.
Policy NI- 5.6
The development pattern shall, to the extent feasible, relate new develop-ment
to a level of services, including the timing of their provision, appropriate
for the density/ intensity of land use planned for its location.
Policy NI- 5.7
Grazing and Cropland land uses shall be recognized and future development
shall, to the extent feasible, be accommodated initially within the residential
land use categories designated on the Land Use Diagram.
Policy NI- 5.8
In conjunction with the City of Red Bluff, the County shall recommend that the
Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCo) review the development pat-tern
shown on the General Plan’s Land Use Diagram and that LAFCo make a
determination of a Sphere of Influence consistent with the General Plan’s de-velopment
pattern adjacent to the City of Red Bluff.
Central I- 5 Planning Area Policies
Policy CI- 5.1
The development pattern shall recognize the predominantly agricultural lands
use of the planning area.
2.0 LAND USE
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 2.0- 45
Policy CI- 5.2
Population growth shall be accommodated primarily in the Los Molinos area
by a development pattern transitioning from higher densities in the devel-oped
portion of Los Molinos to lower densities moving outward to the sur-rounding
rural areas.
Policy CI- 5.3
The rural service center of Proberta and Gerber shall accommodate growth
consistent with their agricultural support function and in a manner that pre-serves
the agricultural value of lands surrounding these communities.
Policy CI- 5.4
The County recognizes the Community Service District in the Los Molinos, Ger-ber-
Los Flores, and El Camino areas.
Policy CI- 5.5
The development pattern shall recognize the existing rural residential- small lot
development in the vicinity of Bryne Avenue, Clement Avenue, and the Sac-ramento
River.
South I- 5 Planning Area Policies
Policy SI- 5.1
The development pattern shall recognize growth accommodation primarily
within and adjacent to the City of Corning.
Policy SI- 5.2
As development demands based on population growth necessitates, land
adjacent to the City of Corning shall be used to accommodate future popu-lation
in the planning area.
Policy SI- 5.3
The rural service centers of Vina and Richfield shall accommodate growth
consistent with their agricultural support function and in a manner that pre-serves
the agricultural resource value of lands surrounding these communities.
Policy SI- 5.4
In conjunction with the City of Corning, the County shall recommend that
LAFCo review the development pattern shown on the General Plan’s Land
Use Diagram and that LAFCo make a determination of a Sphere of Influence
consistent with the General Plan’s development pattern adjacent to the City
of Corning.
Policy SI- 5.5
The development pattern shall recognize the existing rural small- lot residential
development in the area bounded by Squaw Hill Road on the west, Gardner
Ferry Road on the northwest, and Illinois Avenue to the east.
2.0 LAND USE
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 2.0- 46 April 2007
East County Planning Area Policies
Policy EI- 5.1
The development pattern shall accommodate growth primarily within the ru-ral
community centers of Manton and Mineral and within and/ or adjacent to
the subdivisions of Ponderosa Sky Ranch and the Paynes Creek areas along
HWY 36E and shall recognize the limitations on the use of on- site wastewater
treatment systems and available potable water supply.
Policy EI- 5.2
The development pattern shall recognize ranching and related agricultural
operations, as well as the timber, habitat, and scenic values the planning
area affords.
Policy EI- 5.3
The development pattern shall recognize the Tehama State Game Area, Cali-fornia
State Game Refuge, the Lassen National Forest, and the Lassen Na-tional
Volcanic Park
West County Planning Area Policies
Policy WI- 5.1
The development pattern shall accommodate growth primarily within and
around the rural service centers of Flournoy and Paskenta located along
Paskenta Road and on existing legal lots within the Rancho Tehama Subdivi-sion
along Boggs- Champlin Road.
Policy W- I- 5- 2
The development pattern shall recognize existing ranching operations and
grazing activities which dominate the land use activity of this planning area.
Policy W- I- 5- 3
Development accommodated in the planning area shall recognize the ques-tionable
availability of potable water supplies and the limited basic services
provided by the County.
Policy W- I- 5- 4
The development pattern shall recognize the timber resources of this planning
area and shall recognize the proximate boundaries of the Yolla Bolly- Middle
Eel Wilderness area and the Shasta- Trinity and Mendocino National Forests.
Policy W- I- 5- 5
The development pattern shall recognize the existing improvements made at
the Wildhorse Mesa development.
3.0 TRANSPORTATION AND
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
3.0 CIRCULATION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 3.0- 1
3.1 INTRODUCTION
LEGAL BASIS AND REQUIREMENTS
Government Code Section 65302( b) establishes the legal requirements of a Circulation
Element as:
“[ The General Plan shall include] a Circulation Element consisting of the general
location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transporta-tion
routes, terminals, and other public utilities and facilities, all correlated with
the land use element of the plan.”
Within the Tehama County General Plan, the Circulation Element is coordinated with
the Land Use, Noise, and other elements that address topics related to circulation and
transportation. The Circulation Element outlines the necessary transportation system and
related components to serve the future needs of residents and visitors of Tehama
County. The element also provides a framework to guide transportation planning
throughout Tehama County. Goals, policies, and implementation measures provide di-rection
for maintaining and improving Tehama County’s transportation systems.
3.2 TRANSPORTATION SETTING
MOTORIZED CIRCULATION
Automobile use is recognized in the 2001 and 2005 Regional Transportation Plan ( RTP) as
the dominant mode of transportation in Tehama County. According to the 2000 Census,
almost 90 percent of all trips from home to work by County residents were made by
automobiles, with the mean travel time to work being approximately 22 minutes.
Most of the roadways in the County can be characterized as rural. Existing and
planned urbanization within portions of the County, as well as growth in Red Bluff and
Corning, are resulting in the need to develop higher volume and higher capacity road-ways.
Interstate 5 and State Highways 99 and 36 are the primary transportation routes
through the County and provide access to a large number of the developed urban
and rural areas in the County. These roads, along with the various other state routes
within the County, are a critical element to the overall circulation and form the back-bone
of the County’s roadway infrastructure. Other county arterial, collector, and local
roads, as well as private roads, constitute the remainder of the County’s roadway sys-tem.
Essential roadways of the county include, but are not limited to, South Avenue, Gyle
Road, Rawson Road, 99W, Hooker Creek Road, Jelly’s Ferry Road and Bowman Road.
These roads function primarily as local and intra- regional routes providing localized ac-cess
and connections to the major regional roads. While these routes are more local in
nature than Intestate 5 and the State Highways, they provide the primary routes of
travel inside the County. As such, their importance to local travel is significant. As the
region in general continues to gain population, these roads will see increasing levels of
traffic. Increases in traffic will ultimately require that these facilities be upgraded to ad-dress
pavement conditions, shoulder width and roadway integrity, and will need ca-pacity
and safety enhancements to accommodate the increase in vehicle trips.
3.0 CIRCULATION
Draft General Plan Tehama County
Page 3.0- 2 April 2007
Access is a major fire protection need, whether wildland or structural. Failure to provide
access for emergency equipment and concurrent evacuation egress can result in ma-jor
loss of life, property and natural resources. Safe access requires street and road net-works
that limit dead- end roads and provide reasonable widths, grades, surfaces, and
curves for all vehicular accesses.
The 2005 RTP reported that there were approximately 46,548 licensed motor vehicles
( excluding trailers) that travel an average of 2,389,000 vehicle miles daily on public
roads in the county. There are nearly 1,200 centerline miles and 2,400 lane miles of
streets and roads in the County. The following table, Table 3- 1, provides a breakdown of
the total miles and lane miles of paved roadways within the County.
TABLE 3- 1
TEHAMA COUNTY PAVED ROADWAY MILES
AGENCY TOTAL MILES LANE MILES
Tehama County 804 1,608
City of Corning 44 72
City of Red Bluff 62 130
City of Tehama 6 11
State Highways 206 514
Total Paved Roadway Miles 1,122 2,335.7
Source: 2005 Tehama County Regional Transportation Plan
Trucking is an important link to industry and commerce in Tehama County, and Inter-state
5 is a vital route for local, regional, and national trucking. Interstate 5 is a high-emphasis
route of the National Highway System, Interregional Road System ( IRRS), and
State Extra legal load shell system. Average daily truck volumes on Interstate 5 range
from 5,000 to over 7,800 trucks per day. This figure represents approximately 17 percent
of all traffic on the route.
Tehama County is served by two single- track Union Pacific ( UP) rail lines including the
primary Union Pacific line between Sacramento and Portland, Oregon. The main line
enters the county from the southeast parallel to Highway 99E, turns north near Red Bluff
and exits the county along Interstate 5 at Cottonwood. The second line ( formerly Cali-fornia
Northern) is a secondary line that enters the County from the south along Inter-state
5 and connects with the primary line at the City of Tehama.
At this time, there are no passenger rail stops within Tehama County. Amtrak stations are
located in Redding and Chico. Tehama County passengers access Amtrak services
thorough connecting bus service at boarding locations in Red Bluff and Corning.
While there are no passenger rail stops within the county, rail service should be viewed
as an important component of the County’s overall circulation system. In the absence
of a passenger rail stop in the County, attention should be paid to the County’s freight-hauling
opportunities, resulting from the presence of the Union Pacific facilities. As a
large portion of the county’s industrial land uses are located near or adjacent to the UP
mainline, the County should look at ways to protect and expand rail spurs and service
lines to enhance the viability and utility of designated industrial properties. In addition,
policies contained within the General Plan support the retention and expansion of
3.0 CIRCULATION
Tehama County Draft General Plan
April 2007 Page 3.0- 3
freight- rail facilities in the County. The presence of a mainline rail facility in the county
can also serve to reduce large vehicle and freight truck trips by providing alternative
methods of freight transportation.
There are two publicly- owned general aviation airports in Tehama County; Red Bluff
Municipal Airport and Corning Municipal Airport. The Red Bluff Municipal Airport is classi-fied
as a “ community airport,” providing full service for general aviation. It has a runway
length of 5,684 feet, width of 100 feet, and accommodates IFR ( Instrument Flight Rules)
and VFR ( Visual Flight Rules) operations. Corning Municipal Airport is also rated as a
“ community airport”. It has a 2,700- foot runway, 50 feet in width, with 25- foot wide taxi-ways.
Based upon information from the Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA), the Red
Bluff Municipal Airport has estimated annual operations ( take- offs and landings) of ap-proximately
26,150. The Corning Municipal Airport has an estimated 8,718 annual opera-tions.
The FAA reports that there are approximately 67 aircraft based year- round at the
Red Bluff Municipal Airport. Approximately 25 aircraft are based at the Corning Munici-pal
Airport.
Tehama County and its incorporated cities operate a regional transit system, as author-ized
by the Tehama County Transit Agency Board. Funds for this system are allocated by
the Tehama County Transportation Commission.
The TRAX ( Tehama Rural Area Express, fixed route) and the ParaTRAX ( ADA only dial- a-ride
in greater Red Bluff area ) provide mobility to the communities of Red Bluff, Corn-ing,
Tehama, Los Molinos, and the greater unincorporated area of the County. TRAX
ridership continues to increase as the regional transit system expands in response to the
needs of the community.
METS, Medical Transportation Service, is a long established public/ private partnership in
Tehama County. Tehama County residents are transported by county volunteer drivers
to medical appointments. Volunteers are reimbursed for their mileage.
Commercial bus service is available in Tehama County from Greyhound Bus Lines and
Mount Lassen Motor Transit. Greyhound offers fixed route interregional and cross- county
transportation from Red Bluff on a limited basis. Mount Las