« The Bad Girls of Butte County | Main | Prickly Neighbors Can't Stop Aspirations for Estates »
February 07, 2007
Sphere's To You Jim
 |
| The City Council last night heard a request from the
Bidwell Park and Playground Commission (BPPC) to create a "sphere
of influence"
for that body around Bidwell Park. Commissioner Jim Walker originally
proposed this idea last year (maybe 2005), as a response to the visible
homes built on the south side of Bidwell Park. After internal BPPC dialogue
and approval this request for new authority has been steadily moving towards
the City Council for a decision. The "sphere of influence" would extend out 1000' around Upper and Middle Bidwell Park (basically east of Manzanita). Park Commissioner Steve Lucas pointed out early on that a 1000' influence around lower Bidwell Park would be more intrusive than desired. Therefore the BPPC "sphere of influence" in lower park would be limited to properties adjacent to the park. So what does the policy do? Any development within the "sphere" would go to the BPPC for comment sometime early in the approval planning process. The BPPC would not have any authority over development approval/denial beyond comments. The policy might be applied to existing privately owned parcels on the north, south, and east sides of Bidwell Park, and would jut into county areas not within the City of Chico's "sphere of influence". |
| I was impressed by the overall conversation that went
on regarding this topic. There were a number of comments that came from
various Councilors and members of the public that made important points.
Scott Gruendl pointed out the impact of the "edge effect" on Bidwell Park from domesticated animals (he didn't call it the edge effect though). Randy Abbot (Friend O' The Park and one-time disc golfer) had about 10 minutes of speaking time and really hit some valid points. He pointed out that the impact of development on Bidwell Park is to be considered under existing park and general plans. And that the 1000' boundary is both redundant and arbitrary. He recommended not approving the "sphere", as did a number of other speakers who felt it was too soft. Bill Brouhard owner of parcel 9, which will be developed at some time in the future, supported the 1000' sphere. His property would fall within the sphere (this land is adjacent to parcel 7 which are the homes we can see on the south side of Bidwell Park). Some of the Councilors, including Gruendl and Schwab discussed a possible need to envelope other protections into the policy beyond a concern for the "view shed". Larry Wahl voiced concern that making some of the private property un developable could force the City into litigation forcing it to purchase property it can't afford. From a historical perspective the City was forced to pay more for the 1380 acre "new addition" to Bidwell Park after the landowner forced the discussion into mediation. |
| Summary: Steve Bertagna
motioned that the BPPC 1000' sphere of influence be accepted. It was seconded
and passed 6:1 with Tom
Nickel voting against it. Most of the opposition that spoke wanted greater
restrictions on developments adjacent to the park. In this meeting land-owners effected by the policy supported it, as did conservatives and liberals. Local preservationists opposed this park protection policy because they felt it would have no real impact, or needed to cover more than just the view. Park Commissioner Jim Walker created and championed this policy because he felt the BPPC wasn't in the information loop when developments occurred near Bidwell Park. If this policy prevents any additional problems like we had with visible homes on the south rim, Jim's the guy to thank. |
Posted by Lon at February 7, 2007 12:00 AM
Comments
Thanks for the kind words, Lon. It is a little frustrating that getting this policy approved is taking so long. It is really a simple proposal with a simple intent. Its intent is to require BPPC be informed regarding projects that could impact Upper Bidwell Park and allow us to comment. Andy Holcolm was correct in his understanding of the policy. If it is aimed at any entity it would be City staff, who circumvented city policy in regards the the homes built on the canyon rim (parcel 7)a few years ago.
Posted by: Jim Walker at February 7, 2007 11:41 AM
Jim,
The majority of the council saw it for what it was. I think the policy filled an important information gap. Now if you can just get a similar policy in place for Children's Playground.
And you beat disc golf by 11 years, so it was pretty much on the fast track from where I'm sitting.
Lon
Posted by: Lon at February 7, 2007 12:23 PM