Agenda packet — Oroville City Council, April 1, 2025

April 01, 2025~4:00 PM Oroville City Council Meeting Agenda Page 1 of 5

OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL
Council Chambers
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA. 95965
April 01, 2025

REGULAR MEETING
CLOSED SESSION 4:00 PM
OPEN SESSION 4:30 PM
AGENDA

PUBLIC ACCESS AND PARTICIPATION
Please review the options below for ways to participate or observe the Council Meetings.

To Observe the Meeting:

1. Live Feed: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAoRW34swYl85UBfYqT7IbQ/

2. Zoom Link: https://zoom.us/j/96870319529?pwd=dW9kMGRZSFo5MFFNQk5wVDUzRkRrZz09

3. Zoom Application: Meeting ID: 968 7031 9529 Passcode: 67684553

4. By Phone: Telephone: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 968 7031 9529 Passcode: 67684553 To Provide Comment to the Council:

1. Attend the meeting in person

2. Send an Email by 2:00 PM the day before the meeting to [email protected]. All comments emailed will be provided to the Council Members for their consideration.

If you would like to address the Council at this meeting, you are requested to complete the blue speaker request form (located on the wall by the agendas) and hand it to the City Clerk, who is seated on the right of the Council Chamber. The form assists the Clerk with minute taking and assists the Mayor or presiding chair in conducting an orderly meeting. Providing personal information on the form is voluntary. For scheduled agenda items, please submit the form prior to the conclusion of the staff presentation for that item. Council has established time limitations of three (3) minutes per speaker on all items and an overall time limit of thirty minutes for non-agenda items.

If more than 10 speaker cards are submitted for an item, the time limitation would be reduced to one and a half (1.5) minutes per speaker for that item. If more than 15 speaker cards are submitted for non-agenda items, the first 15 speakers will be randomly selected to speak at the beginning of the meeting, with the remaining speakers given an opportunity at the end. (California Government Code §54954.3(b)).

Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the Council is prohibited from taking action except for a brief response from the Council or staff to statements or questions relating to a non-agenda item.

CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Council Members: Scott Thomson, Chuck Reynolds, Tracy Johnstone, Janet Goodson, Shawn Webber, Vice Mayor Eric Smith, Mayor David Pittman

CLOSED SESSION
The Council will hold a Closed Session on the following:

1. Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2), the Council will meet with the City Administrator and City Attorney regarding potential exposure to litigation – One case(s). 1 April 01, 2025~4:00 PM Oroville City Council Meeting Agenda Page 2 of 5

2. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, the Council will meet with the Personnel Officer to discuss Public Employee Performance Evaluations. Position Title: Department Heads and Contract Employees

OPEN SESSION

1. Announcement from Closed Session

2. Pledge of Allegiance

3. Adoption of Agenda

PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
None this meeting.

PUBLIC COMMUNICATION – HEARING OF NON-AGENDA ITEMS
This is the time to address the Council about any item not listed on the agenda. If you wish to address the Council on an item listed on the agenda, please follow the directions listed above.

REPORTS / DISCUSSIONS

1. Council Announcements and Reports

2. Administration Reports

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items 1 - 6 are adopted in one action by the Council. Items that are removed will be discussed and voted on immediately after adoption of consent calendar items.

1. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF ZONING CODE AMENDMENT (ZC) 24-04, AMENDING SECTION 17.04.060 (DEFINITIONS) AND CHAPTER 17.20 (SIGN

REGULATIONS) OF THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE (OMC)
The City Council shall consider adopting ZC 24-04, amendments to the City’s Sign Code as it pertains to the regulation of freestanding-signs, wall signs, and the processing of sign programs.

ZC 24-04 would specifically amend Section 17.04.060 “Definitions,” Section 17.20.070 “Requirements for specific types of signs,” Section 17.20.080 “Sign programs”, Section 17.20.120 “Requirements for commercial and mixed-use districts,” Section 17.20.130 “Requirements for industrial districts,” and Section 17.20.140 “Requirements for special purpose districts.” ACTION REQUESTED –
CONDUCT SECOND READING OF AND ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1886 - AN ORDINANCE

OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE AMENDING THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.04.060 “DEFINITIONS,” SECTION 17.20.070 “REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF SIGNS,” SECTION 17.20.080 “SIGN PROGRAMS,” SECTION 17.20.120 “REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL AND MIXED-USE DISTRICTS,” SECTION 17.20.130 “REQUIREMENTS FOR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS,” AND SECTI ON 17.20.140 “REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS” 2 April 01, 2025~4:00 PM Oroville City Council Meeting Agenda Page 3 of 5

2. FORECLOSURE OF 9 MIDWAY DRIVE
The City Council shall consider initiating foreclosure proceedings related to the City of Oroville’s interest in the Deed of Trust against the property located at 9 Midway Drive, Oroville (APN: 033- 232-008).

ACTION REQUESTED -
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 9362 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS

ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS AND ANY

AMENDMENTS THERETO NECESSARY TO INITIATE AND COMPLETE FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS ON REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 MIDWAY DRIVE, OROVILLE (APN 033- 232-008)

3. AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO THE SALE OF CITY REAL PROPERTIES The City Council shall consider amending Resolution Number 9346 that authorized the Mayor or City Administrator to execute all documents related to the sale of 1218 Bird Street to authorizing the Director of Business Assistance and Housing Development to execute all documents related to the sale of 1218 Bird St.

ACTION REQUESTED -
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 9363 - A RESOLUTION TO AMEND RESOLUTION NUMBER 9346 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING

THE DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE SALE OF 1218 BIRD ST.

4. SUPPORT FOR SENATE BILL 456 (ASHBY) – COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION ACT The City Council shall consider approval of a letter of support for Senate Bill 456 (Ashby), which would exempt muralists from contractor licensing requirements under the California Business and Professions Code. The bill aims to remove unnecessary regulatory barriers to the creation of public art, facilitating community beautification and economic development initiatives across the state, including in the City of Oroville.

ACTION REQUESTED -
APPROVE THE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR SB 456 (ASHBY); AND
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE LETTER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

5. LETTER IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 554 – LAW ENFORCEMENT: IMMIGRATION

ENFORCEMENT
At the request of City Council, Staff have drafted a letter in support of Senate Bill (SB) 554 for Council consideration, which would make modifications to the California Values Act, providing clarity with regard to how local law enforcement officials are to cooperate with federal authorities.

ACTION REQUESTED -
APPROVE LETTER IN SUPPORT FOR SENATE BILL 554 WITH MODIFICATIONS; AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE LETTER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL. 3 April 01, 2025~4:00 PM Oroville City Council Meeting Agenda Page 4 of 5

6. LETTER IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 74 – INFRASTRUCTURE GAP – FUND PROGRAM Staff recommend that the City Council approve a letter of support for Senate Bill 74, which would establish the Infrastructure Gap – Fund Program to provide gap funding grants to local agencies to develop and construct infrastructure projects.

ACTION REQUESTED
APPROVE LETTER IN SUPPORT FOR SENATE BILL 74; AND
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE LETTER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

REGULAR BUSINESS

7. PROJECT PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA
The City Council shall provide feedback on the proposed criteria that will be used to determine how large projects - both programmatic and capital - will be prioritized by engineering staff.

ACTION REQUESTED -
PROVIDE FEEDBACK TO CITY STAFF REGARDING THE SELECTED CRITERIA.

8. GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS REPORT FOR REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION,

THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THE GOVERNORS OFFICE OF LAND USE AND CLIMATE

INNOVATION
The City Council shall receive a report on the status and relevance of the Oroville 2030 General Plan, which was adopted in 2015.

ACTION REQUESTED -
RECEIVE GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS REPORT; AND

ACCEPT THE REPORT AND/OR PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS AND DIRECTION

9. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT 3530 WITH OURENERGY
Staff recommends amending the existing professional services agreement with OurEnergy to increase the agreement amount by $50,000. These additional funds will allow OurEnergy to continue providing on-call consulting services and expand their scope to include a comprehensive infrastructure cost estimate for the Southside neighborhood and a preliminary analysis of a potential microgrid in that area.

ACTION REQUESTED -

APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH OURENERGY TO INCREASE THE TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $50,000, AND

AUTHORIZE THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE THE AMENDED AGREEMENT AND ANY RELATED DOCUMENTS.
4 April 01, 2025~4:00 PM Oroville City Council Meeting Agenda Page 5 of 5

PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Public Hearing Procedure is as follows:
- Mayor or Chairperson opens the public hearing and staff will present the item and answer Council questions.
- The hearing is opened for public comment limited to three (3) minutes per speaker. In the event of more than ten (10) speakers, time will be limited to one and a half (1.5) minutes.

Under Government Code 54954.3, the time for each presentation may be limited. - Speakers are requested to provide a speaker card to the City Clerk - Public comment session is closed and then the Council will debate and take action - Those wishing to speak at the public hearings below, but unable to attend before 5pm, may request that the council consider holding the public hearing after 5pm by emailing [email protected] or calling 530-538-2535. Please submit request 24 hours before the meeting.
- Individuals may email comments for council consideration to [email protected]
None this meeting.

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS / CORRESPONDENCE

1. Future Agenda Items

2. Correspondence

ADJOURN THE MEETING
The meeting will be adjourned. A regular meeting of the Oroville City Council will be held on April 15, 2025 at 4:00 p.m.

Accommodating Those Individuals with Special Needs – In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Oroville encourages those with disabilities to participate fully in the public meeting process. If you have a special need in order to allow you to attend or participate in our public meetings, please contact the City Clerk at (530) 538-2535, well in advance of the regular meeting you wish to attend, so that we may make every reasonable effort to accommodate you. Documents distributed for public session items, less than 72 hours prior to meeting, are available for public inspection at City Hall, 1735 Montgomery Street, Oroville, California.

Recordings - All meetings are recorded and broadcast live on cityoforoville.org and YouTube. 5

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PATRICK PIATT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

CONNOR MUSLER, CONTRACT CITY PLANNER
RE: SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF ZONING CODE
AMENDMENT (ZC) 24-04, AMENDING SECTION 17.04.060
(DEFINITIONS) AND CHAPTER 17.20 (SIGN REGULATIONS) OF

THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE (OMC)
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
The Council will consider adopting ZC 24-04, amendments to the City’s Sign Code as it pertains to the regulation of freestanding-signs, wall signs, and the processing of sign programs. ZC 24-04 would specifically amend Section 17.04.060 “Definitions,” Section

17.20.070 “Requirements for specific types of signs,” Section 17.20.080 “Sign programs”, Section 17.20.120 “Requirements for commercial and mixed-use districts,” Section 17.20.130 “Requirements for industrial districts,” and Section 17.20.140 “Requirements for special purpose districts.”

BACKGROUND
The City’s Sign Regulations can be found in Chapter 17.20 of the Oroville Municipal Code (OMC) (henceforth referred to as the “Sign Regulations” or “Sign Code”). This Sign Code establishes regulations for the construction and placement of signage on properties within the City. The Sign Code at present was adopted by the City Council on June 16, 2021, (Ordinance 1849) following a yearslong comprehensive update effort by the Planning Commission and City Staff that began in 2015.

In utilizing the Sign Code to review signage applications, Staff have found challenges in implementing the regulations as adopted. These challenges have included unclear regulations and overly strict signage limitations, with opportunities to simplify the regulations to make it easier for applicants to design signage and for Staff to review said applications. Staff provided a presentation and facilitated a discussion with the Planning Commission at their March 28, 2024, regular meeting to discuss potential amendments to the City’s Sign Code, specifically as it pertains to freeway-oriented freestanding signs, before returning on May 23, 2024, for an additional discussion. At this May 23, 2024, 6 Item 1.

Page 2 ends

meeting Staff received a consensus from the Commission to finalize the proposed amendments and return for a public hearing. On July 25, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Sign Code amendments.

DISCUSSION
The purpose of the Sign Code is to “provide standards to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare, and to enhance the aesthetic character of development in the city, by regulating and controlling the design, number, area, height, quality of materials, construction, illumination, location, and maintenance of all signs and sign structures and to implement the purposes, policies and programs of the general plan.” To accomplish this, the Sign Code establishes regulations for the types, sizes, and design and placement criteria of signs that are allowed in the various zoning districts throughout the City.

Generally, the zoning districts that allow for intense commercial uses (ex. C-2, MXC, and M-2 zoning districts) are located along major commercial corridors (ex. SR 162, SR 70, and Feather River Blvd) and also allow for larger signs. The zoning districts that are more neighborhood serving (ex. CN and MXN zoning districts) allow for smaller signs to reinforce the smaller scale neighborhood focus of development. Lastly, the regulations for signage within the Historic Downtown Oroville places an emphasis on balancing the historic character of the neighborhood by way of allowing for businesses to use “A” Frame Signs and the continued use historic signs.

This Zoning Code Amendment includes amendments to Section 17.04.060 “Definitions,” and Chapter 17.20 relating to the City’s regulation of wall signs, freestanding signs, and sign programs. The Zoning Code Amendment further includes the creation of regulations for freeway-oriented freestanding signs. This ordinance was introduced for first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on March 18, 2025.

Staff recommend the City Council conduct a second reading of and adopt the ordinance.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Zoning Code Amendment ZC24-04 is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is minimal fiscal impact associated with the recommended actions.

RECOMMENDATION
7 Item 1.

Page 3 ends

1. Conduct second reading of and adopt Ordinance No. 1886 AN ORDINANCE

OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE AMENDING THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.04.060 “DEFINITIONS,” SECTION 17.20.070 “REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF SIGNS,” SECTION 17.20.080 “SIGN PROGRAMS,” SECTION 17.20.120
“REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL AND MIXED-USE DISTRICTS,”
SECTION 17.20.130 “REQUIREMENTS FOR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS,” AND SECTION 17.20.140 “REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS”

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance No. 1886

2. Attachment 1 – Exhibits 1 through 6

3. Attachment 2 - Redline Changes
8 Item 1.

Attachment 1
9 Item 1.

CITY OF OROVILLE
ORDINANCE NO. 1886

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE AMENDING THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.04.060 “DEFINITIONS,” SECTION

17.20.070 “REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFIC TYPES OF SIGNS,” SECTION 17.20.080 “SIGN PROGRAMS,” SECTION 17.20.120 “REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL AND MIXED-USE DISTRICTS,” SECTION 17.20.130 “REQUIREMENTS FOR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS,” AND SECTION 17.20.140 “REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS”
WHEREAS, the City of Oroville has prepared an Ordinance to amend Section

17.04.060 “Definitions”, Section 17.20.070 “Requirements for Specific Types of Signs”, Section 17.20.090 “Sign Programs”, Section 17.20.120 “Requirements for Commercial and Mixed-Use Districts”, Section 17.20.130 “Requirements for Industrial Districts”, and Section 17.20.140 “Requirements for Special Purpose Districts”; and WHEREAS, the Oroville 2030 General Plan sets forth goals, objectives, and policies to enhance and maintain Oroville’s visual appearances and encourage the development of attractive commercial areas; and
WHEREAS, the City of Oroville currently regulates the construction and placement of signage in accordance with OMC Chapter 17.20; and
WHEREAS, City Staff identified challenges in implementing the current sign code as written; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to OMC Section 17.04.060 and Chapter

17.20 include modified regulations for freestanding signs and wall signs; and WHEREAS, the Oroville Planning Commission received a presentation from Staff and conducted a discussion at their March 28, 2024, and May 23, 2024, regular meetings to discuss potential amendments to the City’s Sign Code before returning on May 23, 2024, for an additional discussion; and
WHEREAS, On July 25, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed sign code amendments; and
WHEREAS, On March 18, 2025, the City Council held a noticed public hearing and considered the staff report, recommendations by staff, and public testimony concerning the proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are internally consistent with other applicable provisions of the Zoning Code, the 2030 General Plan, and compatible with 10 Item 1.
the uses authorized in the applicable zoning districts for which the revisions are proposed; and
WHEREAS, adoption of this Ordinance is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council considered the comments and concerns of public agencies, property owners, and members of the public who are potentially affected by the approval of the code changes described herein and considered the City’s staff report regarding the project.

NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: Findings.

The City Council of the City of Oroville adopts and finds as true and correct the aforementioned recitals and incorporate them herein as findings.

Section 2: Amendments to the Oroville Municipal Code Section 17.04.060 (Definitions)
Section 17.04.060 (Definitions) of the Oroville Municipal Code is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit “1,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 3: Amendments to the Oroville Municipal Code Section 17.20.070 (Requirements for Specific Types of Signs)
Section 17.20.070 (Requirements for Specific Types of Signs) of the Oroville Municipal Code is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit “2,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 4: Amendments to the Oroville Municipal Code Section 17.20.080 (Sign Programs)
Section 17.20.080 (Sign Programs) of the Oroville Municipal Code is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit “3,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 5: Amendments to the Oroville Municipal Code Section 17.20.120 (Requirements for Commercial and Mixed-Use Districts)

17.20.130 (Requirements for Industrial Districts) of the Oroville Municipal Code is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit “4,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference Section 6: Amendments to the Oroville Municipal Code Section 17.20.130 (Requirements for Industrial Districts)
11 Item 1.

Section 17.20.130 (Requirements for Industrial Districts) of the Oroville Municipal Code is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit “5,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 7: Amendments to the Oroville Municipal Code Section 17.20.140 (Requirements for Special Purpose Districts)
Section 17.20.140 (Requirements for Special Purpose Districts) of the Oroville Municipal Code is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit “6,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

Section 8: Environmental Determination.

Zoning Code Amendment ZC24-04 is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.

Section 9: Severability.

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 10: Effective Date.

This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its final adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to adoption thereof and cause its publication according to law.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a regular meeting held on this 1
st day of April 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________
David Pittman, Mayor
12 Item 1.

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
______________________________ ___________________________ Scott E. Huber. City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 13 Item 1.

EXHIBIT 1

17.04.060 Definitions.

Sign, freeway-oriented. Any sign for a business or businesses that is designed to be visible from State Route 70 or any other freeway as designated in the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
14 Item 1.

EXHIBIT 2

17.20.070 Requirements for specific types of signs.

C. Monument Signs.

1. Monument signs shall not be placed on any lot frontage with a building setback of less than 20 feet.

2. A minimum distance of 50 feet shall separate any 2 monument signs.

3. A monument sign shall not be placed on any lot frontage on the same parcel that has a freestanding sign unless the two signs are separated by a minimum distance of 75 feet.

D. Freestanding Signs.

1. Freestanding signs shall not be placed on any lot frontage with a width of less than 75 feet, or with a building setback of less than 25 feet.

2. A minimum distance of 75 feet shall separate any 2 freestanding signs.

3. A freestanding sign shall not be placed on any lot frontage on the same parcel that has a monument sign unless the two signs are separated by a minimum distance of 75 feet.

4. The maximum height of a freestanding sign for properties that abut State Route (SR) 162 shall be up to 25 feet.

5. The maximum freestanding sign area is based on the total linear street frontage of the front side of the site as follows:

Street Frontage Sign Area
Up to 200 ft. 50 sq. ft. per side
200 to 400 ft. 75 sq. ft. per side
Over 400 ft. 100 sq. ft. per side

6. No portion of a freestanding sign shall project above a public right-of-way.

7. Landscaping shall be provided at the base of the supporting structure equal to twice the area of one face of the sign. For example, 30 square feet of sign area equates to 60 square feet of required landscaped area.

E. Freeway-Oriented Freestanding Signs.
15 Item 1.

1. A freeway-oriented freestanding sign may be approved on a nonresidential zoned parcel immediately abutting State Route 70 right-of-way, or separated by a road running parallel to State Route 70 where no parcels separate the road from State Route 70 right-of-way, so long as the property is within a ¼ mile distance from a State Route 70 right-of-way.

2. The maximum height and associated permitting requirements for freewayoriented freestanding signs shall be as follows:

Height Permit Requirements
Single Tenant or Multiple
Tenants
40 feet Sign Permit
Multiple Tenants 60 feet plus 5 additional
feet per tenant, up to 85
feet
Use Permit
Property within ¼ mile of
a State Route 70 offramp
85 feet Use Permit

3. The maximum freeway-oriented freestanding sign area is based on the total linear street frontage of the side of the site facing State Route 70 as follows:

Street Frontage Sign Area (Single Tenant) Sign Area (MultiTenant Sign) Up to 200 ft. 50 sq. ft. per side 150 sq. ft. per side
200 to 300 ft. 75 sq. ft. per side 250 sq. ft. per side Over 400 ft. 100 sq. ft. per side 350 sq. ft. per side

4. Two or more contiguous parcels, not located within a shopping center or similar cohesive development, may share a freeway-oriented freestanding sign subject to the height and square footage limits of this section. If two or more contiguous parcels share a freeway-oriented freestanding sign, the parcels shall not be allowed a separate freeway-oriented freestanding sign or other freestanding sign advertising their individual parcel.
16 Item 1.
a. As a condition for the approval of a freeway-oriented sign for two or more contiguous parcels not located within a shopping center or similar cohesive development, an agreement shall be executed between the property owners. The agreement shall be in a form approved by the city attorney and zoning administrator and shall be binding upon the property owner and any successors in interest.

5. Freeway-oriented freestanding signs shall not be placed on any frontage with a width of less than 75 feet, or with a building setback of less than 25 feet.

6. A minimum distance of 75 feet shall separate any 2 freeway-oriented freestanding signs.

7. No portion of the sign shall project above a public right-of-way.

8. The sign shall comply with the location, placement, and design criteria of Section

17.20.060.

9. Support structures for freeway-oriented freestanding signs containing four (4) or more tenant panels shall be cladded or skirted from the base/ground to the sign frame so as to not leave an exposed pole. Cladding or skirting materials shall be complementary in style and color to the building(s) of the subject property.

10.Landscaping shall be provided at the base of the supporting structure equal to twice the area of one face of the sign. For example, 30 square feet of sign area equates to 60 square feet of required landscaped area.
a. If the sign is located abutting State Route 70 at the rear of the property primarily used as a service area and not for regular customer access, decorative rock, gravel, bark, and other low-maintenance landscaping techniques and plantings may be utilized so long as the base area equal to twice the area of one face of the sign is not paved. 17 Item 1.

EXHIBIT 3

17.20.080 Sign programs.

A. Purpose. Sign programs are specifically intended to address the unique needs of certain uses and properties that include multiple uses on a site, or multiple signs for uses with special sign needs. Sign programs shall be used to achieve aesthetic compatibility between the signs within a project and provide flexibility in the number, size, location and type of signs.

B. Applicability. A sign program shall be required for the following:

1. Any new non-residential development with four (4) or more tenants.

2. Shopping centers containing at least one (1) anchor tenant occupying at least 50,000 sq. ft. and at least three (3) other tenants who share common parking and pedestrian facilities.

3. Any requests for deviations from the regulations and standards of this chapter.

Sign programs may also be required as a condition of approval for a project requiring development review or a use permit, specifically for the following uses:

1. Multiple-tenant buildings.

2. Drive-through establishments.

3. Uses with freeway-oriented signs.

4. Automobile or other vehicle sales.

5. All uses within a planned development (PD-O) overlay district.

C. Modification of Standards. A sign program may modify any of the following standards of this section:

1. The number of signs allowed.

2. The size allowed for an individual sign.
18 Item 1.

3. The maximum height of monument and freestanding signs; provided, however, as follows:
a. The height shall not exceed 20 40 feet for establishments that are contiguous to Oroville Dam Boulevard, and 15 25 feet for all other establishments.
b. The maximum height shall not be increased for signs in a residential district or the downtown historic overlay (DH-O).

4. The location and type of signs allowed; provided, however, as follows:
a. A sign program shall allow no more than one sign that is not located on the same site as its associated use, in addition to any such signs that may be allowed by this section.
b. A sign program shall not include a prohibited sign.

D. Design Requirements.

1. Sign programs shall be designed so that all signs have visually compatible themes and placement.

2. Signs shall draw from a common palette of materials, colors, shapes, lettering types and sizes, and illumination methods. This common palette shall be compatible with the architecture and scale of the site’s buildings.

3. For developments with existing signs, the sign program shall include existing signage at the property and designate appropriate replacements, if any, which are consistent with the new signage.

E. Submittal Requirements. An application for a sign program shall consist of the following:

1. A copy of a site plan showing location of buildings, parking areas, driveways, landscaped areas, and adjacent streets.

2. A site plan indicating the location of all existing and proposed signs requiring a permit.

3. A matrix summarizing the total number of signs, sign area for individual signs, total sign area and height, for each existing and proposed sign type.

4. For each existing sign to remain or proposed sign in the Planned Sign Program, the following shall be specified:
19 Item 1.
a. Location of each sign on the buildings and property; b. Sign dimensions;
c. Color scheme;
d. Lettering or graphic style;
e. Lighting, if any;
f. Materials;
g. Landscaping quantities, types, sizes, and planter area dimensions if signs are to be located within landscaped planters;
h. Statement of justification for requests for deviations; and i. Other information as deemed necessary for the adequate evaluation of the proposed Planned Sign Program.

F. Review of Sign Programs. All sign programs shall be subject to development review, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.52 (Development Review) and the requirements of this section. Any sign program requesting deviations from the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to Planning Commission action. The review authority for development review shall approve a sign program only upon determining that:

1. The signs included in the sign program have one or more common design elements, such as their placement, colors, materials, illumination, sign type, sign shape, letter size, and lettering type.

2. The colors, materials, size and placement of the signs included in the sign program are compatible with the materials, architecture and scale of the buildings and signs on the site. (Ord. 1749 § 4; Ord. 1849 § 2)
20 Item 1.

EXHIBIT 4

17.20.120 Requirements for commercial and mixed-use
districts.

Table 17.20.120-1
Allowed Signs in CN and MXN Districts
Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number of
Signs Max. Area
Max. Total Area
for All Signs1 Max. Height
Lighting
Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum Determined by
maximum total
sign area
permitted
1 square foot for
each linear foot
of building
fronting a street,
public way or
public or
customer parking
area2
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage
Determined by
maximum total
sign area
permitted
Below eave or
below sill of
second floor
window
No Shall not be used
as permanent
copy and be
displayed for no
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function.

Canopy signs No maximum Determined by
maximum total
sign area
permitted
Below eave or
below sill of
second floor
window
Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
—
Monument signs 1 per frontage 30 sq. ft. per
sign face
6 feet Yes § 17.20.070
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
Determined by
maximum total
sign area
permitted
Below eave or
below sill of
second floor
window
Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs 1 per building
frontage or tenant
suite elevation
facing a street or
parking lot
1 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
Below eave Yes § 17.20.070
Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
Notes:
21 Item 1.
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs, whose maximum area shall be as specified in Section 17.20.070 and not apply to the maximum total area for all signs on a site. 2 The maximum total area shall not be lower than 25 square feet.

Table 17.20.120-2
Allowed Signs in C-1, OF and MXD Districts
Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number of
Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height
Lighting
Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum 50% of awning
area, or 40 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
Less than 20,000
sq. ft. of gross
floor area on
site: 1.5 sq. ft.
for each linear
foot of building
frontage, or 300
sq. ft., whichever
is less2
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage 40 sq. ft. 20 feet5 No Shall not be used as permanent
copy and be
displayed for no
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 5 sq. ft. per face At least 20,000 sq. ft. of gross
floor area onsite: 1.5 sq. ft.
for each linear
foot of building
frontage, or 350
sq. ft., whichever
is less3
20 feet5 Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
—
Freestanding
signs
1 per frontage See § 17.20.070 12 feet4 Yes § 17.20.070 § 17.20.150
Monument signs 1 per frontage 50 sq. ft. per sign
face
40,000 to 80,000
sq. ft. of gross
floor area: 1.5
sq. ft. for each
linear foot of
8 feet Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
22 Item 1.
building
frontage, or 400
sq. ft., whichever
is less4
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs 1 per building
frontage or tenant
suite elevation
facing a street or
parking lot

1.5 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
80,000 to
140,000 sq. ft. of
gross floor area:

1.5 sq. ft. for
each linear foot
of building
frontage, or 450
sq. ft., whichever
is less
20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
140,000 to
200,000 sq. ft. of
gross floor area:

1.5 sq. ft. for
each linear foot
of building
frontage, or 500
sq. ft., whichever
is less
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
Notes:
1 The maximum total area for all signs applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs. 2 For a gross floor area less than 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 50 square feet.
3 For a gross floor area of at least 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 75 square feet.
4 Sites contiguous to State Route 162, may have additional height as specified in Section 17.20.070.
5 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.
23 Item 1.

Table 17.20.120-3
Allowed Signs in C-2, CH, CLM and MXC Districts
Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height
Lighting
Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum 50% of awning
area, or 40 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
Less than
20,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
300 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less2
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage 40 sq. ft. 20 feet6 No Shall not be used as permanent copy and
be displayed for no
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 5 sq. ft. per face 20 feet6 Yes; internal illumination
prohibited
—
Freestanding signs 1 per frontage See § 17.20.070 20,000 to 40,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
350 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less3
12 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
Freeway-oriented
freestanding sign
1 per property See § 17.20.070 See
§ 17.20.070
Yes § 17.20.070
Marquee signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
10 feet Yes —
Monument signs 1 per frontage 50 sq. ft. per sign
face
8 feet Yes § 17.20.070
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 40,000 to
80,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
400 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less4
20 feet6 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs 1 per building
frontage or
tenant suite
elevation
facing a street
or parking lot

1.5 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
20 feet6 Yes § 17.20.070
24 Item 1.

Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
80,000 to
140,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
building
frontage, or
450 square
feet, whichever
is less
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
140,000 to
200,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
building
frontage, or
500 square
feet, whichever
is less
Notes:
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs.
2 For a gross floor area less than 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 50 square feet.
3 For a gross floor area between 20,000 and 40,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 75 square feet.
4 For a gross floor area more than 40,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 100 square feet.
5 Sites contiguous to State Route, may have additional height as specified in Section 17.20.070.
6 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.
25 Item 1.

EXHIBIT 5

17.20.130 Requirements for industrial districts.

Table 17.20.130-1
Allowed Signs in Industrial Districts
Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height
Lighting
Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum 50% of awning
area, or 40 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
Less than
20,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
300 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less2
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage 40 sq. ft. 20 feet6 No Shall not be used as permanent copy and
be displayed for no
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 5 sq. ft. per face 20 feet6 Yes; internal illumination
prohibited
—
Freestanding signs 1 per frontage See § 17.20.070 20,000 to 40,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
350 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less3
12 feet4 Yes § 17.20.070
Monument signs 1 per frontage 50 sq. ft. per sign
face
8 feet Yes § 17.20.070
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 40,000 to
80,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
400 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less4
20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs 1 per building
frontage or
tenant suite
elevation
facing a street
or parking lot

1.5 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
26 Item 1.

Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
80,000 to
140,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
building
frontage, or
450 square
feet, whichever
is less
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
140,000 to
200,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
building
frontage, or
500 square
feet, whichever
is less
Notes:
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs.
2 For a gross floor area less than 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 50 square feet.
3 For a gross floor area of at least 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 75 square feet.
4 Sites contiguous to State Route 162 may have additional height as specified in Section 17.20.070.
5 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.
27 Item 1.

EXHIBIT 6

17.20.140 Requirements for special purpose districts.

Table 17.20.140-1
Allowed Signs in PQ Districts
Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height
Lighting
Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum 50% of awning
area, or 25 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
1 square foot
for each linear
foot of
building
frontage, or
100 square
feet, whichever
is less2
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage 30 sq. ft. 20 feet3 No Shall not be used as permanent copy and
be displayed for no
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 4 sq. ft. per face 20 feet3 Yes; internal illumination
prohibited
—
Monument signs 1 per frontage 50 sq. ft. per sign
face
6 feet Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 20 feet3 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs 1 per building
frontage or
tenant suite
elevation
facing a street
or parking lot
1 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
20 feet3 Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
28 Item 1.

Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
Notes:
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs
2 The maximum total area shall not be lower than 25 square feet. 3 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.
29 Item 1.

Attachment 2
30 Item 1.

17.04.060 Definitions.

Sign, freeway-oriented. Any sign for a freeway-oriented business or businesses that is designed to be visible from the freeway on which the business depends State Route 70 or any other freeway as designated in the Circulation Element of the General Plan.

17.20.070 Requirements for specific types of signs.

C. Monument Signs.

1. Monument signs shall not be placed on any lot frontage with a building setback of less than 20 feet.

2. A minimum distance of 50 feet shall separate any 2 monument signs.

3. A monument sign shall not be placed on any lot frontage on the same parcel that has a freestanding sign unless the two signs are separated by a minimum distance of 75 feet.

D. Freestanding Signs.

1. Freestanding signs shall not be placed on any lot frontage with a width of less than 75 feet, or with a building setback of less than 25 feet.

2. A minimum distance of 75 feet shall separate any 2 freestanding signs.

3. A freestanding sign shall not be placed on any lot frontage on the same parcel that has a monument sign unless the two signs are separated by a minimum distance of 75 feet.

4. The maximum height of a freestanding freeway-oriented sign for properties that abut State Route (SR) 162 shall be 40 shall be up to 25 feet. Increased height, up to a maximum of 85 feet, may be permitted if the property is within a ¼ mile distance of SR 70. The maximum permitted height shall be specified in the sign permit.

4. The planning commission can approve an increase in the allowed height of a freestanding sign if the need for this increase is demonstrated by means of a balloon test or other method approved by the zoning administrator.

5. The maximum freestanding sign area is based on the total linear street frontage of the front side of the site as follows:

Street Frontage Sign Area
31 Item 1.

Up to 200 ft. 50 sq. ft. per side
200 to 400 ft. 75 sq. ft. per side
Over 400 ft. 100 sq. ft. per side

6. No portion of a freestanding sign shall project above a public right-of-way.

E. Freeway-Oriented Freestanding Signs.

2. The maximum height and associated permitting requirements for freewayoriented freestanding signs shall be as follows:

3. The maximum freeway-oriented freestanding sign area is based on the total linear street frontage of the side of the site facing State Route 70 as follows:

4. Two or more contiguous parcels, not located within a shopping center or similar cohesive development, may share a freeway-oriented freestanding sign subject to the height and square footage limits of this section. If two or more contiguous parcels share a freeway-oriented freestanding sign, the parcels shall not be 32 Item 1.
allowed a separate freeway-oriented freestanding sign or other freestanding sign advertising their individual parcel.
a. As a condition for the approval of a freeway-oriented sign for two or more contiguous parcels not located within a shopping center or similar cohesive development, an agreement shall be executed between the property owners. The agreement shall be in a form approved by the city attorney and zoning administrator and shall be binding upon the property owner and any successors in interest.

5. Freeway-oriented freestanding signs shall not be placed on any frontage with a width of less than 75 feet, or with a building setback of less than 25 feet.

6. A minimum distance of 75 feet shall separate any 2 freeway-oriented freestanding signs.

7. No portion of the sign shall project above a public right-of-way.

8. The sign shall comply with the location, placement, and design criteria of Section

17.20.060.

17.20.080 Sign programs.

B. Applicability. A sign program shall be required for the following:

1. Any new non-residential development with four (4) or more tenants. 33 Item 1.

2. Shopping centers containing at least one (1) anchor tenant occupying at least 50,000 sq. ft. and at least three (3) other tenants who share common parking and pedestrian facilities.

3. Any requests for deviations from the regulations and standards of this chapter.

Sign programs may also be required as a condition of approval for a project requiring development review or a use permit, specifically for the following uses:

1. Multiple-tenant buildings.

2. Drive-through establishments.

3. Uses with freeway-oriented signs.

4. Automobile or other vehicle sales.

5. All uses within a planned development (PD-O) overlay district.

C. Modification of Standards. A sign program may modify any of the following standards of this section:

1. The number of signs allowed.

2. The size allowed for an individual sign; provided, however, that the total area of all signs in the sign program shall not exceed the total area allowed by this section by more than 10%.

3. The maximum height of monument and freestanding signs that display information for multiple tenants; provided, however, as follows:
a. The height shall not exceed 20 40 feet for establishments that are contiguous to Oroville Dam Boulevard, and 15 25 feet for all other establishments.
b. The maximum height shall not be increased for signs in a residential district or the downtown historic overlay (DH-O).

D. Design Requirements.

1. Sign programs shall be designed so that all signs have visually compatible themes and placement.
34 Item 1.

3. For developments with existing signs, the sign program shall include existing signage at the property and designate appropriate replacements, if any, which are consistent with the new signage.

E. Submittal Requirements. An application for a sign program shall consist of the following:

1. A copy of a site plan showing location of buildings, parking areas, driveways, landscaped areas, and adjacent streets.

2. A site plan indicating the location of all existing and proposed signs requiring a permit.

3. A matrix summarizing the total number of signs, sign area for individual signs, total sign area and height, for each existing and proposed sign type.

4. For each existing sign to remain or proposed sign in the Planned Sign Program, the following shall be specified:
a. Location of each sign on the buildings and property; b. Sign dimensions;
c. Color scheme;
d. Lettering or graphic style;
e. Lighting, if any;
f. Materials;
g. Landscaping quantities, types, sizes, and planter area dimensions if signs are to be located within landscaped planters;
h. Statement of justification for requests for deviations; and i. Other information as deemed necessary for the adequate evaluation of the proposed Planned Sign Program.

EF. Review of Sign Programs. All sign programs shall be subject to development review, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.52 (Development Review) and the requirements of this section. Any sign program requesting deviations from the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to Planning Commission action. The review authority for development review shall approve a sign program only upon determining that:

1. The signs included in the sign program have one or more common design elements, such as their placement, colors, materials, illumination, sign type, sign shape, letter size, and lettering type.
35 Item 1.

17.20.120 Requirements for commercial and mixed-use
districts.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function.

Canopy signs No maximum Determined by
maximum total
sign area
permitted
Below eave or
below sill of
second floor
window
Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
—
Monument signs 1 per frontage 30 sq. ft. per sign
face
6 feet Yes § 17.20.070
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
Determined by
maximum total
sign area
permitted
Below eave or
below sill of
second floor
window
Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs No maximum
1 per building
frontage or tenant
suite elevation
facing a street or
parking lot
1 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
Below eave Yes § 17.20.070
Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
Notes:
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented 36 Item 1.
freestanding signs, and monument signs, whose maximum area shall be as specified in Section 17.20.070 and not apply to the maximum total area for all signs on a site. 2 The maximum total area shall not be lower than 25 square feet.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 5 sq. ft. per face At least 20,000 sq. ft. of gross
floor area onsite: 1.5 sq. ft.
for each linear
foot of building
frontage, or 350
sq. ft., whichever
is less3
20 feet5 Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
—
Freestanding
signs
1 per frontage Determined by
total area
See § 17.20.070
8 12 feet4 Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
Monument signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
50 sq. ft. per sign
face
40,000 to 80,000
sq. ft. of gross
floor area: 1.5
sq. ft. for each
linear foot of
building
frontage, or 400
sq. ft., whichever
is less4
8 feet Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs No maximum 1.5 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
80,000 to
140,000 sq. ft. of
gross floor area:
20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
37 Item 1.
1 per building
frontage or tenant
suite elevation
facing a street or
parking lot
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area

1.5 sq. ft. for
each linear foot
of building
frontage, or 450
sq. ft., whichever
is less
Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
140,000 to
200,000 sq. ft. of
gross floor area:

1.5 sq. ft. for
each linear foot
of building
frontage, or 500
sq. ft., whichever
is less
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
Notes:
1 The maximum total area for all signs applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs., whose maximum area shall be as specified in Section 17.20.070 and not apply to the maximum total area for all signs on a site.
2 For a gross floor area less than 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 50 square feet.
3 For a gross floor area of at least 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 75 square feet.
4 Freeway-oriented businesses, as well as sSites contiguous to Oroville Dam Boulevard State Route 162, as well as other C-1 and MXD properties may have one freestanding sign with additional height as specified in Section 17.20.070. 5 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.

Table 17.20.120-3
Allowed Signs in C-2, CH, CLM and MXC Districts
38 Item 1.

Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height Lighting Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum 50% of awning
area, or 40 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
Less than
20,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
300 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less2
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage 40 sq. ft. 20 feet6 No Shall not be used as permanent copy and
be displayed for no
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 5 sq. ft. per face 20 feet6 Yes; internal illumination
prohibited
—
Freestanding signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
See § 17.20.070
20,000 to
40,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
350 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less3
8 12 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
Freeway-oriented
freestanding sign
1 per property See § 17.20.070 See
§ 17.20.070
Yes § 17.20.070
Marquee signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
10 feet Yes —
Monument signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
50 sq. ft. per sign
face
8 feet Yes § 17.20.070
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 40,000 to
80,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
400 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less4
20 feet6 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs No maximum
1 per building
frontage or
tenant suite
elevation
facing a street
or parking lot

1.5 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
20 feet6 Yes § 17.20.070
Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
80,000 to
140,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
building
frontage, or
450 square
feet,
whichever is
less
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
140,000 to
200,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
39 Item 1.

Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height Lighting Allowed
Additional
Requirements
building
frontage, or
500 square
feet,
whichever is
less
Notes:
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs, whose maximum area shall be as specified in Section 17.20.070 and not apply to the maximum total area for all signs on a site. 2 For a gross floor area less than 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 50 square feet.
3 For a gross floor area between 20,000 and 40,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 75 square feet.
4 For a gross floor area more than 40,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 100 square feet.
5 Freeway-oriented businesses, sSites contiguous to Oroville Dam Boulevard State Route, as well as other C-1 and MXD properties may have one freestanding sign with additional height as specified in Section 17.20.070.
6 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.

17.20.130 Requirements for industrial districts.

Table 17.20.130-1
Allowed Signs in Industrial Districts
Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height Lighting Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum 50% of awning
area, or 40 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
Less than
20,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
300 sq. ft.,
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage 40 sq. ft. 20 feet6 No Shall not be used as permanent copy and
be displayed for no
40 Item 1.

Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height Lighting Allowed
Additional
Requirements
whichever is
less2
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 5 sq. ft. per face 20 feet6 Yes; internal illumination
prohibited
—
Freestanding signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
See § 17.20.070
20,000 to
40,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
350 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less3
8 12 feet4 Yes § 17.20.070
Monument signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
50 sq. ft. per sign
face
8 feet Yes § 17.20.070
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 40,000 to
80,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor
area: 1.5 sq. ft.
per linear foot
of building
frontage, or
400 sq. ft.,
whichever is
less4
20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs No maximum
1 per building
frontage or
tenant suite
elevation
facing a street
or parking lot

1.5 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
20 feet5 Yes § 17.20.070
Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
80,000 to
140,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
building
frontage, or
450 square
feet,
whichever is
less
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
140,000 to
200,000 square
feet of gross
floor area: 1.5
square feet per
linear foot of
building
frontage, or
500 square
feet,
whichever is
less
41 Item 1.

Notes:
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs, whose maximum area shall be as specified in Section 17.20.070 and not apply to the maximum total area for all signs on a site. 2 For a gross floor area less than 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 50 square feet.
3 For a gross floor area of at least 20,000 square feet, the maximum total area shall not be lower than 75 square feet.
4 Freeway-oriented businesses, sSites contiguous to Oroville Dam Boulevard State Route 162, as well as other C-1 and MXD properties may have one freestanding sign with additional height as specified in Section 17.20.070. 5 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.

17.20.140 Requirements for special purpose districts.

Table 17.20.140-1
Allowed Signs in PQ Districts
Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height Lighting Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Awning signs No maximum 50% of awning
area, or 25 sq. ft.,
whichever is less
1 square foot
for each linear
foot of
building
frontage, or
100 square
feet,
whichever is
less2
No maximum Yes; internal
illumination
prohibited
§ 17.20.070
Banner signs 1 per frontage 30 sq. ft. 20 feet3 No Shall not be used as permanent copy and
be displayed for no
more than 30
consecutive days.

See Section

17.20.090 if the
banner is for a
special function
Canopy signs No maximum 4 sq. ft. per face 20 feet3 Yes; internal illumination
prohibited
—
42 Item 1.

Permitted Sign
Types
Max. Number
of Signs Max. Area
Max. Total
Area for All
Signs1 Max. Height Lighting Allowed
Additional
Requirements
Monument signs 1 per frontage Determined by
total area
50 sq. ft. per sign
face
6 feet Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
Projecting signs 1 per tenant on
each frontage
50 sq. ft. 20 feet3 Yes § 17.20.070
Wall signs No maximum
1 per building
frontage or
tenant suite
elevation
facing a street
or parking lot
1 sq. ft. per
building lineal
foot of building
frontage not to
exceed 10% of
wall area
20 feet3 Yes § 17.20.070
§ 17.20.150
Window signs No maximum 25% of window
area
No maximum Yes § 17.20.070
Notes:
1 The maximum total area applies to all signs on a site, including signs for all tenants of a multi-tenant building. This does not include freestanding signs, freeway-oriented freestanding signs, and monument signs, whose maximum area shall be as specified in Section 17.20.070 and not apply to the maximum total area for all signs on a site. 2 The maximum total area shall not be lower than 25 square feet. 3 Maximum sign height of 20 feet may be exceeded, subject to the approval of the planning commission.
43 Item 1.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN & COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: AMY BERGSTRAND, DIRECTOR BUISNESS

ASSISTANCE/HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
RE: FORECLOSURE OF 9 MIDWAY DRIVE
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
The City Council may consider initiating foreclosure proceedings related to the City of Oroville’s interest in the Deed of Trust against the property located at 9 Midway Drive, Oroville (APN: 033-232-008).

DISCUSSION
Staff is requesting authorization from the Council to initiate foreclosure on the property located at 9 Midway Drive. The current property owner obtained a mortgage subsidy loan through the City’s Homeownership Assistance Program in the amount of $99,895.00.

The borrower is in default on their first mortgage, Mortgage Electronic Systems Inc., as beneficiary, as nominee for Change Lending, LLC which holds the first lien position. The approximate amount the cure the default and to secure the City’s lien position would be $160,982.21.

Address Amount due to
Primary Lender
Amount of City
Loan(+interest)
Total Loans Value Based on
Comparable
9 Midway Drive $160,982.21 $106,956.07 $267,938.28 $265,000.00 If the City Council authorized staff to secure the City’s interest in this property, staff is proposing that the property be resold on the open market to recoup homebuyer loan costs.

Although the comparable is less than the combined loan balances, staff recommends redeeming the primary loan and initiating our own foreclosure to recoup the majority of the City’s investment of this property. Staff has not gained access to the interior of the home to determine what, if any, repairs are needed. Staff will bring these items back to Council if repairs in excess of normal wear and tear maintenance are required. 44 Item 2.

Page 2 ends

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no general fund impact. Approximately $5,000 will be needed to cure the default, including foreclosure fees from Fund 220 (Housing Program Fund) or 225 (City Revolving Loan Fund).

ACTION REQUESTED -
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 9362 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR

OF BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE ALL

DOCUMENTS AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO NECESSARY TO INITIATE AND COMPLETE FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS ON REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 MIDWAY DRIVE, OROVILLE (APN 033- 232-008)

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 9362
45 Item 2.

Page 1 of 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9362

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA,

AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS AND ANY AMENDMENTS

THERETO NECESSARY TO INITIATE AND COMPLETE FORECLOSURE
PROCEEDINGS ON REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 MIDWAY DRIVE, OROVILLE (APN 033-232-008)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Director of Business Assistance and Housing Development is hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents and any amendments thereto necessary to initiate and complete foreclosure proceedings on 9 Midway Drive, Oroville CA, (APN 033-232-008) Oroville, California; and

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a regular meeting on April 1, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 46 Item 2.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: AMY BERGSTRAND, DIRECTOR

BUSINESS ASSISTANCE/HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
RE: AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO THE SALE OF CITY

REAL PROPERTIES
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
The Council may consider amending Resolution Number 9346 that authorized the Mayor or City Administrator to execute all documents related to the sale of 1218 Bird Street to authorizing the Director of Business Assistance and Housing Development to execute all documents related to the sale of 1218 Bird St.

DIS CUSSION
On May 16, 2023, City Council directed staff to initiate foreclosure related to the City of Oroville’s interest in the Deed of Trust against the property in default located at 1218 Bird St.

On November 30, 2023, the City was granted property from the Estate Administrator through a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure.

On July 8, 2024, the property was listed with the City’s real estate broker for $343,000, then decreased to the price to $300,000 in August of 2024. Although there was initially interest in the property, an offer to purchase failed to materialize. In February, City Staff and the real estate broker agreed to lower the price to $275,000.

On February 11, 2025, City Staff received an offer of $275,000 from Mr. Garrett McCarter with a seller credit of $10,000 for closing costs and a 30-day escrow. The property will be owneroccupied.

Due to the timing escrows and the process in which offers, counter offers and disclosures are processed, it has become apparent that authorizing the Director of Business Assistance and housing development to electronically or manually sign these documents on the City’s behalf would best serve the City of Oroville in these types of transactions.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.
47 Item 3.

Page 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 9363-A RESOLUTION TO AMEND RESOLUTION NUMBER 9346 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE,

CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE SALE OF 1218 BIRD ST.

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 9363
48 Item 3.

Page 1 of 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9363

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING DIRECTOR

OF BUSINESS ASSISTANCE AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE ALL

DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE SALE OF THE CITY-OWNED PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 1218 BIRD STREET, OROVILLE (APN.012-076-007) TO GARRETT MCCARTER FOR THE AMOUNT OF $275,000. (APN 012-076-007)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The Oroville City Council hereby approves the sale of the property located at 1218 Bird Street, Oroville, to Garrett McCarter for $275,000.

2. The Director of Business Assistance and Housing Development is hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents and any amendments thereto necessary to initiate and complete foreclosure proceedings on 1218 Bird Street, Oroville CA, (APN 012-076-007) Oroville, California; and

3. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oroville at a regular meeting on April 1, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

David Ritchie, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 49 Item 3.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN & COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PATRICK PIATT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
RE: SUPPORT FOR SENATE BILL 456 (ASHBY) – COMMUNITY

BEAUTIFICATION ACT
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a letter of support for Senate Bill 456 (Ashby), which would exempt muralists from contractor licensing requirements under the California Business and Professions Code. The bill aims to remove unnecessary regulatory barriers to the creation of public art, facilitating community beautification and economic development initiatives across the state, including in the City of Oroville.

DISCUSSION
Senate Bill 456—also known as the Community Beautification Act—seeks to clarify that muralists are not subject to contractor licensing requirements. Under current interpretations of state law, muralists hired to paint works of art valued at more than $500 are considered "contractors" and must obtain a contractor’s license. This classification imposes significant burdens on artists, including a requirement for four years of licensed experience, passing an exam, and paying licensing fees. These requirements are impractical for artists and have caused many public agencies, including cities, to pause or abandon mural projects.

Public murals have proven to be a powerful tool for neighborhood revitalization, civic pride, and community identity. In Oroville, murals have been incorporated into downtown and community beautification projects and are a celebrated part of the city’s artistic landscape. Requiring contractor licensing for artists jeopardizes future mural projects and hampers our ability to participate in statewide initiatives like the Clean California Program, which includes mural installations as part of its community enhancement goals.

SB 456 creates a narrowly tailored exemption for muralists, distinguishing them from painting contractors by recognizing the artistic and non-structural nature of their work.

The legislation is co-sponsored by the League of California Cities and California Arts 50 Item 4.

Page 2 ends

Advocates, and aligns with Oroville’s ongoing revitalization efforts and public art objectives.

Supporting SB 456 signals the City’s commitment to advancing local art and protecting artists’ rights, while also safeguarding future opportunities for mural-based beautification and economic development.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. The letter of support is a policy endorsement and does not authorize any expenditure.

ACTION REQUESTED -
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Approve the Letter of Support for SB 456 (Ashby); and

2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the letter on behalf of the City Council.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Letter of Support for SB 456 (Ashby)

2. SB 456 Fact Sheet
51 Item 4.

City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2436 FAX (530) 538-2468
www.cityoforoville.org
April 1, 2025
The Honorable Angelique V. Ashby
California State Senate, 8th District
1021 O Street, Suite 8620
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Support for SB 456 (Ashby) – Community Beautification Act Dear Senator Ashby:

On behalf of the Oroville City Council, I am pleased to express our strong support for Senate Bill 456, your important legislation to exempt muralists from contractor licensing requirements under the Business and Professions Code.

Public art plays a vital role in community engagement, economic development, and neighborhood identity. In Oroville, we have seen firsthand how murals spark civic pride and beautify our public spaces, enhancing both the visitor experience and residents’ connection to place. However, recent confusion around licensing requirements has placed an unnecessary burden on artists and municipalities alike—stalling projects and limiting opportunities for creative expression.

By creating a narrowly defined exemption for muralists, SB 456 removes these barriers while maintaining appropriate distinctions between artistic work and construction activity. This thoughtful clarification will empower cities like Oroville to continue investing in public art without exposing local governments or artists to undue risk or regulatory complexity.

We applaud your leadership on this issue and appreciate your commitment to supporting California’s creative economy. The Oroville City Council respectfully urges the Legislature to pass SB 456 and ensure that public art continues to flourish in communities across the state.

Sincerely,
David Pittman
Mayor of Oroville
On behalf of the Oroville City Council
52 Item 4.

AB 861 SB 456 – Community Beautification Act
Supporting public art, protecting muralists, and expanding our creative economy

SUMMARY
SB 456 creates a licensing exemption for muralists,
which will allow them to continue to engage in
commissioned work for public and private art
without obtaining a contractor’s license, as has been
standard practice.

BACKGROUND
Murals are powerful tools for transforming
neighborhoods and improving civic pride. Public art
and murals are proven drivers of enhancing
community and economic health, attracting tourists,
supporting jobs, generating revenue, and improving
public safety and well-being. For example,
Sacramento’s Wide Open Walls mural festival has
brought over 200 murals to the city, sparking local
pride and stimulating the creative economy.

However, current law has led to confusion regarding
licensing requirements for muralists. In 2023, public
notices began being issued to municipalities
indicating that muralists fall within the definition of a "contractor" under Business and Professions Code
Section 7026.

As a result, public agencies and private parties that
commission a muralist must first ensure they carry a
contractor's license if they undertake a mural for
more than $500, even though historically this has not
been standard practice for muralists.

THE PROBLEM
Due to these licensure requirements, cities across
California have been instructing their public arts
administrators to cease or stall the implementation of
mural projects. This creates significant roadblocks
for initiatives, like the State’s Clean CA Program,
which seeks to beautify public spaces like highways,
local roads, parks, and pathways.
1 1 Clean California
2 Contractors State License Board
Requiring muralists to obtain a contractor’s license
imposes significant challenges. To qualify for these
commercial licenses, muralists must accumulate four
years of specialized experience under a licensed
contractor, pass the Law and Business examination,
and pay annual licensing fees.2 These requirements
not only create unnecessary barriers to work on
public art projects, but also expose city employees
and artists to fines if such requirements are not met.

These licensure requirements violate the California
Arts Preservation Act (CAPA) which protects an
artist’s authorship rights and distinguishes the
difference from commercial painting.3 Painting walls
for commercial or decorative purposes does not
receive these same protections, furthering the
distinction between muralists and commercial
painters.

Murals are considered works of art, protected under
federal copyright laws and are fundamentally
different from construction projects.

THE SOLUTION
SB 456 clarifies standard practice of current law and
adds “muralist”, narrowly defined, to the list of
activities in the Business and Professions Code that
are not subject to licensure.

Muralists provide a fundamentally different service
than a painting contractor, as their work is an artistic expression, rather than addressing the structural
integrity of a building. It is appropriate to provide a narrow exception to the state’s licensing
requirements for muralists, as SB 456 seeks to
provide them with the statutory flexibility to
continue their artistic expression.
3 California Arts Preservation Act (CAPA)
Senator Angelique V. Ashby, 8
th Senate District
53 Item 4.

SUPPORT
California Arts Advocates (Co-sponsor)
League of California Cities (Co-sponsor)

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Ryan Tomlinson, Legislative Aide
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (916) 651-4008
54 Item 4.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN & COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADIMINISTRATOR
RE: LETTER IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 554 – LAW ENFORCEMENT:

IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
At the request of Council, Staff have drafted a letter in support of Senate Bill (SB) 554 for Council consideration, which would make modifications to the California Values Act, providing clarity with regard to how local law enforcement officials are to cooperate with federal authorities.

DISCUSSION
Existing law, the California Values Act, generally prohibits California law enforcement agencies from investigating, interrogating, detaining, detecting, or arresting persons for immigration enforcement purposes, including providing information regarding a person’s release date or responding to requests for notification by providing release dates or other information, as specified. Existing law provides a law enforcement official with discretion to cooperate with immigration authorities only if doing so would not violate any federal, state, or local law, or local policy, and where permitted by the California Values Act.

The letter requests language changes that clearly articulate that law enforcement is to cooperate with federal authorities when encountering criminal behavior.

FISCAL IMPACT
None

ACTION REQUESTED -
Approve letter in support for Senate Bill 554 with modifications; and Authorize the Mayor to sign the letter on behalf of the City Council.

ATTACHMENTS
Letter in support of Senate Bill 554 with modifications. 55 Item 5.

Page 2 ends

56 Item 5.
“Oroville – California's best opportunity for a safe and diverse quality of life” City of Oroville

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2535 FAX (530) 538-2468
www.cityoforoville.org
April 1, 2025
Senator Brian W. Jones
California State Senate
1021 O Street, Room 7640
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Letter of Support for Senate Bill 554 – Law Enforcement: Immigration Enforcement
Dear Senator Jones,
The Oroville City Council is writing to express strong support for Senate Bill (SB) 554, relative to California law enforcement’s role in immigration enforcement. The Council recognizes the importance of policies that allow officers to focus on public safety while maintaining community trust.

SB 554, with amended language that clearly articulates that law enforcement is to cooperate with federal authorities when encountering criminal behaviors, would eliminate currently conflicting State and federal laws that create uncertainty for California law enforcement and the communities they serve. By aligning California law, SB 554 would ensure officers are not placed in difficult positions and strengthens public safety by encouraging all residents to report crimes without fear of immigration consequences.

The Council appreciates your leadership on this important issue and we urge the Legislature to pass SB 554 with amended language that clearly articulates that law enforcement is to cooperate with federal authorities when encountering criminal behaviors. Thank you for your work and consideration.

Sincerely,
David Pittman
Mayor
City of Oroville
David Pittman
Office of Mayor
57 Item 5.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN & COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADIMINISTRATOR
RE: LETTER IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 74 – INFRASTRUCTURE GAP – FUND PROGRAM
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
Staff recommend that the City Council approve a letter of support for Senate Bill 74, which would establish the Infrastructure Gap – Fund Program to provide gap funding grants to local agencies to develop and construct infrastructure projects.

DISCUSSION
The City of Oroville, along with many other local agencies, finds itself in a situation where the number of needed capital projects exceeds available resources. This bill would authorize “gap” funding of up to 20% of the project costs, provided certain conditions have been met and the local agency has allocated other local revenue to initial costs of the project. The local agency would need to demonstrate challenges the agency is encountering with achieving the project on time and on budget and how the project is critical to local and State needs.

FISCAL IMPACT
None

ACTION REQUESTED
Approve letter in support for Senate Bill 74; and
Authorize the Mayor to sign the letter on behalf of the City Council.

ATTACHMENTS
Letter in support of Senate Bill 74.
58 Item 6.
“Oroville – California's best opportunity for a safe and diverse quality of life” City of Oroville

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965-4897
(530) 538-2535 FAX (530) 538-2468
www.cityoforoville.org
April 1, 2025
The Honorable Maria Elena Durazo
Chair, Senate Local Government Committee
1021 O Street, Room 7530
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Letter of Support for Senate Bill 74 – Infrastructure Gap-Fund Program Dear Chair Durazo,
On behalf of the Oroville City Council we are pleased to express our strong support for Senate Bill 74, which seeks to establish an infrastructure gap-fund program to provide much-needed grants to local agencies for the development and construction of critical infrastructure projects.

As California’s local governments continue to grow, so does the need for reliable and sustainable infrastructure. However, many local governments struggle to fund essential projects due to financial constraints, making it difficult to meet the demands of our residents and businesses.

Senate Bill 74 will help bridge this funding gap by offering grants that support roads, bridges, water systems, and other vital infrastructure, ensuring safer and more efficient communities.

Investing in local infrastructure is crucial for economic development, job creation, and public safety. By supporting SB 74, the State of California is making a commitment to strengthening our communities and ensuring that local agencies have the necessary resources to complete much-needed projects.

For these reasons, the Oroville City Council urges the Legislature to approve this critical legislation. If you have any questions or need more information, please feel free to contact Brian Ring, City Administrator at [email protected].

Thank you for your leadership on this important issue.

Sincerely,
David Pittman
Mayor, City of Oroville
David Pittman
Office of Mayor
59 Item 6.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN & COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ALYSSA STUTZ, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS /

CITY ENGINEER
RE: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
The City Council will provide feedback on the proposed criteria that will be used to determine how large projects - both programmatic and capital - will be prioritized by engineering staff.

DISCUSSION
As the City continues to grow and face increasing demands on its infrastructure, it is essential to establish a clear, objective framework for evaluating and prioritizing projects.

By utilizing consistent criteria, the City Council can ensure that limited resources are allocated to projects that best serve the community's needs and align with the City’s longterm goals. The Criteria currently included are as follows:

1. Urgency - Focuses on how critical it is to address the project now. This could relate to time-sensitive issues such as deteriorating infrastructure, imminent risks, or regulatory deadlines. Higher urgency means quicker action is needed. Score 1-10

2. Public Safety & Resilience - Assesses the project’s role in ensuring public safety, minimizing risks to residents, and enhancing the city's ability to recover from natural disasters, or other disruptive events. Score 1-10

3. Community & Economic Benefit - Evaluates how the project will impact the community in terms of improving quality of life, creating job opportunities, supporting economic growth, and enhancing community well-being. Score 1-5

4. Cost - Considers the financial investment required for the project, including both initial capital and long-term operational costs. This will often involve assessing whether the project fits within budget constraints or if additional funding sources are 60 Item 7.

Page 2 ends

required. Score 1-5

5. Feasibility - Focuses on whether the project is realistic and achievable based on available resources, existing conditions, and timelines. It also considers technical and operational challenges that could affect execution. Score 1-5

6. Equity & Accessibility - Examines how the project addresses issues of social equity and ensures access for all groups, particularly underserved or vulnerable populations. This category ensures that the project benefits everyone in the community, regardless of background or ability. Score 1-5

7. Environmental Impact & Sustainability - Assesses the project's effects on the environment, including resource use, waste, emissions, and biodiversity. It also considers long-term sustainability, including whether the project promotes green practices or mitigates negative environmental effects. Score 1-5

8. Compliance - Ensures the project meets, or identifies if the project is needed to meet, all legal, regulatory, and policy requirements, including zoning laws, environmental regulations, or state/federal mandates. Score 1-5

9. Risk if Project is Not Done - Examines the potential negative consequences of not undertaking the project. This could include continued safety hazards, regulatory non-compliance, or worsening community issues that could have long-term impacts. Score 1-5

10.Public Health - Focuses on how the project will impact the physical and mental health of the community. This includes reducing health risks, improving access to healthcare, and promoting healthy living environments. Score 1-5

11.Traffic & Congestion Relief - Assesses the project's potential to improve traffic flow, reduce congestion, or enhance transportation infrastructure. This category can focus on both short-term and long-term improvements to mobility and accessibility.

Score 1-5
This approach will help provide a transparent and rational decision-making process that will guide the prioritization of projects over time.

Additionally, staff will monitor ongoing projects and adjust priorities as necessary to accommodate unforeseen challenges or opportunities. This flexible approach will ensure that the City’s infrastructure remains responsive to the changing needs of the community while maintaining fiscal responsibility.

The feedback provided by the City Council during this discussion will be instrumental in refining the proposed criteria. The criteria will be adjusted, if necessary, to ensure they are 61 Item 7.

Page 3 ends

aligned with the City’s strategic priorities and provide engineering staff with a clear and manageable framework for prioritization.

FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of this proposal will depend on the projects prioritized under the new criteria. By establishing a transparent and objective framework for prioritization, the City aims to make more informed decisions about resource allocation, ensuring that funds are directed toward projects with the greatest return on investment for the community.

The City anticipates that this prioritization process will lead to better management of both capital and programmatic project budgets. Efficiently managing large projects will help mitigate cost overruns, reduce the risk of delays, and ensure that funds are spent in the most effective way possible. Additionally, aligning projects with long-term strategic goals and planning will help to prevent duplicative efforts and unnecessary expenditures.

It is important to note that the actual fiscal impact will vary depending on the specific projects that are prioritized each year. The engineering staff will work with the City’s budget office to assess the potential financial impact of each project and ensure that prioritized projects are financially feasible within the City's annual budget. Furthermore, by creating a framework that encourages cost-effective solutions, the City aims to maximize the value of public funds spent on infrastructure projects.

ACTION REQUESTED -
Provide feedback to City staff regarding the selected criteria.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Presentation
62 Item 7.

PROJECT

PRIORITIZATION

CRITERIA FOR

OROVILLE

A DATA-DRIVEN APPROACH TO

PROJECT COMPLETION
63 Item 7.

OVERVIEW
2 • Projects at a High Level
• Need for Prioritization
• Recommended Criteria
• Project Prioritization using Recommended Criteria
• Council Feedback
64 Item 7.

OVERVIEW - NUMBER OF PROJECTS BY DISTRICT
3 4
4 5
3 4
4 5
3 2
2 2
4 20
9 10
13 9
19 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
District F
District E
District D
District C
District B
District A
Under $75k
$75k-$220k
Over $220k
Numbers Above Include Duplicated Projects Due to District Overlap.

Total Projects for all Districts Combined is 68.
29 16
17 18
15 27
65 Item 7.

OVERVIEW - ESTIMATED PROJECT COST BY DISTRICT
4 $29,859,000
$33,776,000
$21,128,000
$19,783,000
$42,228,000
$63,678,000
$0 $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000 $50,000,000 $60,000,000 $70,000,000 District F
District E
District D
District C
District B
District A
Numbers Above Include Duplicated Projects Due to District Overlap.

Total Estimated Project Cost for all Districts Combined is $128,049,000. 66 Item 7.

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?
• Optimizes Resource Allocation
• Improves Decision-Making
• Reduces Conflicts and Confusion
• Maximizes Impact
• Facilitates Communication with Stakeholders
• Supports Long-Term Planning
• Improves Project Execution
• Increases Likelihood of Grant Funding
67 Item 7.

PROJECT

PRIORITIZATION

CRITERIA

DEFINING KEY

PRIORITIZATION FACTORS
1) Urgency
2) Public Safety & Resilience
3) Community & Economic Benefit
4) Cost
5) Feasibility
6) Equity & Accessibility
7) Environmental Impact & Sustainability
8) Compliance
9) Risk
10) Public Health
11) Traffic & Congestion Relief
68 Item 7.

PROPOSED SCORING

METHODOLOGY
How projects are ranked
69 Item 7.

Urgency (1 to 10)
• 1: Project can be deferred indefinitely without any noticeable negative consequences. • 2: Delay of 3-5 years results in minor inconvenience with no critical impact (e.g., small cost increase).
• 3-4: Delay of 2-3 years would cause operational disruption or increased cost. • 5-6: Action is required within 12-24 months to avoid moderate consequences (e.g., a slight increase in operational risk or costs >$220,000).
• 7-8: Delay of 6-12 months could result in legal, safety, reputational consequences, critical safety issues, public backlash, or regulatory fines.
• 9: Must be completed within 6 months to prevent catastrophic issues • 10: Project needs to be initiated immediately to avoid imminent, high-consequence impacts (e.g., loss of life, large-scale environmental disaster). 70 Item 7.

Public Safety & Resilience (1-10)
• 1: No impact on public safety or resilience; project does not contribute to improving or maintaining safety or resilience.
• 2-3: Low-to-Moderate impact; improves safety for specific vulnerable groups, affecting up to 25% of the population.
• 4-5: High to very-high impact; increases resilience to major threats, reducing risks for up to 50% of the population.
• 6-7: Critical improvement; improves overall community resilience and directly prevents significant harm to vulnerable populations (e.g., elderly, disabled, children). • 8-9: Project ensures resilience against extreme events (e.g., natural disasters), potentially saving lives and preventing large-scale disruptions.
• 10: A key initiative that directly averts a crisis with life-and-death consequences for the entire community.
71 Item 7.

Community & Economic Benefit (1-5)
• 1: No measurable community or economic impact; project provides no financial return or social benefit.
• 2: Small economic or community benefit; less than 5% of the local population benefits, and the financial return is minimal (e.g., <$50,000).
• 3: Moderate benefit; affects 10-25% of the local community, with a positive financial impact of $50,000-$200,000.
• 4: Significant benefit; affects 25-50% of the community with economic returns of $200,000-$1 million.
• 5: Transformational benefit; affects over 50% of the population, resulting in substantial financial returns ($1 million+), improved quality of life, and long-term economic growth. 72 Item 7.

Cost (1-5)
• 1: Greater than $1M and/or no funds budgeted
• 2: Greater than $500k and less than $1M and/or no funds budgeted • 3: Greater than $220k and less than $500k and/or major funding reallocations • 4: Greater than $75k and less than $220k and/or manageable with reallocations/minor budget adjustment
• 5: Less than $75k and/or funds completely allocated
73 Item 7.

Feasibility (1-5)
• 1: The project faces major technical, financial, or regulatory barriers that cannot be overcome (e.g., exceeding available resources or significant regulatory issues). • 2: Significant feasibility concerns; at least one major barrier (e.g., technical challenges, regulatory approval issues) that requires substantial effort to address. • 3: Moderate feasibility; some challenges exist, but they are manageable with adjustments (e.g., requires minor redesign or new partnerships).
• 4: High feasibility; most aspects of the project are ready for execution, with only minor adjustments or logistical issues.
• 5: Very high feasibility; no significant challenges or obstacles, and the project is ready for rapid implementation with clear plans and resources.
74 Item 7.

Equity & Accessibility (1-5)
• 1: The project disproportionately benefits high-income or majority groups, exacerbating existing inequities.
• 2: Minor consideration for equity and accessibility; may include some improvements but still limits access for certain groups (e.g., low-income, disabled). • 3: Moderate equity and accessibility; addresses some key equity issues, with improvements for certain underserved or marginalized groups.
• 4: High equity and accessibility; prioritizes underrepresented groups and ensures broad access to services and opportunities.
• 5: Very high equity and accessibility; systematically reduces disparities, providing access to all groups, particularly disadvantaged or marginalized populations. 75 Item 7.

Environmental Impact & Sustainability (1-5)
• 1: The project will result in significant, long-term environmental harm (e.g., destruction of ecosystems, high carbon emissions).
• 2: Minor environmental harm; project has limited positive environmental features and will have some negative impacts.
• 3: Moderate positive environmental impact; reduces some negative environmental effects (e.g., carbon emissions, waste) but not a primary focus. • 4: High environmental sustainability; project significantly reduces negative environmental impacts, with clear improvements in sustainability practices. • 5: Very high environmental sustainability; project leads to substantial improvements in environmental preservation, carbon reduction, or long-term resource sustainability (e.g., energy efficiency, zero waste).
76 Item 7.

Compliance (1-5)
• 1: The project has no relation to regulatory compliance; it is not affected by any existing laws or regulations and does not contribute to meeting any regulatory requirements. • 2: The project does not directly address regulatory requirements but may have minor compliance-related aspects (e.g., voluntary industry standards, non-mandatory best practices). • 3: The project is required to meet existing regulations or laws, but it only satisfies the minimum legal requirements, with no additional benefits or innovations in compliance. • 4: The project goes beyond the basic regulatory requirements, ensuring full compliance with existing laws and exceeding industry standards in some areas (e.g., enhancing safety or environmental sustainability beyond the minimum).
• 5: The project exceeds current regulatory requirements and sets a new standard for compliance, providing innovations that go beyond the law or introduce new regulatory frameworks (e.g., pioneering sustainability practices, or ensuring compliance with future regulations that are likely to be enforced).
77 Item 7.

Risk (1-5)
• 1: Very low risk if the project is not completed; there is little to no consequence if the project is delayed or canceled, and the organization can continue operations without major setbacks. • 2: Low risk if the project is not completed; while the failure to complete the project may cause some minor inconveniences or delays, there would be no critical consequences or high costs. • 3: Moderate risk if the project is not completed; while there would be some disruptions or negative outcomes (e.g., moderate legal issues or operational inefficiencies), the impact could be managed or mitigated.
• 4: High risk if the project is not completed; failure to proceed would result in major negative consequences (e.g., critical legal, safety, or operational disruptions that could lead to substantial costs or liabilities).
• 5: Very high risk if the project is not completed; failure to execute the project could result in catastrophic consequences (e.g., legal penalties, environmental disaster, severe safety hazards, or a significant loss of public trust).
78 Item 7.

Public Health (1-5)
• 1: The project has a direct negative impact on public health (e.g., increasing pollution, public exposure to harmful substances).
• 2: Minor negative impact on public health but can be mitigated with additional measures. • 3: Moderate positive impact; improves public health outcomes for certain groups, with a clear benefit but limited scope (e.g., reducing pollution levels by 10-20%). • 4: High positive impact; significant improvements to public health, with measurable benefits to the community (e.g., reduced disease rates, improved access to health services). • 5: Very high positive impact; the project addresses major public health concerns, significantly reducing risks and improving overall health outcomes (e.g., reducing mortality rates, major disease prevention).
79 Item 7.

Traffic & Congestion Relief (1-5)
• 1: No impact; the project either worsens traffic or has no measurable effect on congestion. • 2: Minimal impact; minor improvement, reducing congestion by less than 5%. • 3: Moderate impact; reduces congestion by 5-15%, improving travel times for a portion of the population.
• 4: Significant impact; reduces congestion by 15-30%, improving traffic flow and travel times for a large portion of the population.
• 5: Very high impact; major reduction in congestion (e.g., 30%+), significantly improving travel times and reducing traffic-related costs for the community. 80 Item 7.

TOP PRIORITY

PROJECTS
Highest-Ranking Projects when using this Criteria
81 Item 7.

TOP 1O RANKING PROJECTS

1. Riverbend Apartments – Drainage Issue

2. Caltrans CAPM Project Coordination

3. Storm Drain behind Mugshots

4. Sewer Lift Station – Emergency Pumping Bypass (x3 Lift Stations)

5. Sewer Lift Station Modernization

6. Montgomery Roundabout

7. Ishi Middle School – Complete Streets

8. City-wide ADA Compliance Baseline Study and Transition Plan

9. Table Mountain Blvd. Sidewalk Railing

10. Foothill Blvd. Storm Drain Replacement
20 82
Item 7.
11-20 RANKING PROJECTS

11. Argonaut Basin Piping Repair

12. Bird Street ADA and Traffic Improvements

13. Public Safety Building #2

14. Drainage behind Stanford Elementary School

15. Drainage Improvements at Lincoln and Myers Intersection

16. Larkin Road Drainage Improvements

17. Grand Ave. at Table Mountain Blvd. Intersection

18. Drainage Issue at Montgomery St. and Feather River Blvd. Intersection

19. Oro Bangor Hwy. Drainage between Burlington and Spencer

20. Oro Dam Blvd. E Slope Stabilization
21 83
Item 7.

VISUALIZATION OF PROJECT STATUS
22 84
Item 7.

WHAT’S NEXT?
23 • Actioning/Planning Top
Priority Projects
• Resource and Scheduling
Alignment
• Adjustments Based on
Changing Circumstances
85 Item 7.

COUNCIL INPUT AND

FEEDBACK
Suggestions: • Review the list of projects
in your district
and coordinate with me to propose
additional projects.
• Take a close look at the proposed project
criteria. It determines which projects staff
will be spending most of their time on.

Modifying the criteria and/or weighting it
differently does affect priority.
86 Item 7.

Overall Project Summary
Primary Project Description District Project Score Total Estimate 1 SR162 Complete Streets
Project Closeout
Sidewalk gap closures andstriping improvements to addbike lanes along SR 162 fromHwy 70 to Foothill Blvd.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
48 $8,010,000.00
2 Riverbend Apartments -Drainage Issue
Undersized storm drain throughRiverbend Apartment Complexat Corner of Nelson Ave. andTable Mountain Blvd. Will beworking with the Developer toIncrease the size of the StormDrain along Nelson Ave toaccommodate 100-yr storm.

District B
48 $125,000.00
3 Caltrans CAPM ProjectCoordination
Caltrans Maintenance Project toOverlay SR162 from Hwy 70 toFoothill Blvd. Very little cost tothe City, just coordination,weekly meetings, andoccasional job site visits. Mayalso require some PIO efforts.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
45 $105,000.00
4 Mugshots Storm Drain
Replacement
Clogged storm drain behindmugshots on Montgomery St.

District F
41 $375,000.00
5 Sewer Lift StationEmergency PumpingBypass
1) Orangwood 2) RiverviewTerrace 3) Olive Glen
District B
41 $740,000.00
6 Sewer Lift StationModernization
1) Orangewood 2) Olive Glen 3)South 7th St to above ground District B
40 $1,090,000.00
7 Montgomery Roundabout
Resurfacing roadway,installation of pedestrianbeacons
District C District F
40 $1,145,000.00
8 Ishi Middle School SidewalkImprovements
Foothill Blvd from Oro-Quincy toSR162 has no sidewalks and isin the vicinity of Ishi MiddleSchool.

District D
39 $4,190,000.00
9 City-wide ADA ComplianceBaseline Study andTransition Plan Caltrans Section 504Requirement for Grant Funding.Agencies must have an ADATransition Plan.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 39 $235,000.00
10 Table Mountain Blvd
Sidewalk Railing
Add approximately 600 LF ofrailing to separate pedestriansfrom vehicles District A
38 $215,000.00
11 Foothill Storm Drain
Replace Storm Drain belowFoothill Blvd from Pierpont toEdgewood District D
38 $1,470,000.00
12 Argonaut Basin PipingRepair
Piping through face of damwhen water level is high
District D 38
$75,000.00
13 Bird Street ADAImprovements
Analysis of the addition of two4-way stops on Bird Street, oneat Huntoon and another atDowner. Also, addition of bulbouts for public safety and ADAramps.

District F
38 $1,580,000.00
Exported on March 27, 2025 10:28:05 PM PDT Page 1 of
5 87
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Project Score Total Estimate 14 Public Safety Building #2
Analysis and design to convert2000 Challenger to a PublicSafety Building to be shared byCalFire and OPD.

District A
38 $5,175,000.00
15 Drainage Behind StanfordElementary School Water drains onto back field District C 37
$275,000.00
16 Drainage Improvements atLincoln and Myers
Long term issues with debrisduring large rain events
District E
37 $350,000.00
17 Larkin Drainage
Floods during large rain events,root intrusion, etc.

District A
37 $260,000.00
18 Grand Ave Table MountainIntersection Culvert Clogged Culvert District A District B
37 $260,000.00
19 Drainage Issue Montgomeryand Feather River BlvdIntersection District A District F
37 $260,000.00
20 Oro Bangor Hwy Drainage,between Burlington andSpencer 42-48-inch culvert District E
37 $290,000.00
21 Ophir (Partnering with Butte
County)
Partnering with Butte CountyPublic Works for roadrehabilitation on Ophir Rd.

District A
37 $1,085,000.00
22 Oro Dam Blvd. East Slope
Stabilization
East of Valley View, winterstorms dump rocks onto OroDam Blvd East District D
36 $1,220,000.00
23 Bedrock Park Rehabilitation
(Phase I)
Stairway improvements, RockWall Safety, Lighting, Electrical,Building Demo, Brush cleanup,Irrigation District F
36 $270,000.00
24 South Oroville DrainageImprovements
South Oroville Drainage onWest side of Lincoln,Curb/Sidewalk throughoutSouthside, Renovation ofGreenville Culvert District E
36 $22,260,000.00
25 Washington and Table
Mountain Blvd Corridor(ATP)
Complete Streets Project fromTable Mountain Blvd. at CityLimits to Washington Ave atSR162.

District A District B
36 $37,560,000.00
26 Sewer Study for Inflow &
Infiltration
To assess which sections of citysewer need to be relined orreplaced District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 36 $410,000.00
27 F.O.G. Program
Sewer Fats Oils and Greasesprogram - partner with TWSDand LOAPUD District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 35 $40,000.00
28 Citywide E&TS
Engineering & Traffic Surveysare required on Collector andArterial streets to set updatedspeed limits once every 5 years.It has been 14 years since theCity has performed an ET&S.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 35 $230,000.00
29 New Lift Station - RuddyCreek
New Lift Station, SC-OR ismanaging design
35 $585,000.00
Exported on March 27, 2025 10:28:05 PM PDT Page 2 of
5 88
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Project Score Total Estimate 30 Hewitt Park (Phase II)
Construct Splash Pad,pickleball courts, dog park,multipurpose field, andperimeter fence. Renovateexisting bathroom.

District F
33 $7,020,000.00
31 Downtown Oroville Phase I -Myers
Resurface Myers fromConvention Center to Mitchell
District F
33 $520,000.00
32 Downtown Oroville Phase I -
Montgomery
Resurface Montgomery fromFeather River Blvd toRoundabout District F
33 $920,000.00
33 Norton St. Repave,Drainage, and AccessImprovements
District C
33 $1,180,000.00
34 Historic Downtown AccessImprovements
Improve all curb ramps andsidewalk throughout HistoricDowntown, bounded by OliverStreet to the East, High Streetto the South, Arline RhineMemorial to the North, and 5thAve to the West, Includes BirdStreet Improvements District F
32 $545,000.00
35 Montgomery/Orange
Complete Streets
Sidewalk Gap Closures androad overlay from railroadcrossing to Acacia Ave District C
32 $2,410,000.00
36 CMMS Rollout
Implement and Migrate to aComputerized MaintenanceManagement System (PublicWorks) District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 32 $80,000.00
37 Lord's Gym Bike Racks
This may be linked to BirdStreet Improvements. Findlocation for bike racks nearLord's Gym.

District F
31 $40,000.00
38 Boynton Drainage
Improvements
Improve Open Channel fromBridge Street to the JoyApartment Complex District C
31 $628,000.00
39 Downtown RestroomRehabilitation
District F
31 $143,000.00
40 Update to ImprovementStandards andSpecifications, andTechnical Specifications Current Standards to notcomply with current CBC
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 31 $40,000.00
41 City-wide Master Drainage
Plan
Master plan for identifyingculvert condition, sizing, whatsizing should be, needed StormDrain enhancements, etc.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 31 $320,000.00
42 OPD Office Expansion 31 $355,000.0043 Feasibility Study @ Acacia (Roundabout?)
Feasibility Study forRoundabout at Acacia andOrange
District C
30 $2,250,000.00
44 Painting Lott Home / SankPark
District F
30 $198,000.00
Exported on March 27, 2025 10:28:05 PM PDT Page 3 of
5 89
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Project Score Total Estimate 45 S 5th Ave
Overlay on whole road, curband sidewalk repairs/additionfrom Cal Oak to SR 162 District A
30 $1,255,000.00
46 Burlington and Spencer
Sidewalks
Sidewalks for public safetyalong Burlington and Spencerfrom Ithaca to Wyandotte. 30 $0.00
47 Feather River Blvd andMitchell Intersection TrafficLight/Roundabout Study Alternatives Analysis forFeather River Blvd. and MitchellAve. Intersection District A
29 $895,000.00
48 Mitchell Veteran's Apartment
Coordination
New Veteran Apartments Southof Mitchell Corp Yard
District A
29 $20,000.00
49 Fogg Ave
Curb/gutter, repaving fromGrand Ave to Nelson Ave.

District A District B
28 $940,000.00
50 Convention Center Parking
Lot
Enhance (add landscaping),repave parking lot East of theConvention Center District F
27 $1,143,000.00
51 OPD Door Installation 27 $20,000.0052
Lower Wyandotte Rd. StormDrainage
Storm Drainage fromWyandotte to V7
District D District E
27 $1,195,000.00
53 Foothill Complete Streets
From SR162 south to CityLimits
District D 27
$3,400,000.00
54 New Corporation YardRenovation
District A
26 $1,830,000.00
55 MYOPS - Museum Facilities
Artifact assessment and displayupdgrades
District F
26 $145,000.00
56 Downer Public Parking Lot,Brownfield Renovate Public Parking Lot District F
25 $1,610,000.00
57 MS4 Update
Current MS4 is over 10 yearsold
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 25 $55,000.00
58 Bedrock Park Rehabilitation(Phase II)
District F
25 $1,160,000.00
59 Linden Ave. Repave andAccess Improvements
District C 25
$1,175,000.00
60 City Hall Lobby andRestroom Renovation
District F
25 $290,000.00
61 Convention Center (Phase II- Exterior)
Renovate the exterior of theConvention Center, realign thefront entrance and vehicleaccess, update ADAcompliance District F
24 $1,775,000.00
62 Table Mountain RoundaboutBeautification Project
District A District B
24 $103,000.00
63 Lincoln and WyandotteBeautification Project
District E
24 $103,000.00
64 Oro Bangor and MyersBeautification Project
District E
24 $53,000.00
65 Oro Quincy and FoothillBeautification
District D 24
$53,000.00
66 Mitchell Ave Overlay District A District C District F 23 $1,195,000.00 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:28:05 PM PDT Page 4 of 5 90
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Project Score Total Estimate 67 Demo of Mitchell Corp Yard District A 23 $1,230,000.0068 Commercial ManufacturingSpace at Airport
Potential for large warehousewith office space at Airport District A
18 $935,000.00
69 Multi-hanger Building at
Airport
District A
18 $935,000.00
Exported on March 27, 2025 10:28:05 PM PDT Page 5 of
5 91
Item 7.

District A
Primary Project Description District Project Score Total Estimate 1 SR162 Complete Streets
Project Closeout
Sidewalk gap closures andstriping improvements to addbike lanes along SR 162 fromHwy 70 to Foothill Blvd.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
48 $8,010,000.00
2 Caltrans CAPM ProjectCoordination
Caltrans Maintenance Project toOverlay SR162 from Hwy 70 toFoothill Blvd. Very little cost tothe City, just coordination,weekly meetings, andoccasional job site visits. Mayalso require some PIO efforts.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
45 $105,000.00
3 City-wide ADA ComplianceBaseline Study andTransition Plan Caltrans Section 504Requirement for Grant Funding.Agencies must have an ADATransition Plan.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 39 $235,000.00
4 Table Mountain Blvd
Sidewalk Railing
Add approximately 600 LF ofrailing to separate pedestriansfrom vehicles District A
38 $215,000.00
5 Public Safety Building #2
Analysis and design to convert2000 Challenger to a PublicSafety Building to be shared byCalFire and OPD.

District A
38 $5,175,000.00
6 Larkin Drainage
Floods during large rain events,root intrusion, etc.

District A
37 $260,000.00
7 Grand Ave Table MountainIntersection Culvert Clogged Culvert District A District B
37 $260,000.00
8 Drainage Issue Montgomeryand Feather River BlvdIntersection District A District F
37 $260,000.00
9 Ophir (Partnering with Butte
County)
Partnering with Butte CountyPublic Works for roadrehabilitation on Ophir Rd.

District A
37 $1,085,000.00
10 Washington and Table
Mountain Blvd Corridor(ATP)
Complete Streets Project fromTable Mountain Blvd. at CityLimits to Washington Ave atSR162.

District A District B
36 $37,560,000.00
11 Sewer Study for Inflow &
Infiltration
To assess which sections of citysewer need to be relined orreplaced District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 36 $410,000.00
12 F.O.G. Program
Sewer Fats Oils and Greasesprogram - partner with TWSDand LOAPUD District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 35 $40,000.00
13 Citywide E&TS
Engineering & Traffic Surveysare required on Collector andArterial streets to set updatedspeed limits once every 5 years.It has been 14 years since theCity has performed an ET&S.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 35 $230,000.00
Exported on March 27, 2025 10:29:24 PM PDT Page 1 of
2 92
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Project Score Total Estimate 14 CMMS Rollout
Implement and Migrate to aComputerized MaintenanceManagement System (PublicWorks) District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 32 $80,000.00
15 Update to ImprovementStandards andSpecifications, andTechnical Specifications Current Standards to notcomply with current CBC
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 31 $40,000.00
16 City-wide Master Drainage
Plan
Master plan for identifyingculvert condition, sizing, whatsizing should be, needed StormDrain enhancements, etc.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 31 $320,000.00
17 S 5th Ave
Overlay on whole road, curband sidewalk repairs/additionfrom Cal Oak to SR 162 District A
30 $1,255,000.00
18 Feather River Blvd andMitchell Intersection TrafficLight/Roundabout Study Alternatives Analysis forFeather River Blvd. and MitchellAve. Intersection District A
29 $895,000.00
19 Mitchell Veteran's Apartment
Coordination
New Veteran Apartments Southof Mitchell Corp Yard
District A
29 $20,000.00
20 Fogg Ave
Curb/gutter, repaving fromGrand Ave to Nelson Ave.

District A District B
28 $940,000.00
21 New Corporation YardRenovation
District A
26 $1,830,000.00
22 MS4 Update
Current MS4 is over 10 yearsold
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F 25 $55,000.00
23 Table Mountain RoundaboutBeautification Project
District A District B
24 $103,000.00
24 Mitchell Ave Overlay District A District C District F 23 $1,195,000.0025 Demo of Mitchell Corp Yard District A 23 $1,230,000.0026 Commercial ManufacturingSpace at Airport
Potential for large warehousewith office space at Airport District A
18 $935,000.00
27 Multi-hanger Building at
Airport
District A
18 $935,000.00
Exported on March 27, 2025 10:29:24 PM PDT Page 2 of
2 93
Item 7.

District B
Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 1 Riverbend Apartments -Drainage Issue
Undersized storm drain throughRiverbend Apartment Complexat Corner of Nelson Ave. andTable Mountain Blvd. Will beworking with the Developer toIncrease the size of the StormDrain along Nelson Ave toaccommodate 100-yr storm.

District B
$125,000.00
48 2
Sewer Lift StationEmergency PumpingBypass
1) Orangwood 2) RiverviewTerrace 3) Olive Glen
District B
$740,000.00
41 3
Sewer Lift StationModernization
1) Orangewood 2) Olive Glen 3)South 7th St to above ground District B
$1,090,000.00
40 4
City-wide ADA ComplianceBaseline Study andTransition Plan Caltrans Section 504Requirement for Grant Funding.Agencies must have an ADATransition Plan.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $235,000.00
39 5
Grand Ave Table MountainIntersection Culvert Clogged Culvert District A District B
$260,000.00
37 6 Washington and Table
Mountain Blvd Corridor(ATP)
Complete Streets Project fromTable Mountain Blvd. at CityLimits to Washington Ave atSR162.

District A District B
$37,560,000.00
36 7 Sewer Study for Inflow &
Infiltration
To assess which sections of citysewer need to be relined orreplaced District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $410,000.00
36 8
F.O.G. Program
Sewer Fats Oils and Greasesprogram - partner with TWSDand LOAPUD District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
35 9
Citywide E&TS
Engineering & Traffic Surveysare required on Collector andArterial streets to set updatedspeed limits once every 5 years.It has been 14 years since theCity has performed an ET&S.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $230,000.00
35 10
CMMS Rollout
Implement and Migrate to aComputerized MaintenanceManagement System (PublicWorks) District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $80,000.00
32 11
Update to ImprovementStandards andSpecifications, andTechnical Specifications Current Standards to notcomply with current CBC
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
31 12 City-wide Master Drainage
Plan
Master plan for identifyingculvert condition, sizing, whatsizing should be, needed StormDrain enhancements, etc.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $320,000.00
31 13 Fogg Ave
Curb/gutter, repaving fromGrand Ave to Nelson Ave.

District A District B
$940,000.00
28 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:30:28 PM PDT Page 1 of 2 94
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 14 MS4 Update
Current MS4 is over 10 yearsold
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $55,000.00 25 15
Table Mountain RoundaboutBeautification Project
District A District B
$103,000.00
24 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:30:28 PM PDT Page 2 of 2 95
Item 7.

District C
Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 1 SR162 Complete Streets
Project Closeout
Sidewalk gap closures andstriping improvements to addbike lanes along SR 162 fromHwy 70 to Foothill Blvd.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
$8,010,000.00
48 2
Caltrans CAPM ProjectCoordination
Caltrans Maintenance Project toOverlay SR162 from Hwy 70 toFoothill Blvd. Very little cost tothe City, just coordination,weekly meetings, andoccasional job site visits. Mayalso require some PIO efforts.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
$105,000.00
45 3
Montgomery Roundabout
Resurfacing roadway,installation of pedestrianbeacons
District C District F
$1,145,000.00
40 4
City-wide ADA ComplianceBaseline Study andTransition Plan Caltrans Section 504Requirement for Grant Funding.Agencies must have an ADATransition Plan.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $235,000.00
39 5
Drainage Behind StanfordElementary School Water drains onto back field District C
$275,000.00
37 6 Sewer Study for Inflow &
Infiltration
To assess which sections of citysewer need to be relined orreplaced District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $410,000.00
36 7
F.O.G. Program
Sewer Fats Oils and Greasesprogram - partner with TWSDand LOAPUD District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
35 8
Citywide E&TS
Engineering & Traffic Surveysare required on Collector andArterial streets to set updatedspeed limits once every 5 years.It has been 14 years since theCity has performed an ET&S.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $230,000.00
35 9
Norton St. Repave,Drainage, and AccessImprovements
District C
$1,180,000.00
33 10 Montgomery/Orange
Complete Streets
Sidewalk Gap Closures androad overlay from railroadcrossing to Acacia Ave District C
$2,410,000.00
32 11
CMMS Rollout
Implement and Migrate to aComputerized MaintenanceManagement System (PublicWorks) District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $80,000.00
32 12 Boynton Drainage
Improvements
Improve Open Channel fromBridge Street to the JoyApartment Complex District C
$628,000.00
31 13
Update to ImprovementStandards andSpecifications, andTechnical Specifications Current Standards to notcomply with current CBC
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
31 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:34:22 PM PDT Page 1 of 2 96
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 14 City-wide Master Drainage
Plan
Master plan for identifyingculvert condition, sizing, whatsizing should be, needed StormDrain enhancements, etc.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $320,000.00
31 15 Feasibility Study @ Acacia
(Roundabout?)
Feasibility Study forRoundabout at Acacia andOrange
District C
$2,250,000.00
30 16 MS4 Update
Current MS4 is over 10 yearsold
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $55,000.00 25 17
Linden Ave. Repave andAccess Improvements
District C
$1,175,000.00
25 18 Mitchell Ave Overlay District A District C District F $1,195,000.00 23 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:34:22 PM PDT Page 2 of 2 97
Item 7.

District D
Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 1 \
Sidewalk gap closures andstriping improvements to addbike lanes along SR 162 fromHwy 70 to Foothill Blvd.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
$105,000.00
45 3
Ishi Middle School SidewalkImprovements
Foothill Blvd from Oro-Quincy toSR162 has no sidewalks and isin the vicinity of Ishi MiddleSchool.

District D
$4,190,000.00
39 4
City-wide ADA ComplianceBaseline Study andTransition Plan Caltrans Section 504Requirement for Grant Funding.Agencies must have an ADATransition Plan.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $235,000.00
39 5
Foothill Storm Drain
Replace Storm Drain belowFoothill Blvd from Pierpont toEdgewood District D
$1,470,000.00
38 6
Argonaut Basin PipingRepair
Piping through face of damwhen water level is high
District D
$75,000.00
38 7 Oro Dam Blvd. East Slope
Stabilization
East of Valley View, winterstorms dump rocks onto OroDam Blvd East District D
$1,220,000.00
36 8 Sewer Study for Inflow &
Infiltration
To assess which sections of citysewer need to be relined orreplaced District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $410,000.00
36 9
F.O.G. Program
Sewer Fats Oils and Greasesprogram - partner with TWSDand LOAPUD District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
35 10
Citywide E&TS
Engineering & Traffic Surveysare required on Collector andArterial streets to set updatedspeed limits once every 5 years.It has been 14 years since theCity has performed an ET&S.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $230,000.00
35 11
CMMS Rollout
Implement and Migrate to aComputerized MaintenanceManagement System (PublicWorks) District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $80,000.00
32 12
Update to ImprovementStandards andSpecifications, andTechnical Specifications Current Standards to notcomply with current CBC
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
31 13 City-wide Master Drainage
Plan
Master plan for identifyingculvert condition, sizing, whatsizing should be, needed StormDrain enhancements, etc.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $320,000.00
31 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:35:09 PM PDT Page 1 of 2 98
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 14 Lower Wyandotte Rd. StormDrainage
Storm Drainage fromWyandotte to V7
District D District E
$1,195,000.00
27 15 Foothill Complete Streets
From SR162 south to CityLimits
District D
$3,400,000.00
27 16 MS4 Update
Current MS4 is over 10 yearsold
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $55,000.00 25 17
Oro Quincy and FoothillBeautification
District D
$53,000.00
24 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:35:09 PM PDT Page 2 of 2 99
Item 7.

District E
Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 1 \
Sidewalk gap closures andstriping improvements to addbike lanes along SR 162 fromHwy 70 to Foothill Blvd.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
$105,000.00
45 3
City-wide ADA ComplianceBaseline Study andTransition Plan Caltrans Section 504Requirement for Grant Funding.Agencies must have an ADATransition Plan.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $235,000.00
39 4
Drainage Improvements atLincoln and Myers
Long term issues with debrisduring large rain events
District E
$350,000.00
37 5
Oro Bangor Hwy Drainage,between Burlington andSpencer 42-48-inch culvert District E
$290,000.00
37 6
South Oroville DrainageImprovements
South Oroville Drainage onWest side of Lincoln,Curb/Sidewalk throughoutSouthside, Renovation ofGreenville Culvert District E
$22,260,000.00
36 7 Sewer Study for Inflow &
Infiltration
To assess which sections of citysewer need to be relined orreplaced District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $410,000.00
36 8
F.O.G. Program
Sewer Fats Oils and Greasesprogram - partner with TWSDand LOAPUD District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
35 9
Citywide E&TS
Engineering & Traffic Surveysare required on Collector andArterial streets to set updatedspeed limits once every 5 years.It has been 14 years since theCity has performed an ET&S.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $320,000.00
31 13
Lower Wyandotte Rd. StormDrainage
Storm Drainage fromWyandotte to V7
District D District E
$1,195,000.00
27 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:35:53 PM PDT Page 1 of 2 100
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 14 MS4 Update
Current MS4 is over 10 yearsold
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $55,000.00 25 15
Lincoln and WyandotteBeautification Project
District E
$103,000.00
24 16
Oro Bangor and MyersBeautification Project
District E
$53,000.00
24 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:35:53 PM PDT Page 2 of 2 101
Item 7.

District F
Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 1 \
Sidewalk gap closures andstriping improvements to addbike lanes along SR 162 fromHwy 70 to Foothill Blvd.

District A District C DistrictD District E District F
$105,000.00
45 3 Mugshots Storm Drain
Replacement
Clogged storm drain behindmugshots on Montgomery St.

District F
$375,000.00
41 4
Montgomery Roundabout
Resurfacing roadway,installation of pedestrianbeacons
District C District F
$1,145,000.00
40 5
City-wide ADA ComplianceBaseline Study andTransition Plan Caltrans Section 504Requirement for Grant Funding.Agencies must have an ADATransition Plan.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $235,000.00
39 6
Bird Street ADAImprovements
Analysis of the addition of two4-way stops on Bird Street, oneat Huntoon and another atDowner. Also, addition of bulbouts for public safety and ADAramps.

District F
$1,580,000.00
38 7
Drainage Issue Montgomeryand Feather River BlvdIntersection District A District F
$260,000.00
37 8 Bedrock Park Rehabilitation
(Phase I)
Stairway improvements, RockWall Safety, Lighting, Electrical,Building Demo, Brush cleanup,Irrigation District F
$270,000.00
36 9 Sewer Study for Inflow &
Infiltration
To assess which sections of citysewer need to be relined orreplaced District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $410,000.00
36 10
F.O.G. Program
Sewer Fats Oils and Greasesprogram - partner with TWSDand LOAPUD District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
35 11
Citywide E&TS
Engineering & Traffic Surveysare required on Collector andArterial streets to set updatedspeed limits once every 5 years.It has been 14 years since theCity has performed an ET&S.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $230,000.00
35 12
Hewitt Park (Phase II)
Construct Splash Pad,pickleball courts, dog park,multipurpose field, andperimeter fence. Renovateexisting bathroom.

District F
$7,020,000.00
33 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:36:23 PM PDT Page 1 of 2 102
Item 7.

Primary Project Description District Total Estimate Project Score 13 Downtown Oroville Phase I -Myers
Resurface Myers fromConvention Center to Mitchell
District F
$520,000.00
33 14 Downtown Oroville Phase I -
Montgomery
Resurface Montgomery fromFeather River Blvd toRoundabout District F
$920,000.00
33 15
Historic Downtown AccessImprovements
Improve all curb ramps andsidewalk throughout HistoricDowntown, bounded by OliverStreet to the East, High Streetto the South, Arline RhineMemorial to the North, and 5thAve to the West, Includes BirdStreet Improvements District F
$545,000.00
32 16
CMMS Rollout
Implement and Migrate to aComputerized MaintenanceManagement System (PublicWorks) District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $80,000.00
32 17
Lord's Gym Bike Racks
This may be linked to BirdStreet Improvements. Findlocation for bike racks nearLord's Gym.

District F
$40,000.00
31 18
Downtown RestroomRehabilitation
District F
$143,000.00
31 19
Update to ImprovementStandards andSpecifications, andTechnical Specifications Current Standards to notcomply with current CBC
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $40,000.00
31 20 City-wide Master Drainage
Plan
Master plan for identifyingculvert condition, sizing, whatsizing should be, needed StormDrain enhancements, etc.

District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $320,000.00
31 21
Painting Lott Home / SankPark
District F
$198,000.00
30 22 Convention Center Parking
Lot
Enhance (add landscaping),repave parking lot East of theConvention Center District F
$1,143,000.00
27 23 MYOPS - Museum Facilities
Artifact assessment and displayupdgrades
District F
$145,000.00
26 24
Downer Public Parking Lot,Brownfield Renovate Public Parking Lot District F
$1,610,000.00
25 25 MS4 Update
Current MS4 is over 10 yearsold
District A District B District CDistrict D District E District F $55,000.00 25 26
Bedrock Park Rehabilitation(Phase II)
District F
$1,160,000.00
25 27
City Hall Lobby andRestroom Renovation
District F
$290,000.00
25 28
Convention Center (Phase II- Exterior)
Renovate the exterior of theConvention Center, realign thefront entrance and vehicleaccess, update ADAcompliance District F $1,775,000.00
24 29 Mitchell Ave Overlay District A District C District F $1,195,000.00 23 Exported on March 27, 2025 10:36:23 PM PDT Page 2 of 2 103
Item 7.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN & COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PATRICK PIATT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

WES ERVIN, CITY PLANNER
RE: GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS REPORT FOR REVIEW BY THE PLANNING

COMMISSION, THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THE GOVERNORS OFFICE OF

LAND USE AND CLIMATE INNOVATION
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
The City Council will receive a report on the status and relevance of the Oroville 2030 General Plan, which was adopted in 2015.

DISCUSSION
The Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (formerly the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research) requires an annual report from every California jurisdiction on the status of its General Plan. There are no penalties or sanctions for not filing the report by April 1 of every year. Because of several factors, primarily including a recession, low staff capacity, and COVID, Oroville has not submitted a status report since the General Plan was adopted in 2015. This will be the first.

This report evaluates the existing General Plan from several perspectives including how much change there has been, its compliance with State law, and other factors. It concludes that the General Plan is still current, is substantially in compliance with state law, and does not need to be updated for several years.

Staff have heard comments from the Planning Commission and invite comments and direction from the City Council and the public.

The City Council must also receive and accept this report so it can be filed with the State on April 1.
104
Item 8.

Page 2 ends

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

ACTION REQUESTED -
Staff recommends the following actions:

1. Receive General Plan Progress Report.

2. Accept the report and/or provide any comments and direction

ATTACHMENTS

1. Annual Progress Report Revision 6A

2. Appendix A -- General Plan review for compliance by Placeworks, Inc.

3. Appendix C -- Current General Plan Land Use map

4. Appendix D -- Current Zoning map

5. Appendix F -- Annexations starting in 2015
105
Item 8.
1 CITY OF OROVILLE

GENERAL PLAN PROGRESS REPORT

APRIL 1, 2025
This progress report to the Oroville Planning Commission and City Council and the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) (formerly GOPR) fulfills statutory reporting requirements on the status of the General Plan and progress on its implementation as set forth under Government Code 65400. This report shall be transmitted to the LCI.

Submitted by:
______________________________________________
Patrick Piatt
Community Development Director
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965
106
Item 8.
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City of Oroville General Plan -- Oroville’s blueprint for future development to the year 2030– was adopted in 2015. It uses established planning principles for an orderly development program for the city. By state law, all new development must be consistent with Its goals and policies and maps.

This report provides the Planning Commission, the City Council and the public an overview of the General Plan and its purposes and implementation, evaluates the relevance of the 2015 General Plan after 10 years of implementation, and identifies trends and recommended changes/improvements.

The General Plan Vision Statement1
“Oroville will be a thriving, full-service community where residents enjoy a high quality of life and can find well-paying jobs. Oroville’s residents will have a choice of housing to best suit their individual lifestyles. Safe, beautiful neighborhood and community parks will be scattered throughout the city and pedestrian and bicycle trails will provide access to the Feather River and the open spaces surrounding Oroville.”
….. the vision continues to address business vitality, residential growth, Oroville’s natural setting, and other items. It concludes: …..”Oroville will be a place people are proud to call home or will visit frequently”.

Is the 2015 Plan still substantially relevant and effective as the guiding document as Oroville grows and develops?
The 2015 General Plan is still substantially in compliance with its original land use and policy content and has generally kept up with current state legislation. There is still plenty of land available for development in all categories in the desired locations. General Plan amendments have been minimal, and there are few applicants who desire to use their land for purposes out of compliance with existing zoning.

When is it advisable to begin the next comprehensive update? In general, jurisdictions should not rush to update their general plans because an update is a major multi-year undertaking requiring an environmental impact report and often costing upwards of $500,000 to complete2. If the General Plan sufficiently guides development, it may not need updating for 15 or more years. In times of slow growth and slow change, a General Plan may remain substantially intact, complete, accurate and comprehensive for 20 years or more. This guidance would suggest starting the next comprehensive update in 2028-2030. 1 General Plan, page 2-1 et seq. 2 In 2017 half the general plans in California were over 15 years old. State grant funding is often available to help small communities fund their updates
107
Item 8.
3 Factors slowing the pace of local development have included the economic recession in 2018, Covid in 2019-21, and the associated dampened investment climate. Factors affecting a faster pace of development include the 9% tax credits for affordable housing, the recent Highway 70 expansion, the soon-to-be-completed Hospital expansion, the current 162 Corridor project, and the local economic activity and residential growth from the aftermaths of the wildfires in the region in 2018 -2021.

Link to General Plan volumes: https://www.cityoforoville.org/services/planning-developmentservices-department/planning-division/planning-documents Link to General plan information: https://www.cityoforoville.org/services/planningdevelopment-services-department/planning-division/general-plan-development-code-zoninginformation Recommended updates/upgrades
Course adjustments to consider are minor, and do not necessarily require General Plan amendments:
• Consider rezoning the area around Walmart from M2 to C2. Retail and commercial developers seem to be attracted to the area.
• Continue a global rezoning of Southside, particularly changing some of the commercial zoning to Mixed use and Neighborhood mixed use. This will encourage mixed use development and commercial revitalization.
• Refer to the General Plan when considering new policies and actions that affect the city’s future. Every element of the document is full of excellent policies and goals. • Continue to support revival of previously approved housing subdivisions, most of which included market rate housing.
• Improve bicycle and pedestrian flow throughout the city. • Allow ground floor residential for mixed use projects in the MXD downtown zone. • Actively promote downtown revitalization efforts (GP Goal LU-2). • Consider eliminating the 65-foot height limit in the M2 Zone. Use permits would not be needed for industrial projects with stacks above that limit. 108
Item 8.
4 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 2 i. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 5 ii. PLANNING CONTEXT AND OROVILLE DEMOGRAPHICS.................................................... 5 iii. GENERAL PLAN OVERVIEW................................................................................................ 8 iv. GOALS, POLICIES, OBJECTIVES, OR STANDARDS THAT ARE CHANGED.......................... 13 v. GENERAL PLAN VS STATE LAW......................................................................................... 14 vi. LAND USE CHANGES ON THE BOOKS............................................................................... 16 vii. FACTORS OF CHANGE AFFECTING LAND USE.................................................................. 18 viii. PLANNING PRINCIPLES EMBODIED IN THE GENERAL PLAN ........................................... 19 APPENDICES.................................................................................................................................. 20 109
Item 8.
5 I. INTRODUCTION
The General Plan is Oroville’s blueprint for future land use and development within the Oroville Planning Area. The city is directed by the State of California to protect resources, plan an orderly distribution of land uses, and apply fair and equitable regulations for new development.

Certain cities and all 58 counties must submit an annual report on the status of the General Plan and progress in its implementation to their legislative bodies, the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, and the Department of Housing and Community Development.

GOALS OF THIS REPORT

1. Evaluate the relevance of the 2015 General Plan after 10 years of implementation.

2. Identify trends and make recommended changes/improvements.

3. Provide an overview of the General Plan and its purposes and implementation to the Council and the public.

The 2025 Oroville General Plan annual progress report will be reviewed for acceptance by the City Council on April 1, 2025, in accordance with Government Code Section 65400 and 65700.

This report will be unique in that it is the first progress report prepared since adoption. This report will therefore cover changes from the 2015 adoption of the General Plan. At this time the Planning Commission, City Council, and public would benefit from a discussion of changes because it will help Staff and the Council identify how soon the General Plan should be updated, and because the city has not filed an annual report since 2015.

II. PLANNING CONTEXT AND OROVILLE DEMOGRAPHICS

POPULATION BEFORE AND SINCE FIRES
Table 1 demonstrates that the city’s population has not changed much, except for adding about 3,000 residents who were refugees of the Camp and North Complex fires. The influx contributed to a significant housing shortage and increased the city’s sales tax revenues for a short time (Table 2). The population has since stabilized and hovers around 20,000 incorporated, with another ~28,000 in the greater Oroville urban area3. Some of the growth between 2010 and 2014 is via annexations. Going forward, BCAG, the Census, and Department of Finance all predict a slow decline in population over the next several years. 3 Wikipedia
110
Item 8.
6 TABLE 1
OROVILLE POPULATION 2010-2022
2010 2014 2015 2018 2019 2021 2023 2024
18,698 18,875 18,964 19,174 20,817 19,893 18,841 18,129 Source: US Census Bureau, BCAG for 2023-2024
2000 2010 2014 2015 2018 2019 2021 2022
13,004 15,546 15,980 16,161 18,091 21,773 20,119 18,863 Source: California Department of Finance
Area, population density, elevation
Area =13.85 mi2
Population Density = ~1,450 persons per square mile
Elevation = 167 feet above sea level
TABLE 2
SALES AND PROPERTY TAX CHANGES – 2020 – 2026
Oroville’s sales tax revenues have fluctuated with the economy, population, new development, Covid, and other factors.

X$1,000 2020 2022 2023 2024 2025
(est)
2026
(est)
Sales Tax $7,355 $7,720 $6,938 $6,965 $7,127 $7,281
General Fund
Revenues
$22,507 $24,992 $20,006
(Est)
$19,933
(Est)
-- --
Source: Avenue Insights & Analytics, Q2 2024
TABLE 3

OROVILLE EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING AND JOBS-HOUSING BALANCE
2015 2018 2020 2022 2023
Employment
City
6,700 6,900 6,100 6,300 6,200
Employment
vicinity4
15,300 15,700 13,800 14,300 14,200
Housing
units city5
6,294 7,069 7,275 8,283 7,705
Sources: EDD LMID, Census
4 Includes Oroville city, Oroville East CDP, Palermo CDP, South Oroville CDP, Thermalito CDP. Source, EDD LMID 5 Census via Data Commons.org 111
Item 8.
7 Jobs Housing Balance. The Jobs Housing Balance (JHB) is an indicator whether a community is jobs-rich (>1.8) or a bedroom community (<1.0). 1.2 to 1.6 is an indicator of balance.

Oroville’s urban area JHB in 2020 was about 1.1 (13,800 jobs / 12,150 households, which indicates an urban area slightly skewed toward housing and having a small excess of people looking for jobs. The benefits of balance include reduced car travel – everyone can work in town; expanded housing choice – Oroville has more affordable than market rate housing; and enhanced economic and social vitality – most goods and services are generally close by.

Entities Responsible For The General Plan
The following commissions, committees, and stakeholders serve key roles in land use planning and development review in Oroville, as specified in the Oroville Municipal Code.

The City Council approves all Zoning Changes, General Plan amendments, and handles appeals.

Full responsibility for the General Plan, Zoning Code, and all ordinances.

The Planning Commission provides recommendations to the Council regarding General Plan amendments and zoning amendments and makes decisions on most discretionary approvals including land divisions, use permits, and zoning variances. The Planning Commission is also the acting Historic Advisory Committee that makes decisions on downtown historic structures, facades, and design.

The Historic Advisory Committee, which is composed of the Planning commissioners and meets concurrently with the Planning Commission. This committee is charged with keeping development in Oroville’s Downtown Historic Overlay consistent with the General Plan policies and Zoning Code and to be respectful of Oroville’s history.

The Zoning Administrator (ZA) has the authority to make decisions on discretionary approvals including minor land divisions, minor use permits, zoning code interpretations, and legal lot determinations.

The Development Review Committee (DRC) comprised of the Planning, Building, Engineering, Housing, Parks and Streets, Fire Marshall, and includes two planning commissioners. The DRC reviews certain ministerial permits and makes recommendations to the Planning Commission on their discretionary decisions.

Community Development staff (with active consultation with other departments and divisions). Approves certain ministerial applications, and makes recommendations to the DRC, ZA, Planning Commission and City Council for all other applications. 112
Item 8.
8 III. GENERAL PLAN OVERVIEW
Overview of the Oroville General plan
As noted in the introduction, the General Plan is the City’s adopted blueprint for future development – policies and goals to determine where, how and how much development the City Council desires for a 20 -year horizon. Table 4 outlines the key contents and implementation and identifies the six required and three optional elements in the General Plan.

The last Oroville General Plan update was adopted by the City Council on March 31, 2015. The update was accompanied by a Supplemental EIR6. The accompanying Land Use Map and Zoning Ordinance and Map have been revised several times since then.

The General Plan defines a city that is compact and reasonably dense (<= 8 minutes from end to end), that has good separation between residential, commercial, and industrial uses, that has ample vacant land in all categories, and that encourages development of all types including significant mixed-use development. These features promote short commutes for residents working in town and a relatively low Greenhouse Gas contribution. Much of these same features exist in the adjacent urban area, which is included in the Planning Area and Sphere of Influence of the document.

It should be noted that the General Plan includes the prior approval of 11 subdivisions & 2,500 homes, most of which were approved as tentative maps before 2015, and which have been incorporated for the time when the maps – all now expired—can be revived with minimal revisions and minimal added processing. In addition, the vision for an amphitheater and park on the former Ford dealership property that connects Centennial Plaza with City Hall has been abandoned in favor of commercial and mixed-use development.7 6 Supplemental to the 2009 comprehensive EIR originally prepared for the 2009 General Plan Update. A SEIR only needs to address new impacts and can piggyback on an earlier EIR as long as all updates and changes are adequately discussed.
7 See the Arts, Culture, and Entertainment District Overlay (referenced in the General Plan Economic Development Element)
113
Item 8.
9 Table 4
General Plan Elements and Overview (Adopted March 31, 2015)

ELEMENT/ KEY CONTENTS CHANGED
SINCE 2015?
HOW

IMPLEMENTED
MOVING

FORWARD

TOPICS TO

MONITOR
Vision
Statement &
Guiding
Principles
Is the City’s “constitution” and
fundamental basis for land use,
development, conservation,
and basic Community values,
ideals and aspirations thru
2030. Comprehensive guide for
Policies and Actions in each
element.

No Ensuring a balance
of the goals in the
other elements,
and
Continued
attention to
balancing
policies and
goals and
following
Council’s
direction.

Planning Area,
Sphere of
Influence, City
limits
Land Use* Designates all lands for
housing, commercial,
industrial, open space,
recreation, public facilities and
agriculture including densities
and locations. Includes
discussion of overlay districts.

Several
changes
including
rezonings and
annexations.

See updated
Land Use and
Zoning maps in
Appendices B
& C.

Adherence to
Zoning Code,
Building code,
Land use and
Zoning maps.

Individual projects
are reviewed for
consistency.

Continue to
monitor
changes, start
an update if
land uses
change
significantly.

Future
annexations and
sphere changes.

Watch for
individual
projects out of
sync with Zoning
map or in
conflict with
neighbors.

Community
Design
Urban design principles for the
built environment for high
quality of life. Converts 2-
dimensional land coverage to
3-D design considerations.

No Design Guidelines
by reference,
Historic Downtown
& other overlays,
and individual
project reviews.

Suggest
updating
design
guidelines.

As the city
develops, more
attention to
compatible
project design.
114
Item 8.
10 ELEMENT/ KEY CONTENTS CHANGED
SINCE 2015?
HOW

IMPLEMENTED
MOVING

FORWARD

TOPICS TO

MONITOR
Economic
Development
Baseline Economy, programs
and initiatives for a thriving
city.

No Available
commercial &
industrial land,
downtown
revitalization,
recruitment, etc.

Enhance the
economic
development
program to
encourage
more
commercial
and industrial
development.

Gateway, Oro
Dam Blvd
development,
filling our
industrial areas
with biomass &
other projects,
re-use of
Koppers.

Circulation &
Transportation*
Specifies location and extent of
existing and future major
streets and their capacities,
bike, pedestrian, and
emergency access.

Updated in
July 2024 to
accommodate
VMT as the
new standard.

Must correlate
with the land use
element. If
impacts, we
require traffic
studies for
proposed projects.

Keep up on
capital projects
& impact fees.

Major projects
that impact our
road quality and
congestion.

Open Space,
Natural
Resources &
Conservation*
Much more open space outside
city limits within sphere than in
city limits. 2,013 acres within
city, and 7,596 within the
sphere.

Very little Landscaping
standards,
parkland
dedications, oak
woodland
preservation, and
project conditions.

Continued
vigilance.
115
Item 8.
11 ELEMENT/ KEY CONTENTS CHANGED
SINCE 2015?
HOW

IMPLEMENTED
MOVING

FORWARD

TOPICS TO

MONITOR
Public Facilities
& Services
Current & desired public safety
(police, fire), schools, libraries,
sewers, water, streets, other
infrastructure.

Municipal
Service
Reviews (MSR)
at various
times. CalFire
absorbed OFD
& El Medio
City and county
budgets to ensure
ongoing service
capacities.

Maintain
adequate per
capita services.

Safety* Protect from current and
foreseeable hazards -- seismic,
flooding, dam inundation, fire,
hazardous materials.

LHMP 2024
update
complete.

Includes LHMP by
reference.

Use LHMP to
plan and react
to floods, fires,
other risks.

Maintain
adequate
emergency
preparedness.

Noise* Current & projected noise
levels from various sources.

No Noise ordinance,
project reviews.

Major project
review.

Housing*--
separately
published
Existing housing stock, future
housing needs, RHNA needs,
programs to address
disadvantaged population
needs. Must be updated every
8 years.

Last adopted
and certified
May 2023, the
next update
begins in 2029.

Housing Division,
Planning et al to
ensure adequate
land supplies and
programs.

Several new
mandated
zoning changes
to adopt.

Current
Oversupply of
affordable units,
undersupply of
market rate &
above market
rate.

Environmental
Justice
Environmental Justice (policies
to identify vulnerabilities in
health and economic
opportunities in disadvantaged
communities).

Not in the
current GP.

Required
element for
next GP
update.

Policies and goals
to address
inequitable effects.

Access to
education,
health care,
mitigate
environmental
effects.

Air Quality Not applicable to Oroville, San
Joaquin Valley only.
*Required element
116
Item 8.
12 OVERLAY DISTRICTS AND SPECIFIC PLANS IN THE DOCUMENT The General Plan identifies 7 overlay districts or Specific plan areas, which have been implemented through the Zoning Code. We note also another 6 overlay zones of various sizes that have been added.

1. Unique Agriculture – did not translate to the Zoning code, very little ag land in city limits (GP page 3-33).

2. Foothill Overlay – an area of the city acknowledged to be rural in design and infrastructure, slow to grow, with higher fire risk. Certain frontage and roadway improvements waived; fireworks prohibited (GP page 3-33).

3. Professional Office Overlay – allow professional offices along with housing, primarily Downtown along Montgomery (GP page 3-35).

4. Arts, Culture and Entertainment, focus on entertainment, museums, galleries, etc. – part of downtown revitalization and efforts to attract new entertainment venues. The zone includes parts of Myers Street, and stretches along the museum/waterfront corridor, and includes the former Ford dealership (GP page 3-35).

5. Oro Bay Specific Plan – 1,700 homes west of airport, fully analyzed and approved but not annexed, quiescent for now (GP page 3-35).

6. Rio d’Oro Specific Plan – West of Hwy 70 south to Dingerville – master planning was done, quiescent for now (GP 3-36).

7. South Ophir Specific Plan – the Specific Plan was never completed, and development has not been determined. However, the General Plan anticipates up to 300 acres for industrial park development and 1,500 dwelling units. A portion of this area is the subject of an EIR to discuss the development of a major distribution campus of up to 3.2 million square feet of warehouse space, which conforms to the General Plan (GP page 3-36).

In the Zoning Code only

8. Hillside Overlay – requires slope analysis in steeper areas of the city. In Zoning Code (OMC

17.44.020).

9. Downtown Historic Overlay District – in Zoning Code (OMC 17.44.040)

10. Airport Area of Influence Overlay & Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan – protects the Airport from development that will interfere with operations and future expansion (GP page 3-11 & OMC 17.44.050).

11. Other Overlays created in the Zoning Ordinance only include the Mini Storage Overlay, the Oro Dam Industrial Conditional Overlay, and 2 Planned Development overlays (Martin Ranch, Vets Housing).
117
Item 8.
13 RELATED DOCUMENTS
There are several planning documents related to the General Plan and/or other planning activities. These should be utilized as much as practicable:

Community Design Element and Design Guidelines
The Community Design Element translates the two-dimensional Land Use Element into three dimensions by specifying how new development should feel, look, and function. Many of the design principles focus on the goals of connectivity, human scale design, smart growth, and walkability for the range of housing types in the various neighborhoods and districts of Oroville.

One focus is on maintaining and enhancing Oroville’s existing landscapes, streetscapes, neighborhoods, and gateways. Projects in the Downtown and other areas are screened for their adherence to the General plan’s design principles. The companion Oroville Design Guidelines were developed as non-compulsive guidance for new development and are incorporated into the General Plan.

Other guidance documents
Many of the following documents are at this link:
https://www.cityoforoville.org/services/planning-development-services-department/planningdivision/planning-documents . • Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, last updated March 18, 2025 • Climate Action Plan, adopted in March 2015
• Oroville Urban Greening Plan, completed in December 2015 • Feather River Boulevard Revitalization Plan, Adopted in 2013 • Lincoln and Huntoon Streets Restoration Plan, adopted in 2011 • Bicycle Transportation Plan, adopted in 2010
• Design Guidelines for Oroville’s Downtown Historic District prepared in 2005 • Riverfront Master Plan, prepared in October 2004
• The Southside Redevelopment Project Myers Street, completed in 2011 IV. GOALS, POLICIES, OBJECTIVES, OR STANDARDS THAT ARE CHANGED Changes to goals, policies and objectives
No goals, policies, objectives, or standards have been changed since being drafted in 2015 Compliance with General plan laws and consistency.

In 2022 Placeworks evaluated the General Plan’s consistency with state laws (GC 65300-65302, including legislation enacted after GP adoption). Their conclusion was that there was full or partial compliance with virtually all the GP elements. Non-compliance was only found in the 118
Item 8.
14 Circulation and Safety elements. The non-compliant items have since been addressed by adopting Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in the Circulation Element as the primary CEQA traffic metric, and by adopting the Local Hazard Mitigation Program into the Safety Element by reference.

Local Hazard Mitigation Program (LHMP)
The LHMP is a required document created separately from the General Plan, which details the types of potential disasters which may occur and the City’s specific responses in those cases.

The current LHMP Update was approved by FEMA and Cal OES in February 2025 and adopted by the City Council in March 2025. The city updated its General Plan Safety Element in 2020 to incorporate the LHMP and its latest revisions by reference.

Impacts of COVID.

The 1 or2-year period in 2019-2021, when Covid restrictions were in place, dampened investment throughout the world. The impact on the General Plan was therefore minimal.

Impact from the Camp and North Complex fires.

While the region was reeling from the fire aftermath, the City added about 3,000 people, and experienced significant retail commercial development along Oro Dam Boulevard and a noticeable increase in sales tax revenues – several new drive-through restaurants established in this time frame. These establishments did not require rezoning or general plan amendments, being permitted uses in the Corridor Mixed Use Zone (MXC).

V. GENERAL PLAN vs STATE LAW
Housing Element Update and Annual Progress Reports
As the Planning Commission and City Council members know, the Housing Element has always been a required stand-alone Element of the General Plan, and follows a separate track for development, adoption, review and implementation. The element must be updated every 8 years. The Sixth Cycle Housing Element was certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development in May 2023. An annual report is due by April 1 each year, and if not submitted the city risks losing significant grant funding.

Consistence with State law.

In November 2022 Placeworks Inc. evaluated the extent to which our 2015 General Plan was consistent with State law. The laws reviewed included all legislation enacted until then (See Appendix A). The General Plan was deemed either completely or partially compliant in most areas, with these exceptions:
• Incorporating Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the primary evaluative criteria for planning and for significance under CEQA in the Circulation Element per SB 747. That was completed when the City Council incorporated VMT in July 2024. 119
Item 8.
15 • Several items relating to exposure to flooding, fire, and other hazards, and planning for these risks accordingly. Most of these have been addressed by the 2024 Local Hazard Mitigation Program Update, which has been incorporated in the Safety Element by reference.
• Climate adaption and resiliency – these requirements were added after the General Plan was adopted and will be incorporated in the next General Plan Update. • Environmental Justice – these requirements were added after the General Plan was adopted and will be incorporated into the next General Plan update.

Staff have brought the analysis current to January 1, 2025, by incorporating subsequent General Plan related activities as practicable, including the following legislation:
• Chaptered in 2022
o SB 197 – changed rezoning deadlines for jurisdictions without certified housing elements. No effect on Oroville
o SB 379 – requires cities and counties to implement an online automated permitting platform for residential solar energy systems. Oroville has implemented the Tyler software online permitting platform. o SB 932 -- general plan and elements must comprise an integrated, internally consistent statement of policies, supporting communities in reaching state's environmental and climate objectives and climate change adaptation.

Particularly applies to bicycles, walking, and goods movement. Oroville will comply during the next General Plan update.
o AB 2094 –allows reporting on extremely-low-income and very-low-income populations. This information is reported in the 2025 Housing Element update, which indicates that Oroville has 171 Very low-income households and 86 extremely low-income households.
• Chaptered in 2023
o SB 9 -- aims to increase housing density by allowing certain types of development, such as splitting lots and constructing multiple units on existing lots. Local agencies must ministerially approve lot splits for construction of small residential units on parcels zoned single family. No development standards need be changed, except for allowing 4-foot side and rear setbacks. Oroville has processed one SB 9 lot split.
o SB 10 – facilitated upzoning in transit-rich areas or urban infill sites. Oroville has no “transit-rich” areas or sites.
120
Item 8.
16 • Legislation Chaptered in 2024
o AB 821 -- reinforces the requirement that zoning ordinances be consistent with a city or county general plan and must meet objective general plan standards. No current effect on Oroville’s general plan.
o AB 98 – establishes warehouse standards, requires local agencies to update their circulation elements to include truck routes. Ophir Road and most roads in the industrial area are designated truck routes. Figure CIR-5 of the 2015 General Plan includes that information but does need to include Ophir Road and other routes to the map at the next update.

VI. LAND USE CHANGES ON THE BOOKS
Since slowly recovering from the 2008 recession until about 2014 and weathering COVID and fires between 2018 and 2021, Oroville has seen the development of over 850 affordable housing units from 2020-2023, significant commercial/retail development, and new industrial development.

List of General Plan Amendments and Rezonings since 2015 There have been relatively few General Plan amendments since 2015, none of which were significant enough to trigger revising the General Plan (see Appendix B for a complete list since 2015). The most significant were:
• Rezoning 21 parcels in and around the former Ford dealership from Public-Quasi public (PQ) to Downtown Mixed Use (MXD). The city did this without charge to assist Mark Mendez develop the property he had newly acquired.
• Rezoning the 39-acre Seidenglanz former lumber mill at 1245 Oro Dam Blvd to Intensive Industrial (M2) from Corridor Mixed Use (MXC) and creating the Oro Dam Industrial OverlaySrtaS District to ensure that future industrial development will not conflict with the Oro Dam Blvd. commercial corridor.
• Rezoning the vacant land behind the old corporation yard to encourage the vets Housing Corporation to build an apartment complex
• Rezoning 40 acres of the Airport Business Park (ABP) to R-1 for the Feather Ranch subdivision project
• Rezoning the land under the 4 phases of the Olive Ranch affordable housing project along Table Mountain Blvd. from MXN to R-4 for the convenience of the applicant. • Creating a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) at 711 Montgomery Avenue to accommodate the Veterans Housing townhome development.
121
Item 8.
17 ANNEXATIONS SINCE 2015 AND POTENTIAL ANNEXATIONS
There have been four annexations since 2015:

1. Annexing South Oroville and vicinity in 2015. Area A (819 parcels on 203 acres) and Area B (157 parcels on 203 acres), with its ~6,000 new residents at the time8. That is the city’s most disadvantaged community, which is the subject of significant attention and grant funding. Significant infrastructure needs.

2. Riverview Terrace, 14 parcels on 7 acres, completed March 13, 2017.

3. South Lincoln – 27 parcels on 14 acres to capture the Rescue Mission, completed April 12, 2021.

4. Ruddy Creek, a 97-unit single family home subdivision north of the Airport. Completed November 15, 2021.

Potential annexations that have not occurred, many of which are depicted in the General Plan

1. Oro Bay Specific Plan area west of the airport. The Specific Plan was approved in 2008 along with a development agreement. If involved creating up to 2,400 new homes of varying densities and 5 acres of commercial. The Development agreement has expired. If the project is resurrected, a new specific plan design and review, environmental update, and annexation would need to occur.

2. Thermalito – a long-established rural community west of the river with about 6,000 residents. This area is almost exclusively residential, and though it is logical to eventually annex this adjacent urban area there will be no financial benefit for the city.

3. Rio D’ Oro Specific Plan, an area west of Highway 70 between Ophir Road and Dingerville.

This area was planned in concept, but not annexed or developed, nor has the specific plan been adopted. It involved between 1,583 & 2,700 homes of varying densities in 4 villages with another 27 acres of commercial. Also, may include the Highway 70 industrial Park and both sides of Highway 70 from Georgia Pacific Way south.

4. Several potential individual annexations around the city’s edges are not in the General Plan but being promoted by various landowners and/or city staff:
a. Long Bar – a potential hillside development with views of the diversion dam. b. The Hmong parcels on north Table Mountain Blvd—site of a proposed future Hmong community anchored by a new worldwide religious temple. c. Wilbur Road – west of the city’s current sphere
d. Rose Oaks Farms – on glen Drive at the northeast corner of Oroville. 8 The population of the South Oroville CDP was down to 3,235 in 2023. Source: Census data 122
Item 8.
18 Examples of Development since 2015 Within the GP’s Existing Land Uses Restaurants: Chipotle, Dutch Bros #2, Starbucks #2 & #3, Arby’s, KFC, Dominoes, restaurant redevelopment in Downtown (Union, ice cream store, Provisions, Nori, the wine club), Capital City Market, Payless lumber, Chick Fila (pending).

Offices and residential: renovation of Delta Dental, Hospital expansion, Dialysis Clinic, Asian Market, 850 affordable housing units in 7 separate projects.

Examples of noncompliant development in the city to be phased out over time Legal noncompliant development is development that existed prior to the current General Plan and Zoning Code, and which if expanded or stopped would not be allowed to continue without a Use Permit. Examples:
• The automotive repair shops in the Downtown Mixed-Use District along Montgomery Street. Such uses have been eliminated from downtown in the document. • Duplexes or multifamily units in R-L or R-1 zoning. Not allowed, consider changing to allow. • Warehousing in C-2 Zoning
VII. FACTORS OF CHANGE AFFECTING LAND USE
The following factors affect a General Plan over time. Few have impacted on the Oroville General Plan to the extent that it needs updating:
• Annual review of demographic and employment data from Finance, US census. Little or no growth is expected in the future – except the 10% increase from the fires in 2018 & 2019. • Sales tax and property tax revenues, job creation, housing construction, and economic growth all continue to be encouraged in the General plan and its elements. • The recession hit the city hard. Between 2008 and 2019 Oroville was among many jurisdictions near bankruptcy that had to keep the lights on with minimal staff. In 2019 the city began to build again.
• The city still maintains plenty of industrial and commercial land properly zoned and ready for development.
• The Koppers Superfund site has been cleaned for a decade and has been ready for redevelopment.
• The major public service changes since 2015 were the merging of the fire department into CalFire in 2022 and the dissolution of the El Medio Fire District. • Infrastructure development is important to keep active to accommodate existing and future growth. Infrastructure development since 2015 includes:
123
Item 8.
19 • The SC-OR expansion now underway to increase capacity for new housing and industrial development.
• The Hwy 162 improvement project, which is updating Oro Dam Blvd and improving its attractiveness
• Cal Water, LOAPUD, the Thermalito Water and Sewer District, and the city’s public works department are maintaining adequate service capacities as the city expands. • The recently completed Highway 70 expansion to Marysville is accelerating growth in Oroville – especially commercial growth-- and will speed up land absorption for housing, commercial and industrial uses. Key assets to benefit will be Gateway, South Feather River Blvd., and the Garden Drive Highway Commercial areas. Maverik, Dutch bros, Hampton Inn, Surf-thru car wash, and Tractor Supply are examples of establishments taking advantage of growth along SR 70.
• The Broadband grant will bring last-mile fiber optics to areas of the city with substandard access, which will also encourage new development.

VIII. PLANNING PRINCIPLES EMBODIED IN THE GENERAL PLAN
The general plan is a living, working document that incorporates the following good planning principles:
• Promoting infill development. The General plan itself encourages infill, primarily by keeping Oroville compact, and making infill development easier through logical land use planning and the staff dedication to a streamlined approval process. Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced in compact communities.
• Preserving cultural, natural or historic resources, especially in the Downtown via the Historic advisory Committee, the Downtown Historic Overlay Zone, the Arts, Culture and Entertainment District, and the city’s design guidelines. • Promoting equitable planning considerations by considering impacts on various ethnic groups or disadvantaged socioeconomic populations. South Oroville, Downtown, and North Oroville all have high poverty concentrations and are areas of focus. • Advancing Economic Development by establishing areas of economic focus along Montgomery Blvd, the Oro Dam commercial corridor, the industrial area, and the airport. • Seeking grants and other funding to improve infrastructure and to advance Oroville’s revitalization goals, for blight elimination in South Oroville, for road maintenance, for sewer collection services, and for the Airport. Partners include BCAG, Butte County, and the Butte County Firesafe Council.
124
Item 8.
20 • Keeping our GIS and technology up to date are works in progress. Continued implementation of the new Tyler online permit process software and having adequate GIS staff are areas of improvement.

IX APPENDICES
A. Placeworks, Inc. evaluation of the General Plan’s compliance with State law B. Complete LIST OF GPA’S SINCE 2015
C. Current General Plan Land Use Map
D. Current Zoning map
E. Economic Focus Areas
F. Annexations starting in 2015
125
Item 8.
21 APPENDIX A
Placeworks’ evaluation of the General
Plan’s compliance with State law
See attachment
126
Item 8.
22 APPENDIX B
General Plan Amendments Since 2015
Amendment No. Date adopted topic
20-01 9-24-20 Ruddy Creek Subdivision – changed to
medium low density land use.
20-02 10-1-20 Modify the Safety Element for the
LHMP, land from PQ to R-3 for
Veteran’s Housing, and changing land
use to LDR north of city limits
20-03 1-28-21 New Planned Development Overlay
for 711 Montgomery for Veteran’s
Housing
20-04 voided
21-01 7-22-21 Change Seidenglanz 39-acres at 1245
Oro Dam Blvd to Industrial.
21-02` 9-23-21 Change Father’s House to Public from
residential
21-03 10-28-21 Change 400 Grand Avenue to PQ for
Plumas Ave School District.
22-01 7-19-22 Change 21 parcels at and near old
Ford Dealership to mixed use from PQ
22-02 7-19-22 Adopt 2022-2030 Housing Element
23-01 5-25-23 Change Feather Ranch Subdivision
from Airport Business Park to
Residential
24-01 9-3-24 Change YMCA and next door to Mixed
use from PQ
127
Item 8.
23 APPENDIX C
Current General Plan Land Use Map
See attachment
128
Item 8.
24 APPENDIX D
Current Zoning Map
See attachment
129
Item 8.
25 APPENDIX E
General Plan Economic Focus Areas
F I G U R E E D - 4

E C O N O M I C F O C U S A R E A S
e 16: Map of Focus Areas

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E
2 0 3 0 G E N E R A L P L A N

E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T E L E M E N T
NOR TH
Source: City of Oroville 2014 Economic Development Strategy. 130
Item 8.
26 APPENDIX F
Annexations starting in 2015
See attachment
131
Item 8.
21 APPENDIX A
Placeworks’ evaluation of the General
Plan’s compliance with State law
132
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 1-Global
,,,,,Land Use Element, Community Design Element, Open Space, Natural Resources and Conservation Element,,, ,,,,Environmental justice needs to be addressed in the General Plan, and though that work, an expanded discussion of equity and policy development to support equitable and resilient communities is appropriate.,,,Environmental justice is missing., ,The plan must address the jurisdiction’s physical development, such as general locations, appropriatemix, timing, and extent of land uses and supporting infrastructure.,,,,,,, Yes,Yes,Yes,Ye
s,Partially,Yes,
Yes,Partially,Ye
s
2-Land Use Element
200 65302(a)
(blank)
A land use element that designates the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of the land for housing, business, industry, open space, including agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty, education, public buildings and grounds, solid and liquid waste disposal facilities, greenways, as defined in Section 816.52 of the Civil Code, and other categories of public and private uses of land.

Yes
201 (blank)
(blank)
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.

Yes
202 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Housing Flooding not addressed. Safety element includes flood risk map and discusses flooding, but not in relation to specific uses.

Partially
203 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Business Flooding not addressed. Safety element includes flood risk map and discusses flooding, but not in relation to specific uses.

Partially
204 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Industry Flooding not addressed. Safety element includes flood risk map and discusses flooding, but not in relation to specific uses.

Partially
205 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, and potential for flooding of:

Open space, including agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and scenic resources Flooding not addressed. Safety element includes flood risk map and discusses flooding, but not in relation to specific uses.

Partially
Michael Baker International Page 1 of 21 3/18/2025 133
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 206 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Education Flooding not addressed. Safety element includes flood risk map and discusses flooding, but not in relation to specific uses.

Partially
207 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Public Facilities Flooding not addressed. Safety element includes flood risk map and discusses flooding, but not in relation to specific uses.

Partially
208 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Solid and liquid waste disposal No solid waste disposal facilities are located in the city and they are not discussed in the LU element. The handling of solid waste, including a description of the Oroville Transfer Station, is covered in the Public Facilities and Services Element.

N/A
209 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Timberland production N/A
210 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Other N/A
211 65302(a)
General distribution, location, extent of, density and intensity, and potential for flooding of:

Greenways, as defined in Civil Code Section 816.52 Flooding not addressed. Safety element includes flood risk map and discusses flooding, but not in relation to specific uses.

Partially
212 65302(a)
(blank)
Identify and annually review areas subject to flooding per FEMA or DWR mapping Yes
213 65302(a)(2)
(blank)
Consider the impact of new growth on military readiness activities carried out on military bases, installations, and operating and training areas, when proposing zoning ordinances or designating land uses covered by the general plan for land, or other territory adjacent to military facilities, or underlying designated military aviation routes and airspace.

Yes
214 (blank)
Michael Baker International Page 2 of 21 3/18/2025 134
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 214 (blank)
Identification of each island or fringe community within the city’s sphere of influence that is a disadvantaged unincorporated community. In the case of a county, an identification of each legacy community within the boundaries of the county that is a disadvantaged unincorporated community but not including any area within the sphere of influence of any city. This identification shall include a description of the community and a map designating its location.

Yes
215 (blank)
(blank)
For each identified DUC community, an analysis of water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, and structural fire protection needs or deficiencies.

Yes
216 (blank)
(blank)
An analysis, based on the existing available data, of benefit assessment districts or other financing alternatives that could make the extension of services to identified DUC communities financially feasible.

Yes
217 (blank)
(blank)
Correlation with Circulation element Yes
218 (blank)
(blank)
Coordination with other elements. Yes
Michael Baker International Page 3 of 21 3/18/2025 135
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 3-Circulation
(blank) 65302(b)
Safe Streets (SB 932)
Incorporate the principles of the Federal Highway Administration’s Safe System Approach and develop bicycle plans, pedestrian plans, and traffic calming plans based on the policies and goals in the circulation element that, among other things, sets goals for initiation and completion of all actions identified in the plans within 25 years of the date of adoption of the modified circulation element, as specified.

This policy guidance could be expanded to incorporate Vision Zero concepts and to clarify timing of related actions.

Partially
300 65302(b)(1)
General Location and extent of:

Existing and proposed major thoroughfare Yes
301 65302(b)(1)
General Location and extent of:

Existing and Proposed Transportation Routes Yes
302 65302(b)(2)
General Location and extent of:

Public Transit Yes
303 65302(b)(2)(A)
General Location and extent of:

Bicycle Yes
304 65302(b)(2)(A)
General Location and extent of:

Pedestrian Yes
305 65302(b)(2)(A)
General Location and extent of:

Automobile Yes
306 65302(b)(2)(B)
General Location and extent of:

Commercial Goods Yes
307 65302(b)(1)
General Location and extent of:

Existing and proposed terminals N/A
308 65302(b)(1)
General Location and extent of:

Military Airports and ports N/A
309 65302(b)(1)
General Location and extent of:

Other public utilities and facilities Yes
310 65302(b)(2)(B)
(blank)
Needs of children, persons with disabilities, seniors Yes 311 65302(b)(1); Fed. of Hillside & Canyon Assns. v. City of Los Angeles (2004) 126 Cal. App. 4th 1180, 1196
(blank)
Identified funding for infrastructure identified in the circulation element Yes
Michael Baker International Page 4 of 21 3/18/2025 136
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 312 65302(b)(1)
(blank)
Correlation with Land Use element Yes
313 (blank)
(blank)
VMT No
4-Conservation
400 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of water and its hydraulic force Yes
401 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
The water analysis "shall be developed in coordination with any countywide water agency and all special district and city agencies... that have developed, served, controlled, managed, or conserved water of any type for the purpose in the... city Information should be added about the Groundwater Sustainability Plan(s) (GSP) that affect the Planning Area, and the General Plan should be reviewed to ensure consistency with the GSP(s).

Partially
402 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of forests N/A 403 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of soils Yes 404 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of rivers Yes 405 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of other waters Yes
406 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of harbors N/A 407 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of fisheries Yes 408 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of wildlife Yes Michael Baker International Page 5 of 21 3/18/2025 137
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 409 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of minerals Yes 410 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Conservation, development, and utilization of other natural resources Yes
411 65302(d)(1)
(blank)
Consider the effect of development within the jurisdiction, as described in the land use element, on natural resources located on public lands, including military installations.

Yes
412 65302(d)(3)
(blank)
Identify rivers, creeks, streams, flood corridors, riparian habitats, and land that may accommodate floodwater for purposes of groundwater recharge and stormwater management.

Yes
5-Open Space
500 65563
(blank)
The Open-Space element must be long range and comprehensive.

Yes
501 65560(b)(1)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of Open space for natural resources including:
areas required for preservation of plant and animal life, including fish and wildlife Yes
502 65560(b)(1)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of Open space for natural resources including:

Areas required for ecologic or scientific study purposes Yes 503 65560(b)(1)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of Open space for natural resources including:

Rivers, streams, bays, and estuaries Yes
504 65560(b)(1)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of Open space for natural resources including:

Coastal beaches, lakeshores, banks of rivers and streams and watershed lands Yes
Michael Baker International Page 6 of 21 3/18/2025 138
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 505 65560(b)(2)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of for open space for managed production of resources:

Forest lands, rangeland, agricultural lands, areas of economic importance for production of food or fiber Yes
506 65560(b)(2)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of for open space for managed production of resources:

Areas required for recharge of groundwater basins Yes
507 65560(b)(2)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of for open space for managed production of resources:

Bays, estuaries, marshes, rivers, streams, which are
important for the management of commercial fisheries
Yes
508 65560(b)(2)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of for open space for managed production of resources:

Areas containing major mineral deposits, including those in short supply Yes
509 65560(b)(3)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for outdoor recreation:

Areas of outstanding scenic, historic and cultural value Yes 510 65560(b)(3)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for outdoor recreation:

Areas particularly suited for park and recreation purposes, including access to lakeshores, beaches, and rivers and streams Yes
511 65560(b)(3)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for outdoor recreation:

Areas which serve as links between major recreation and open-space reservations, including utility easements, banks of rivers and streams, trails, and scenic highway corridors Yes
Michael Baker International Page 7 of 21 3/18/2025 139
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 512 65560(b)(4)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for public health and safety:

Areas which require special management or regulation because of hazardous or special conditions such as -earthquake fault zones, -unstable soil areas, flood plains, -watersheds, -areas presenting high fire risks, -areas presenting high fire risks, -areas required for protection of water quality and water reservoirs, and -areas required for the protection or enhancement of air quality.

Yes
513 65560(b)(5)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for military support:

Areas adjacent to military installations Yes
514 65560(b)(5)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for military support:

Military training routes Yes
515 65560(b)(5)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for military support:

Areas underlying restricted airspace. Yes
516 65560(b)(6)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for tribal resources:

Public land containing any native American -sanctified cemetery, place of worship, -religious or ceremonial site, sacred shrine Yes
517 65560(b)(6)
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for tribal resources:

Native American historic, cultural or sacred sites that are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic resources.

Yes
518 65562.5
Plan for the preservation and conservation of open space for tribal resources:

Tribal consultation is required to determine the level of confidentiality needed.

Consider adding policy guidance to call out AB 52 requirements, in addition to SB 18 requirements that are mentioned.

Partially
519 65560(b)
(blank)
Inventory of all of the above lands, including any parcel that is essentially unimproved (ie., completely vacant) Yes
Michael Baker International Page 8 of 21 3/18/2025 140
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 520 65560(b)
(blank)
Inventory of all lands designated in any local, regional, or state open-space plan.

Yes
521 65562(a)
(blank)
Policies provide that open space must be "conserved
whenever possible"
Yes
522 65562(b)
(blank)
Co-ordinated with state and regional plans. Yes
523 65564, 65566
Action Plan consisting of specific programs which the legislative body intends to pursue in implementing its openspace plan Acquisition and disposal of open space (must be consistent with open space plan) Yes
524 65567
Action Plan consisting of specific programs which the legislative body intends to pursue in implementing its openspace plan Building permits, subdivision maps, and zoning must be consistent with the plan.

This review did not include a review of the implementing zones and ordinances for the General Plan.

Not Reviewed
525 65910
Action Plan consisting of specific programs which the legislative body intends to pursue in implementing its openspace plan Open-space zoning pursuant must be consistent with the plan.

This review did not include a review of the implementing zones for the General Plan.

Not Reviewed
6-Noise
601 65302(f)(1)(A)
Analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for:

Highways and freeways Yes
602 65302(f)(1)(B)
Analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for:

Primary arterials and major local streets Yes
603 65302(f)(1)(C)
Analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for:

Passenger and freight online railroad operations and ground rapid transit systems.

Yes
Michael Baker International Page 9 of 21 3/18/2025 141
Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 604 65302(f)(1)(D)
Analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for:

Commercial, general aviation, heliport, helistop, and military airport operations, aircraft overflights, jet engine test stands, and all other ground facilities and maintenance functions related to airport operation.

Yes
605 65302(f)(1)(E)
Analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for:

Local industrial plants, including, but not limited to, railroad classification yards Yes
606 65302(f)(1)(F)
Analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for:

Other ground stationary noise sources, including, but not limited to, military installations, identified by local agencies as contributing to the community noise environment N/A
607 65302(f)(2)
(blank)
Noise contours shall be shown for all of these sources and stated in terms of community noise equivalent level (CNEL) or day-night average sound level (Ldn). The noise contours shall be prepared on the basis of noise monitoring or following generally accepted noise modeling techniques for the various sources identified in paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive.

Yes
608 65302(f)(3)
(blank)
The noise contours shall be used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses in the land use element that minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise.

Yes
609 65302(f)(4)
(blank)
The noise element shall include implementation measures and possible solutions that address existing and foreseeable noise problems, if any. The adopted noise element shall serve as a guideline for compliance with the state’s noise insulation standards.

Yes
Michael Baker International Page 10 of 21 3/18/2025 142 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 7-Safety
(blank) 65302(g)(5)
Emergency evacuation routes (SB 99)
Identify residential developments in any hazard area identified in the safety element that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes.

No
65302.15
Emergency evacuation routes (AB 747)
Identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios.

No
701 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from induced risks, including:

Slope instability generally and slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides Yes
702 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from seismically induced risks, including:
surface rupture Yes
703 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from seismically induced risks, including:
ground shaking Yes
704 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from seismically induced risks, including:
ground failure Yes
705 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from seismically induced risks, including:
tsunami, seiche, and dam failure Explicit discussion of seiches is warranted given the potential risk of seiches on large waterbodies like Lake Oroville.

Partially
706 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from seismically induced risks, including:
subsidence and liquefaction Yes
707 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from:

Other hazards identified by section 2690 et. Seq. of the public resources code.

Yes
Michael Baker International Page 11 of 21 3/18/2025 143 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 708 65302(g)(1)
Identification of unreasonable risks and policies for the protection of the community from:

Mapping known seismic and other geologic hazards Yes
709 65302(g)(1)
As related to identified fire and geologic/seismic hazards, safety element shall address:
evacuation routes The Safety Element doesn't present a map or other details about evacuation routes.

Partially
710 65302(g)(1)
As related to identified fire and geologic/seismic hazards, safety element shall address:
military installations Yes
711 65302(g)(1)
As related to identified fire and geologic/seismic hazards, safety element shall address:
peak load water supply requirements Yes
712 65302(g)(1)
As related to identified fire and geologic/seismic hazards, safety element shall address:
minimum road widths and clearances around structures Yes 713 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Flood hazard zones Yes
714 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

FEMA flood insurance maps Yes
715 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Information from the Army Corps of Engineers. No
716 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Flood maps from the Central Valley Flood Protection Board Yes 717 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Dam Failure Inundation Maps available from the Department of Water Resources or Office of Emergency Services) Yes
Michael Baker International Page 12 of 21 3/18/2025 144 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 718 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Floodplain Maps available from the Department of Water Resources Yes
719 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Maps of Levee Protection Zones Yes
720 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Areas subject to inundation in the event of the failure of levees and floodwalls Yes
721 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Historic flood information The information about historic flooding is very general and more specific information about individual flood events is warranted.

Partially
722 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Existing and planned development in flood hazard areas including structures, roads, utilities, and essential public facilities.

No
723 65302(g)(2)(A)
Identify information regarding flood hazards, including, but not limited to:

Agencies with responsibility for flood protection Yes
724 65302(g)(2)(B)
Establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risks of flooding, including, but not limited to:

Avoiding and minimize flood risks for new development. Yes 725 65302(g)(2)(B)
Establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risks of flooding, including, but not limited to:

Evaluating whether new development should be located in flood hazard zones, and identifying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if new development is located in flood hazard zones More specific policy guidance for the level of protection and how to minimize damage is appropriate.

Partially
Michael Baker International Page 13 of 21 3/18/2025 145 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 726 65302(g)(2)(B)
Establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risks of flooding, including, but not limited to:

Maintaining the structural and operational integrity of essential public facilities during flooding More specific policy guidance for flood protection for essential public facilities is appropriate.

Partially
727 65302(g)(2)(B)
Establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risks of flooding, including, but not limited to:

Locating, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of flood hazard zones, including hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, fire stations, emergency command centers, and emergency communications facilities or identifying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if these facilities are located in flood hazard zones.

More specific policy guidance for flood protection for essential public facilities is appropriate.

Partially
728 65302(g)(2)(B)
Establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risks of flooding, including, but not limited to:

Establishing cooperative working relationships among public agencies with responsibility for flood protection.

Yes
729 65302(g)(2)(C)
Establish a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risks of flooding, including, but not limited to:

Feasible implementation plan for the flood risk prevention policies.

Yes
730 65302(g)(3)
(blank)
Identification of, and policies for, the protection of the community from any unreasonable risks associated with wildland and urban fires.

Yes
731 65302(g)(3)
Address the risk of fire for:

State Responsibility Areas and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones Yes
732 65302(g)(3)
Address the risk of fire and include:

Consider advice in OPR’s Fire Hazard Technical Advisory No Michael Baker International Page 14 of 21 3/18/2025 146 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 733 65302(g)(3)(A)(i)
The safety element review shall include information regarding fire hazards, including:

CALFire Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps Yes
734 65302(g)(3)(A)(ii)
(blank)
Historical data on wildfires Yes
735 65302(g)(3)(A)(iii)
(blank)
USGS wildfire hazard areas No
736 65302(g)(3)(A)(iv)
(blank)
Existing and planned development within these areas No
737 65302(g)(3)(A)(v)
(blank)
Local agencies with responsibility for fire protection in these areas Yes
738 65302(g)(3)(B)
(blank)
Mandatory goals, policies and objectives for the protection of the community from the unreasonable risk of wildfire Yes
739 65302(g)(3)(C)(i)
set of feasible implementation measures designed to carry out the goals, policies, and objectives based on the information identified pursuant to subparagraph (B) including:

Avoiding or minimizing the wildfire hazards associated with new uses of land Yes
740 65302(g)(3)(C)(ii)
set of feasible implementation measures designed to carry out the goals, policies, and objectives based on the information identified pursuant to subparagraph (B) including:

Locating, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of high fire risk areas, including, but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency communications facilities, or identifying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if these facilities are located in a state responsibility area or very high fire hazard severity zone.

More specific policy guidance for locating essential public facilities outside of fire hazard areas and mitigating risks for any new facilities within fire hazard areas is appropriate.

Partially
Michael Baker International Page 15 of 21 3/18/2025 147 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 741 65302(g)(3)(C)(iii)
set of feasible implementation measures designed to carry out the goals, policies, and objectives based on the information identified pursuant to subparagraph (B) including:

Designing adequate infrastructure if a new development is located in a state responsibility area or in a very high fire hazard severity zone, including safe access for emergency response vehicles, visible street signs, and water supplies for structural fire suppression.

Yes
742 65302(g)(3)(C)(iv)
set of feasible implementation measures designed to carry out the goals, policies, and objectives based on the information identified pursuant to subparagraph (B) including:

Working cooperatively with public agencies with responsibility for fire protection.

Yes
743 65302(g)(3)(D)
(blank)
If a city or county has adopted a fire safety plan or document separate from the general plan, an attachment of, or reference to, a city or county’s adopted fire safety plan or document that fulfills commensurate goals and objectives and contains information required pursuant to this paragraph.

Reference to the Butte County Community Wildfire Protection Plan should be added.

No
744 65302(g)(4)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(blank) The current emphasis in this section is on reducing GHG emissions. An expanded discussion of and policy guidance for climate adaptation and resiliency are appropriate.

Partially
745 65302(g)(4)(A)(i)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:

A vulnerability assessment that identifies the risks that climate change poses to the local jurisdiction and the geographic areas at risk from climate change impacts, including, but not limited to, an assessment of how climate change may affect the risks addressed pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) The policy guidance in the General Plan should be expanded to more explicitly cover climate adaptation and resiliency in response to the findings of the vulnerability assessment and to provide a framework for the adaptation strategies in the CAP.

Partially
Michael Baker International Page 16 of 21 3/18/2025 148 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 746 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(I)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(I) Information from the internet-based Cal-Adapt tool. No 747 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(II)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(II) Information from the most recent version of the California Adaptation Planning Guide.

No
748 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(III)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(III) Information from local agencies on the types of assets, resources, and populations that will be sensitive to various climate change exposures.

The policy guidance in the General Plan should be expanded to more explicitly cover climate adaptation and resiliency in response to information from local agencies on climate change vulnerabilities.

Partially
749 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(IV)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(IV) Information from local agencies on their current ability to deal with the impacts of climate change.

The policy guidance in the General Plan should be expanded to more explicitly cover climate adaptation and resiliency in response to information from local agencies on climate change vulnerabilities.

Partially
750 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(V)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(V)Historical data on natural events and hazards, including locally prepared maps of areas subject to previous risk, areas that are vulnerable, and sites that have been repeatedly damaged.

The policy guidance in the General Plan should be expanded to more explicitly cover climate adaptation and resiliency in response to hazards information and maps.

Partially
751 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(VI)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(VI)Existing and planned development in identified at-risk areas, including structures, roads, utilities, and essential public facilities.

No
Michael Baker International Page 17 of 21 3/18/2025 149 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 752 65302(g)(4)(A)(ii)(VII)
The safety element shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies applicable to the city or County and shall consider/include the following:
(VII)Federal, state, regional, and local agencies with
responsibility for the protection of public health and safety and the environment, including special districts and local offices of emergency services.

The policy guidance in the General Plan should be expanded to more explicitly cover climate adaptation and resiliency, taking into account information about these agencies.

Partially
753 65302(g)(4)(B)
Feasible implementation measures to address the goals, policies, and objectives for climate resiliency, including:

Adaptation and resilience goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of the community.

The current emphasis in this section is on reducing GHG emissions. An expanded set of implementation actions to support climate adaptation and resiliency is appropriate.

Partially
754 65302(g)(4)(C)(i)
Feasible implementation measures to address the goals, policies, and objectives for climate resiliency, including:

Feasible methods to avoid or minimize climate change
impacts associated with new uses of land.

The current emphasis in this section is on reducing GHG emissions. An expanded set of implementation actions to support climate adaptation and resiliency in new land uses is appropriate.

Partially
755 65302(g)(4)(C)(ii)
Feasible implementation measures to address the goals, policies, and objectives for climate resiliency, including:

The location, when feasible, of new essential public facilities outside of at-risk areas, including, but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency communications facilities, or identifying construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if these facilities are located in at-risk areas.

More specific policy guidance for locating essential public facilities outside of hazard areas and mitigating risks for any new facilities within hazard areas is appropriate.

Partially
756 65302(g)(4)(C)(iii)
Feasible implementation measures to address the goals, policies, and objectives for climate resiliency, including:

The designation of adequate and feasible infrastructure located in an at-risk area.

No
757 65302(g)(4)(C)(iv)
Feasible implementation measures to address the goals, policies, and objectives for climate resiliency, including:

Guidelines for working cooperatively with relevant local, regional, state, and federal agencies.

The General Plan doesn't present any guidelines for working cooperatively with other agencies on climate change resiliency.

Partially
Michael Baker International Page 18 of 21 3/18/2025 150 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 758 65302(g)(4)(C)(v)
Feasible implementation measures to address the goals, policies, and objectives for climate resiliency, including:

The identification of natural infrastructure that may be used in adaptation projects, where feasible.Where feasible, the plan shall use existing natural features and ecosystem processes, or the restoration of natural features and ecosystem processes, when developing alternatives for consideration.For the purposes of this clause, “natural infrastructure” means the preservation or restoration of ecological systems, or utilization of engineered systems that use ecological processes, to increaseresiliency to climate change, manage other environmental hazards, or both. This may include, but is not limited to, floodplain and wetlands restoration or preservation, combining levees with restored natural systems to reduce flood risk, and urban tree planting to mitigate high heat days.

The General Plan does not explicitly identify natural infrastructure for adaptation projects.

Partially
759 65302(g)(4)(D)(i)
(blank)
If a city or county has adopted the local hazard mitigation plan, or other climate adaptation plan or document that fulfills commensurate goals and objectives and contains the information required pursuant to this paragraph, separate from the general plan, an attachment of, or reference to, the local hazard mitigation plan or other climate adaptation plan or document.

The LHMP was updated in 2019. The General Plan should be updated to explicitly incorporate by reference the most recent LHMP.

Partially
760 65302(g)(4)(D)(ii)
(blank)
Cities or counties that have an adopted hazard mitigation plan, or other climate adaptation plan or document that substantially complies with this section, or have substantially equivalent provisions to this subdivision in their general plans, may use that information in the safety element to comply with this subdivision, and shall summarize and incorporate by reference into the safety element the other general plan provisions, climate adaptation plan or document, specifically showing how each requirement of this subdivision has been met The LHMP was updated in 2019. The General Plan should be updated to reflect the updated information in the 2019 LHMP and to explicitly incorporate by reference the most recent LHMP.

Partially
Michael Baker International Page 19 of 21 3/18/2025 151 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 761 65302(g)(5)
(blank)
Cities and counties that have flood plain management ordinances that have been approved by FEMA thatsubstantially comply with this section, or have substantially equivalent provisions to this subdivision in their general plans, may use that information in the safety element to comply with this subdivision, and shall summarize and incorporate by reference into the safety element the other general plan provisions or the flood plain ordinance, specifically showing how each requirement of this subdivision has been met.

N/A
762 (blank)
(blank)
Prior to the periodic review of its general plan and prior to preparing or revising its safety element, each city and county shall consult the California Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation, the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, if the city or county is located within the boundaries of the Sacramento andSan Joaquin Drainage District, as set forth in Section 8501 of the Water Code, and the Office of EmergencyServices for the purpose of including information known by and available to the department, the agency, and the board required by this subdivision.

Will need to address in GPU. A portion of the Planning Area is within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Drainage District, so CVFPB consultation will be required.

Partially
763 (blank)
(blank)
To the extent that a county’s safety element is sufficiently detailed and contains appropriate policies and programs for adoption by a city, a city may adopt that portion of the county’s safety element that pertains to the city’s planning area in satisfaction of the requirement imposed by this subdivision N/A
764 (blank)
(blank)
Review the safety element for fire and flood impacts upon each Housing Element update.

Partially
765 (blank)
(blank)
Review the safety element for climate change at each update to the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Jurisdiction may also choose to do a comprehensive review of the safety element upon each housing element update to streamline review.

Partially
Michael Baker International Page 20 of 21 3/18/2025 152 Item 8.

General Plan Consistency Eastvale 2040
Categor Government Code Relationship to Other Elements or Agencies Analysis/Gaps OPR-Ref Consistency 8-Environmental Justice
800 65302(h)(1)
(blank)
Identify disadvantaged areas within the area covered by the general plan.

No
801 65302(h)(1)(A)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Reduce exposure to pollution- including improving air quality in disadvantagedcommunities No
802 65302(h)(1)(A)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Promote public facilities in disadvantaged communities No 803 65302(h)(1)(A)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Promote food access in disadvantaged communities No
804 65302(h)(1)(A)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Promote safe and sanitary homes in disadvantaged communities No
805 65302(h)(1)(A)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Promote physical activity in disadvantaged communities No 806 65302(h)(1)(A)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Reduce any unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communitie not otherwise addressed above No
807 65302(h)(1)(B)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Promote civil engagement in the public decision making process in disadvantaged communities No
808 65302(h)(1)(C)
Identify objectives and policies to:

Prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities No
Michael Baker International Page 21 of 21 3/18/2025 153 Item 8.
24 APPENDIX C
Current General Plan Land Use Map
154
Item 8.
·
·
·
·
· ·
·
·
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
}
}
}
}
} }
}
}
þ
þ
þ
þ
þ þ
þ
þ
Thermalito Afterbay
Thermalito
Forebay
Lake Oroville

MLDR/MU
162
99 70
70 162 162
99 162

LONGBAR RD

LONG BAR RD

STANFORDAVE

HIGHLANDSBLVD

LAS PLUMAS AVE

ACAC AI AVE

OROVILLE GARDEN RANCHRD

GLEN DR

OROVILLEBANGOR HWY

CANYON HIGHLANDS DR

WILBUR RD
MYERS
ST

MYERS ST

OAKVALE
AVE

FEATHER RIVER BLVD

MITCHELLAVE

OROVILLE QUINCYHWY

HUNTOON
ST

ORANGE AVE

GARDEN DR

WASHINGTON AVE
5TH AVE
WYANDOTTE AVE 18TH ST

MONTE VISTA AVE

OROVILLE DAM BLVD E

OLD OLIVE HWY

GEORGIA PACIFICWAY

CANYON DR

OROVILLE BANGOR HWY

ROYALOAKS
DR

OROVILLE BANGOR HWY
S 5TH AVE
12TH ST

MONTGOMERY ST

KELLY R DI GE RD

MTIDA RD

MINERS RANCH RD

CHEROKEE
RD

OPHIR RD

GRAND AVE

TABLE MOUNTAIN BLVD

LINCOLN BLVD

LOWER WYANDOTTE RD

LARKIN RD

FOOTHILL BLVD

NELSON AVE
Ë 0 0.5 1 Mile
Source Data: City of Oroville GIS, 2013
NOTE: The Foothill Overlay is displayed in Figure LU-7.

CIT Y O F O ROVILLE
203 0 G EN ERAL PL A N

LAND U SE ELEMENT
FIG URE LU -6
2030 GENERAL PLAN LAND U SE D ESIGNATIONS
Land Use Designation
Rural Residential (0-0.2 du/acre)
Very Low Density Residential (0.2-1 du/acre)
Low Density Residential (1-3 du/acres)
Medium Low Density Residential (3-6 du/acres)
Medium Density Residential (6-14 du/acre)
Medium High Density Residential (14-20 du/acre)
High Density Residential (20-30 du/acre)
Mixed Use
Retail and Business Services
Office
Industrial
Airport Business Park
Public
Park
Environmental Conservation/Safety
Resource Management
State Water Project
Oro Bay Special Plan Area Overlay
South Ophir Specific Plan Area Overlay
Rio d'Oro Specific Plan Area Overlay
Oro Dam Blvd Industrial Overlay (ODB-O)
Oroville Planning Area
Oroville Sphere of Influence
Oroville City Limits
Airport Land Use Safety Zones
A
B-1
B-2
C
D
Tribal Land
Unique Agriculture Overlay
Arts, Culture, and Entertainment Overlay
Water
GP Amendment # Adoption Date
20-01 9/24/2020
20-02 10/1/2020
20-03 1/28/2021
20-04 TBA
21-01 7/22/2021
Genral Plan Amendments Since 2015
155
Item 8.
26 APPENDIX D
Current Zoning Map
156
Item 8.

PQ
R-3
PQ
R-3 MXD
MXD
C-2
OS
C-2
C-2
PUD
R-1
RP PQ
OF
PQ MXD
PQ
MXD
PQ R-1
R-4 OF
R-3
MXC
PQ
R-1
PQ
R-1 MXD
PQ PQ R-1
PQ RR-20
ROAD
RL R-1
R-1 MXC
R-1
PQ
R-1
R-1 RL
RL
R-1
R-1
PQ
MXC
C-2
C-1
R-1
CN
PQ
MXC
MXC
MXC
PQ
PQ
MXC
R-4
MXC
PQ R-2
MXC
MXC PQ
MXC
RL
C-2
C-2
OS
OS
M-2
M-2
OS
M-2
OS
CH
OS
PQ
CH
PQ
RL
PQ
ROAD
C-2 RL
RL
OS
PQ MXN
R-1
RR-20
RL
OS
PQ
PQ RL
OS OS
R-2
R-3
R-2
MXN
RL
R-3
R-3
C-1
OS
OS
RL
MXN
RL
RL
OS
R-2
R-3
PQ
RR-20
RR-20
R-1 OS PQ
R-3

ROAD RL
R-4
R-3
R-3
CN PQ
R-2
PQ
N
R-2 C-2
R-3
R-2
RL
C-2
PQ
CN
R-3
RL
R-1
CN
R-2
R-2
R-1
RL
R-1
RL
OS
RL
RL
RL
R-1 RL
RL
R-1
R-2
R-1
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RR-10
RR-20
RL
RL
MXN
PQ PQ
RL
RL
PQ
R-1
R-1 R-1
RL
R-1
MXN
RL R-1
R-1 MXN
C-2
MXC
MXC
MXC
CLM
C-2
R-1
CN
R-1 R-1
PQ
R-1
M-2
PQ
PQ M-2
M-2
M-2
R-1
C-2
R-1
R-1
PQ
MXN
R-1 CN R-1
RL
PQ
CLM
PQ
MXC
R-3
MXC
C-2
MXC
PQ
MXC
MXC
MXC/M-2
M-2 MXC
PQ
PQ
PQ
PQ
PQ
PQ
C-2
PQ
OS
PQ
C-2
C-2
PQ
C-2
PQ
C-2
M-2
M-2 C-2
M-2
C-2
M-2
PQ
M-2
M-2
MXC
M-2
M-2
M-2
M-2
M-2
M-2
MXC
C-2
M-2
M-2
PQ
M-2
M-2
M-2
M-2
RL
C-2
RR-20
RL
RL
OS
RL
RL
RL
RL RR-20
RR-20
RL
RR-20
RL
RR-20
RL
RL
PQ
RL
RL RL
RL
PQ
RL
RL
PQ
RL RL
C-2 PQ
RR-20
M-2
M-2
M-2
M-2
M-2
PQ
M-2
PQ
PQ
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
R-3
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
RL
R-3
RL
RL
PQ
Rl

MXC CLM
MXC/PQ
RL RL
MXC
MXC
R-4
MXN
LEONA
R
D
W
AY
CORTEZ
WAY
EHMANN
ST
LINDEN
ST

SPUR ST
CUTTY
SARK
CT
JEWELL
C
T
OAK AL
CA
R
B
O
N
CIR
M
Y
E
R
S
S
T
8TH AVE
S
AW
WALI
C
T

HEATHER
CIR
GLEN
AV
E

PACIFIC
HE
R
I
D
GHTS
R
O
C
K

HAVEN C
T

JASMINE CT

BUTTE AVE

MAJHI LN
S
U
MI C
T
TUCKER
LN
TIGE
LITTLE

INTEGRITY RS TRL
CT

CENTER LN
NOB AL
PO
M
OLA
AVE

SERVICE
CIR

DONNA ST
LIN
DA
LO
MA
WAY

PARKS ST
Y ST
OLD MT
IDA RD
FLYING
CLOUD
DR

DORR LN

TRAVERS LN
PLU
M
A
S
C
T

PAULA CT

FAY WAY

M O RRELCIR
A
R
R
O
W
WAY

HART LN

MILL ST

VERN CT
CON
L
C
N
ORDIA
BUTTE
GLEN
DR

KAMPONG
CT

GOLD AVE

HEMEN WAY

MILLOW CT

SUMMERS ST

FEATHER
AVE

GRACE ST
G
A
N
G
WAY
9T
H
S
T
TA BLE

MOUN TAIN CIR

ROSE ST
LAKE

FORESTAVE

GLEN AVE

HIGHLANDS
TERR

PLACER AVE
RANCHO

VISTA DR

GOLD AVE

RIO VISTA DR

VALIN D A
CIR

SPRUCEPK
W
Y

MELANDJO
CT
9T
H
S
T

CORTO ST

ANDORA CIR

DEBRA WAY
DEBBIE
ANN CT

PHILLIPS WAY
OM
E
GA LN

ROSSMORE LN
S
U

NFLOWER
LN

MONTE VISTA AVE

PLACER AVE

PANO LN

MADRONE AVE

VIA CORTE
GRAVEL
GERTIE
DR

FEATHER AVE
G
U
N
TER LN

BALDWIN AVE
PA
R
K
D
ALE
AVE
H
A
R
M
S
AVE
T

R PI OLI TER
R

OL VI E
G
R
O
VE LN

PALM AVE
H
A
R
D
NET
T
C
T
A

DELAIDE WAY

RAVINE CT
BATON

ROUGE DR
C
O
A
CH D
R

GROVE ST

CLINTON AVE

HUNTOON
ST

ROSEMEL CT

MAPLE AVE

YOLO AVE

CABANA DR

GILMORE LN
S
H
A
D
O
W
O
A
K
C
T
LO
R
E
N
E
C
T
T
Y
R
A
C
T

ROSEKRANS DR

COUNTRY

WOOD LN
DAW
N
C
T
PATES
M
O
U
N
TAIN
C
T

TREVANNA WAY

MOUNTAIN
VIEW
CT

LINCOLN
ST

BONNIE LN

DODGE AVE
BA
R
NES
WAY
WIN
DW
A
RD WAY

WILDFLO WER
TE
RR

DODGE AVE

RAND LN

SISKIYOU AVE

SHARP RD

YUBAAVE

SHASTAAVE

WATERBURY LN

LAKE AVE

MARGARET DR

STORMES AVE

SABINE RD
SO
C

UTH POWER

ANAL RD
W
Y
M
AN AVE
C
ANA
R
Y
C
T
G
OLDEN
EA
GLE R
D
O
RANGEW
OOD
W
AY
C
O
A
R
SE G
OLD
R
D
EU
C
ALYPT
U
S
AVE
RIVER

BLUFF D
R
DEBBY
AVE

MUR-MEL RD

BURMAT DR
F GI S
T
BO
N
TI E S
T
OLIVER
ST
H
O
O
VER
S
T

NEL SIER PL
DEL O
R
O
AVE
O
C
C
DI EN
TAL
AVE

DOWNER ST

REICKER AVE

FELICECT

ELLIS LN
MERLO
AVE

ZEPHE R
WAY

SHERIFFS
ACCESS
RD
B
ECKY
LN

ROBINSON ST

COUGAR CT
CA
SEY
C
T
N
O
RT
O
N
S
T

WRAY CT

CHERRY LN

INCLINE AVE

LAUREL AVE
L NI D
SEY LN

LA PALMA DR
R
O
BLE
AVE
PER
K
NI S
AVE
R
NU
GE CT

V EI W LN
HEW
TI T
AVE

CYNTHIAN
N
CT

PEACHY KEAN WAY
14TH S
T

OROVILLE
BANGOR
HWY

FAVORITE CT
FULT
O
N
AVE

JEFF E RSON ST

CHAISE DR
DIANE
CT

EVANSWOOD
CIR

NEVADAAVE

ISHI HILLS WAY

LA COLINA DR

LEMON HILL DR

BROOKDALE CT

FEATHER FALLS BLVD

HIGH ST

ODIE WAY

POST LN

WESTELLE DR

OLIVE GLENN DR

SYCAMORE PKWY

CA S A LOMA
W
AY
EUCLID
AVE

STUART CT

BROUGHAM DR

SISKIYOU AVE
T
TI A
N
WAY

PA CIFIC

H EIG H
TS
D
R

GRAY ST

SWAN LN

PHAETON DR

VIA LATON
GEA
R
Y
C
T
PARK
K
AVE
EK
O
S
T

OAK PARK WAY
HEDLU
ND
DR
BROWN
AVE
ED
WA
R
D
D
R

BO-Y- LE LN
MARG
O
LN
WALMER
R
D

REGENT LO
OP
H
O
R
NEY
T
O
A
D
R
D
3RD AVE
REY
M
A
N
S
T

PERKINS
AVE

POND VIEW LN

INDUSTRIAL WAY

MIDWAY D R

CRANE AVE

ORCHARDCREST
DR
BURMA
RD

LAUSEN S
T
B

E VE RLY DR
RID

GEWELL CT
COM
M
E

RCI AL W
AY
SERRA

M ONTE D
R

COVENTRY DR

RUSTY DUSTY RD
H
U
N
TER
D
R

PINEDALE CT

KENNETH LN

CAMPBELL
AVE

RICHTER
AV
E

SUTTER VIEW CT
OVE
RH
EAD
D
R

GILMORE LN
VIA
CEDRO

YARD ST
PINE
ST
C
OLU

MB AI AVE

SELF LN

CONCOW MAIDU DR
C
OUNT
RY
O
A
K
S
D
R
BR
ONS
ON C
T
F. D. R. T
RL
PIE

RP ONT DR

NORTHVIEW DR
EL N

OBLE AVE
FLO

RENCE AVE

BOWLING DR

NISSEN RANCH RD

TEHAMAAVE

SELF LN

BRODERICK ST
LO
N
G
BAR
CT

NEVADAAVE

CORONAAVE

SIERRAAVE

FIRLOOP CIR

SERENE LN

KATIE CT
IR

ONHORSE LN

ZEPHERWAY

SAM LYNN WAY

CLEMO AVE
V
AI PA
C
A
N
A
FIR AL

BRERETON WAY
ROC
K

RIDGE RD
O
A
K
AVE
6TH S
T
E

XECUTIVE PK
W
Y

THOMPSONFLAT

CEMETERYRD

WELLS LN

MAPLE AVE
T
HERES
A LN

LAS PLUMAS WAY

BIGGS AVE

ARGONAUT AVE

HAMMON PARK DR
Y
ELLOW
HA
M
M
E
R
DR
LINDA
D
R
3RD
AVE
BU

RL NI G
T
O
N
AVE
VEATC
H
ST
B UTTE

WOODS DR

STAUSS AVE

HUNTING
T
ON LN

YUBAAVE

SPRUCE AL

BUEHLER AVE

LIM E LIG
HTWAY
C
RES
T
RID
GE D
R

STUMP DR
GOLDEN

FEATHER
DR

ARDETH CT

MORNINGSTAR AVE

GLENV I EW WAY
3R
D
S
T

O ROVIEW DR

STATE BOX RD

MESAAVE

RAINY'S WAY

FOREBAY ACCESSRD

VIA CANELA

DEERWOODDR

E G R A
ND
AVE
2ND AVE
HAMMON
AVE
SP
R INGT
MI E
TRL
V
SI TA

DEL CERRO
4T
H
S
T
7TH AVE
AL

CRESENTA DR

MORNINGSIDE DR

ROSITA WAY
TYME W
AY
LIN
DEN
AVE
6TH AVE
OAK
ST

SOUTHVIEW DR

PRINCE RD

SIMPCO LN
4TH AVE

JUSTELLE DR

FORD DR

BOY NTON AVE
LB
UFFS
DR
N
O
RT
H
R
D
RI W
NI AVE

MITCHELL AVE
FO
G
G
AVE

MONO AVE

MINERS ALLEY
LINDA
L OMA
D
R

STANLEY DR
MELV
NI A
AVE
2ND
S
T

MARIAH LN
C
OLIN
A
WAY
RI W
NI AVE
MYRTLE
DR

ASHLEY AVE

ALVERDA DR
5TH ST
C
A
R

MEL AVE

PINEDALE
AVE

VAL L EYVIEW
D
R

RIVE RVIE W TERR

WILDLIFE AREA

ACCE SS RD
V

RI G NI AI AVE

COLUSAAVE

DUTCH DR

BUTTE AVE

FORESTVIEW DR
BIG
O
RD
LO
M
A
VIS
TA
D
R

EDGEWOOD DR
A ST
R
O
SEBEN
AVE
FALLBR
O
O
K
AVE

FEATHER AVE

CUSTER LN
ROD
M
OR
LN

MEADOWVIEW
DR
M OU
N
AT IN
V
EI W
DR
V-C
R
D

ITHACA ST
V-7 RD

LAKELAND BLVD
GLEN
CIRCLE
DR

V E- AVE
FA
RLEY
ST
LEMON

HILL DR
14T
H
S
T

EDGEMONT
DR

FORE BAYACCESS RD
MELRO
S
E
D
R
B ST
B
E
AV
E
R
R
D

BROOKDALE
DR
CO
U
N
TY

CENTER DR

INGLEWOO
D
D
R
C ST
RA
B
OLAVE
SEA
C
REST D
R

GREENBA
N
K
AV
E
D ST

MA AND PA LN

FAIRHILL
DR

MIRA LOMA
DR
M

DI DLEH
OFF LN

BURMA RD

OAK KNOLL WAY
P INE

OAK S RD

TEHAMAAVE

BAGGETT-M
A
RY

SV LI L
E
R
D

CAL OAK RD

CLARE MONT DR

FORT WAYNE ST

THERMALITO AVE

SAFFORD ST

ELGIN ST

OAK KNOLL WAY
D

VI ERSIO
N
DAM
A
C
CES
S
R
D

THOMPSON FLAT RD

WHEELER AVE
C
TI R
U
S
AVE

ARLIN RHINE DR

POMONAAVE

CYNTHI A
NN
LN

SOUTH POWER CANAL RD
OLD
FERRY
RD

MESSINAAVE

HIGH ST

PACIFIC
H
EIG
H
TS
R
D
6TH ST

PLUMAS AVE
D
RES
C
HER
T
RA
C
T
R
D
V-6 RD
A
U
T
REY LN
14TH S
T

KUSEL RD

BOHEMIAAVE

GREENVILLE ST
VALLEY
VIE W
D
R
BAG
G
ETT
PALE
R
M
O
R
D

BAGGETT-MARYSVILLE
RD
7TH S
T
S
TA

GEL NI E R
D

BIRD ST

SPENCER
AVE

PINECREST RD

RAILROAD
AVE
7T
H
AVE LO
NE T
REE R
D
10TH S
T

HILLDALE AVE

BURMA RD
POWER
HOUSE
HILL
RD

UPPER PALER
M
O
R
D

NORTH POWER CANAL RD

COTTONWOOD
CIR

LONG BAR RD

STANFORD
AVE
HIG
HLA
N
D
S
BLV
D

LAS PLUMAS AVE
A
C
A
CIA
AV
E

OROVILLE GARDEN RANCH RD
GLEN
DR

OROVILLE

BANGOR HWY

CANYONHIGHLANDS DR

MYERS ST
FE
AT
H
E
R

RIVER BLV
D

MITCHELL AVE

OROVILLE QUINCY HWY

ORANGE AVE

GARDEN DR
WA
S
H
NI G
T
O
N
AVE
5T
H
AV
E

WYANDOTTE AVE

OROVILLE DAM BLVD E

GEORGIA PACIFIC WAY

OROVILLE BANGOR HWY

CHEROKEE RD
S 5TH AVE
12TH S
T

MONTGOMERY ST

NELSON AVE

GRAND AVE

OPHIR RD

FOOTHILL
BLVD

TABLE MOUNTAIN BLVD
LO
WER
W
YAND
O
T
TE R
D

LINCOLN
BLVD

OROVILLE DAM BLVD W

OLIVE HWY

OROVILLE DAM BLVD W
LA
R
KIN R
D
18TH ST

GRAND AVE
20TH S
T

RABE RD
PA
R FO
U
R
WAY

AFTERBAY DR

BIGGS AVE
P NI T
O PL
16TH S
T

FEATHER AVE

TRES VIAS RD
18TH S
T

ALMA ST
HA

RLAN AVE
21S
T
S
T

CANTER DR

REPPE R
D

FRESNO AVE
R
O
Y
D
R

WESTERN DR
G
OLD
C
O
U
N
T
RY LN
WES BA
R

RETT LN

AIRPORT PKWY

CALLE VIS
TA
D
R
CHUC
K
YEA
GER
WAY

RAUCH CT

MINERAL WAY
JA
MES
ON C
T

SUSAN CT

CULLY CT
16T
H
S
T
ABP
PQ
RL
R-1
R-3
RA
CLM
RR-1
R-2

OLIVE HWY

OROVILLE DAM BLVD E

MONTGOMERY ST
MYERS
ST

MITCHELL AVE

LINCOLN
ST
5TH AVE
WA
S
H
NI G
T
O
N
AVE

HUNTOON
ST
FEAT
H
E
R
RIV
E
R
BLV
D

OROVILLE DAM BLVD E
TABLE
M
O
U
N
TAIN
BLVD

MITCHELL AVE

BIRD ST

HIGH ST
5TH S
T

POMONA AVE

SAFFORD ST
OAK
ST

SPENCER
AVE

ARLIN RHINE DR
4TH AVE
6TH AVE
PINE
ST
FIR AL

ROBINSON ST
7TH AVE
2ND AVE

BRIDGE ST
1ST AVE
3RD AVE

MESA AVE
LINDEN
AVE

YARD ST

MITC HELL AVE

SPRUCE AL

MINERS ALLEY

ORANGE AVE

BALDWIN AVE
VEAT
C
H
S
T

GRAY ST

OROVIEW D R

PARK AVE

OLD FERRY
RD

CLEMO AVE

GRANT AVE

PERKINS
AVE
2N
D
S
T

GILM ORE LN

BRERETON WAY

WILCOX AVE
Y ST

GAWTHORNE AVE
OLIVER
ST
N
O
RT
O
N
S
T

DOWNER ST
W

LINCOLN
ST
B
LUFFS
D
R

LINCOLN
ST

STORMES AVE
NOB AL

ELMA ST

KITRICK AVE
TUCKER
LN
8TH
AVE

HIG H ST
3RD AVE
PINE
ST

YARD ST
VEATCH
ST
PQ
MXN
OS
MXC
R-2
C-2
RR-20
RL
R-3
MXC/PQ
R-4
MXD
CN
R-1
OF
PUD
C-1
ROAD
RP
Downtown Area
Thermalito Area
See Thermalito
Area Inset Map

CI T Y O F O ROV ILLE

ZO N I N G M AP
ADOPTED MARCH 31 ,2015
Residential Districts
Agricultural Residential (RA)
Rural Residential 1 Acre (RR-1)
Rural Residential 20,000 Square Feet (RR-20)
Rural Residential 10,000 Square Feet (RR-10)
Large-Lot Residential (RL)
Single-Family Residential (R-1)
Medium-Density Residential (R-2)
High-Density Residential (R-3)
Urban Density Residential (R-4)
High-Density Residential/Professional (RP)
Commercial and Mixed-Use Districts
Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
Limited Commercial (C-1)
Intensive Commercial (C-2)
Highway Commercial (CH)
Commercial Light Manufacturing (CLM)
Office (OF)
Downtown Mixed Use (MXD)
Neighborhood Mixed Use (MXN)
Corridor Mixed Use (MXC)
Industrial Districts
Airport Business Park (ABP)
Intensive Industrial (M-2)
Special Purpose Districts
Public or Quasi-Public Facilities (PQ)
Open Space (OS)
Overlay Districts
Hillside Development Overlay (HD-O)
Planned Development Overlay (PD-O)
Downtown Historic Overlay (DH-O)
Airport Influence Area Overlay (AIA-O)
Mini-Storage Overlay (MS-O)
Conditional Overlay (C-O)
Foothill Overlay (F-O)
Professional Office Overlay (PO-O)
Specific Plan Area Overlay (SPA-O)
Oro Dam Blvd Industrial Overlay (ODB-O)
´ 0 0.25 0.5 Miles
Zoning Amendment # Adoption Date
ZC 15-01 6/22/2015
ZC 16-01 12/1/2016
ZC 17-01 12/14/2017
ZC 17-02 12/
ZC 18-01 11/15/2018
ZC 18-02 11/15/2018
ZC 18-03 12/27/2018
ZC 18-04 12/27/2018
ZC 19-01 2/28/2019 DENIED
ZC 19-02 2/28/2019 DENIED
ZC 19-03 4/25/2019 Never to Council
ZC 19-04 4/25/2019 Never to Council
ZC 19-05 4/25/2019 Never to Council
ZC 20-01 10/22/2020
ZC 20-02 10/1/2020 PC
ZC 20-03 10/22/2020 PC
ZC 20-04 1/28/2021
ZC 20-05 2/5/2021
ZC 20-05 2/5/2021
ZC 21-01 7/22/2021 PC
ZC 21-02 7/22/2021 PC
ZC 21-03 8/26/2021 PC
ZC 21-04 9/23/2021 PC
ZC 21-05
ZC 21-06 10/28/2021
ZC 21-07 10/28/2021
ZC 21-08 11/16/2021
ZC 22-01 1/17/2022
ZC 22-02 4/5/2022 TO COUNCIL
ZC 22-03 6/23/2022
ZC 22-04 8/25/2022 TO PC
ZC 22-05 9/22/2022 TO PC
Zoning Amendments Since 2015
29 APPENDIX F
Annexations Starting in 2015
158
Item 8.
·
·
·
·
|
|
|
|
}
}
}
}
þ
þ
þ
þ
8/10/15
6/23/15
11/15/21
4/14/21
3/14/17

GRAND AVE
12TH S
T

NELSON AVE
L NI C

OLN BLV
D
S 5TH AVE
MYERS
ST

FEATHER

RIVER BLV
D

TABLE MOUNTAIN BLVD
18TH S
T

MONTGOMERY ST
LO
WER
W
YA
N
D
O
T
TE R
D

CHEROKEE RD

FOOTHILL
BLVD
MITCHELL AVE 5T
H
AV
E
LA
R
K NI R
D

LINCOLN
ST

OROVILLE QUINCY HWY

MONTE VISTA AVE

WYANDOTTE AVE

GEORGIA PACIFIC WAY

OROVILLE DAM BLVD E

GARDEN DR
WA
S
H
NI G
T
O
N
AVE

ORANGE AVE

HUNTOON
ST

OROVILLE BANGOR HWY

LONG BAR RD

ACACIAAVE

OROVILLE BANGOR HWY

LAS PLUMAS AVE

CANYON HIGHLANDS DR

HIGHLAN
DS
BLVD

OROVILLE GARDEN RANCH RD
STANFO
RD
AVE
10TH ST
7TH AVE
7TH ST

BIRD ST
V-6 RD
6TH ST
14TH ST
16TH ST
D ST
20TH ST
C ST
B ST

TEHAMA AVE

HIGH ST
A ST

SPENCER AVE

AUTREY LN

BIGGS AVE

NORTH POWER CANAL RD

FEATHER AVE

ELGIN ST
V-7 RD

PLUMAS AVE

ROBINSON ST

V-C RD GREENVILLE ST
PINE
ST

V E- AVE
5TH ST

POMONA AVE
2ND ST

YARD ST

OLD FERRY
RD

HILLDALE AVE

SAFFORD ST
VEATCH
ST

CAL OAK RD
18TH ST

ITHACA ST

FOREBAY ACCESS RD
OAK ST
4TH ST

FARLEY ST

ARLIN RHINE DR

SOUTH POWER CANAL RD

OAK KNOLL WAY

BURMA RD

BUTTE AVE
4TH AVE

FORT WAYNE ST
6TH AVE
BRIDGE
ST

ARBOL AVE

PACIFIC HEIGHTS RD

GLEN AVE
3RD ST

THERMALITO AVE
FIR AL

SEACREST DR
2ND AVE

VALLEY VIEW DR

COLUSA AVE

FOGG AVE

M DI DLEHOFF LN

MONO AVE
BIG
O
RD

ROSEBEN AVE

ASHLEY AVE

V RI G NI AI AVE
1ST AVE

THOMPSON FLAT RD

COLINA WAY

LETA LN

CLAREMONT DR
3RD AVE

BROOKDALE DR

SIMPCO LN

LAKELAND BLVD

PINE OAKS RD

FALLBROOK AVE

MESA AVE

OAK AVE

LINDEN AVE

YUBA AVE

BAGGETT-MARYSVILLE RD

LEMON HILL DR

GRAND AVE

ALMA ST

STUMP DR

BALDWIN AVE

VIA CANELA

MITCHELL AVE

WELLS LN

SPRUCE AL

BOYNTON AVE

MINERS ALLEY

ROSITA WAY

HARLAN AVE

HAMMON AVE

ORANGE AVE

LINDA DR

DIVERSION DAM ACCESS RD

SWEEM ST

STAUSS AVE

COUNTY CENTER DR

E GRAND AVE

EDGEWOOD DR

LINDA LOMA DR

CLEMO AVE

V AI PACANA

KEKO ST

STATE BOX RD

MIRA LOMA DR

RAINY'S WAY

GRAY ST

SIERRA AVE

BUEHLER AVE

REPPE RD

FRESNO AVE

F GI ST

NEVADA AVE
ROY DR

PARK AVE

MORNINGSIDE DR

OROVIEW DR

LAUSEN ST

V SI TA DEL CERRO

CORONA AVE

ZEPHER WAY

VIA LATON

VAQUERO DR

CRESTRIDGE DR

MARGO LN

GILMORE LN

REYMAN ST

ARGONAUT AVE

LONG BAR CT

EL NOBLE AVE

GRANT AVE

RICHTER AVE

ORO AVE

IDORA ST
DIANE
CT

BURL NI GTON AVE

PIERPONT DR

MYRTLE DR

CALLE VISTA DR
5TH AVE

MORNINGSTAR AVE

BRODERICK ST

BROWN AVE

ELLIS LN

STUART CT

COLUMB AI AVE

FLORENCE AVE

PERKINS AVE

WALMER RD
8TH AVE

BO-Y-LE LN

WRAY CT

BRERETON WAY

WILDLIFE AREA ACCESS RD

MIDWAY DR

EXECUT VI E PKWY

LA CRESENTA DR

MONTE VISTA AVE

MINERAL WAY

CAMPBELL AVE

PLACER LN

HUNTINGTON LN

VIA MADERO
8TH ST

CHAISE DR

PHAETON DR

ONYX CIR

COVENTRY DR

GOLDEN FEATHER
DR

ONTARIO AVE

ROCKRIDGE RD

GAWTHORNE AVE

BECKY LN

LAS PLUMAS WAY

WORTHY AVE

WILCOX AVE

VILLA ST

GRAND VIEW AVE

RAND LN
BLUFFS
DR
11TH ST

HEWITT AVE

SERVICE ST
Y ST

LAKE AVE

BUTTE WOODS
DR

MCCLELLAN AVE

ROBLE AVE

NISSEN RANCH RD

SISKIYOU AVE
OLIVER
ST

GAYLOR AVE

LESLIE LN

RIVERVIEW TERR BON TI E ST

FERNWOOD AVE

L NI DSEY LN

OAK PARK WAY

CHERRY LN

GARDELLA AVE

WESTELLE DR

NIKKI CT

NORTON ST

HAMMON PARK DR

LA COLINA DR

MERLO AVE

LAUREL AVE

FORESTVIEW DR

DEBBY AVE

SABINE RD

PEARL ST

BROUGHAM DR

EUCLID AVE
9TH ST

INCLINE AVE

CREST DR

HOOVER ST

COTTONWOOD CIR

LA PALMA DR

BURMAT DR

ISHI HILLS WAY

CEDAR PKWY
DOWNER
ST

BONNIE LN

W LINCOLN ST

ELM PKWY

BROOKDALE CT

FELICE CT

MAGNESIO ST

YOLO AVE

ARNOLD AVE

OLIVE GLENN DR

SHASTA AVE

ANTLER DR

DODGE AVE

REICKER AVE

DEL ORO AVE

LA MEDIA DR

WILLOW PKWY

LINCOLN
ST

PALM AVE

CASEY CT

SYCAMORE PKWY

GROVE ST

DAWN CT

ORCHARDCREST DR

CAMERON DR

EHMANN ST

CABANA DR

COACH DR
LEE ST

PARKER AVE

FLYING CLOUD DR

OSAGE AVE

STORMES AVE

MILL ST

ARDEE CT

MAGNOL AI PKWY

KELLEY ST

ROSE ST

HARMS AVE

PLATA CT

OL VI E LEAF DR

JEFFERSON ST
LEAH
CT

OMEGA LN

CORTO ST

HUNTOON
ST

CLINTON AVE

POPLAR AVE

VERN CT
WYNOKA
WAY
NOB AL

ZACK CIR

V AI CEDRO

CASA LOMA WAY

GOLD AVE

VIA CORTE

FAY WAY

TITANIO
CT

EUCALYPTUS AVE

WILLOW DR

STU'S LN

COARSE GOLD RD

ROSEKRANS DR

WINDWARD WAY

COURT ST

GRACE ST
BUCK
RUN
DR

TR PI OLI TERR DORR LN

PLACER AVE

DEBRA WAY

HARDNETT CT

GOLDEN EAGLE RD

GANG WAY

PAULA CT

PARK WAY

TREVANNA WAY

FAUNCE WAY

COLBALTO CT

PARKDALE AVE

ROCK RD

PATRICK CT

MARY JO PL

PARKS ST

MADRONE AVE

WEST WAY

PHILLIPS WAY

COOLEYS WAY

TUSCANY DR

DONNA ST

RIVER BLUFF DR

HELMAN ST

OL VI E GROVE LN

HEMEN WAY

VISTA ESTATES CT

ARROW WAY

REGENT LOOP

PERKINS ST

CURRIER CT

MELANDJO CT

PLUMAS CT

N CI OLAI AVE

MARJORY ST

SUMMERS ST

MEDICAL CENTER DR

KAMPONG
CT

TRAVERS LN

CENTER LN

GUNNERS WAY

TUCKER LN

GRAVEL GERTIE DR

B RI CH PKWY

QUICK SILVER CT

EVANSWOOD CIR

CONCORDIA LN

POMOLA AVE

BLOSSOM HILL RD

TUSCAN VILLA DR

WOODCREST DR

DOVER WAY

HIGHLANDS TERR

BUTTE GLEN DR

JASMINE CT

LAKE FOREST AVE

RUSSELL PROCTOR WAY

WILDWOOD CT

LACY CT
MYERS
ST

LA PAZ DR

LINDA LOMA
WAY

PAMELA JANE CT

BERRY CT

JEWELL CT

WOODLEAF CT
7TH AVE

SISKIYOU AVE

FEATHER AVE

FOREBAY ACCESS RD

FEATHER AVE

PLACER AVE

OAK KNOLL WAY
8TH AVE

PLUMAS AVE
14TH ST
3RD AVE

PLUMAS AVE

GILMORE LN

DODGE AVE

PLUMAS AVE
ZEPHER
WAY

POPLAR AVE

HIGH ST
20TH ST
16TH ST

YUBA AVE
14TH ST

STAUSS AVE
9TH ST
18TH ST 18TH ST

NEVADA AVE
18TH ST

THERMALITO AVE
6TH ST

TEHAMA AVE

BURL NI GTON AVE

GOLD AVE
70 70
162
162
City of Oroville Annexation History
²
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
159
Item 8.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN & COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PATRICK PIATT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
RE: AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT 3530 WITH OURENERGY
DATE: APRIL 1, 2025

SUMMARY
Staff recommends amending the existing professional services agreement with OurEnergy to increase the agreement amount by $50,000. These additional funds will allow OurEnergy to continue providing on-call consulting services and expand their scope to include a comprehensive infrastructure cost estimate for the Southside neighborhood and a preliminary analysis of a potential microgrid in that area.

DISCUSSION
In February 2024, the City entered into an agreement with OurEnergy to prepare a feasibility study and apply for funding under the PG&E Microgrid Incentive Program (MIP). Their efforts included a preliminary analysis, stakeholder coordination, and the submission of a conforming grant application, all of which qualified the City for a $25,000 reimbursement.

OurEnergy’s support and technical expertise have proven invaluable as the City of Oroville continues to explore energy resilience and long-term sustainability strategies.

Given the urgent need to evaluate infrastructure in the Southside area—a historically underserved neighborhood annexed in 2015—staff recommends expanding OurEnergy’s scope of work to include:
 Development of a comprehensive cost estimate for Southside infrastructure improvements, including:
o Complete roadway reconstruction
o New sidewalks, curbs, and gutters
o Installation of a storm drainage system
o Street lighting throughout the area
160
Item 9.

Page 2 ends

 Preliminary microgrid analysis for Southside, building on work already completed under the MIP application and exploring feasibility, cost, and energy delivery models for the neighborhood.

The $50,000 amendment will cover these new responsibilities as well as provide additional funding for OurEnergy to continue serving as the City’s on-call energy consultant as new opportunities and grant programs arise.

FISCAL IMPACT
$50,000 will be allocated from available Community Development or special project funds. This amount will be added to the original agreement with OurEnergy.

ACTION REQUESTED -
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Approve an amendment to the agreement with OurEnergy to increase the total contract amount by $50,000.

2. Authorize the City Administrator to execute the amended agreement and any related documents.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Original OurEnergy Proposal

2. Original Staff Report and Agreement (February 2024)

3. Draft Amendment to Agreement

161
Item 9.

Prepared For:

Patrick Piatt
Community Development Director
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965
(530) 538-2430 x2402
cityoforoville.org
[email protected]
Prepared By:

OurEnergy
101 Cooper Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
831.200.3969
ourenergyco.com
Proposal Date:

February 16, 2024
Project Title:

City of Oroville
PG&E Microgrid Incentive Program
Preliminary Feasibility Study &
MIP Grant Application
101 Cooper Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 | 831.200.3969 | ourenergyco.com Attachment 1
162
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
February 16, 2024
Patrick Piatt
Community Development Director
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965
Subject: Grant Application for Microgrid Incentive Program Dear Patrick,
OurEnergy takes pride in serving clients to plan and implement the most cost-effective renewable energy, electrification and advanced energy systems to increase resilience, reduce energy costs, and decrease emissions. We provide independent energy expertise, above the influence of systems vendors. Attributes that make our firm exceptionally qualified include:
● Deep understanding of renewable and advanced energy technologies, products, economics and trends.
● A focus on risk management and finance options with sophisticated risk analysis and mitigation. ● Highly vetted approach and process.
● Full spectrum advanced energy project development services, feasibility through operations. ● Independent. OurEnergy inherently takes a technology-agnostic approach to find the most appropriate solutions.
● Flexible and nimble. We offer a range of delivery structures from Owner’s Engineer to full scope development.

This is an exciting project that fits our expertise and service offerings well. I look forward to the opportunity to work with the City of Oroville, and hopefully build a long and fruitful relationship.

Sincerely,
Dustin Jolley, PE, LEED AP
CEO, Founder & Principal
February 16, 2024 Page 1
163
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
Project Background
This proposal documents OurEnergy’s offer to assist the City of Oroville in applying for grant funding toward designing and building a community-resilience microgrid.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is offering up to $18 million in grant funding to qualifying municipalities. The grant fund is referred to as the “Microgrid Incentive Program” (MIP). The purpose of a MIP grant is to provide funds for study, design, construction, and commissioning of a microgrid that energizes critical community facilities. In Northern California, CPUC has charged Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) with administration of MIP. The initial tranche of grant funds becomes available in Q2 2024, with applications due before then.

Toward processing and evaluating the MIP application, PG&E requires that the applicant work with a qualified engineering consulting firm to: 1) perform a preliminary techno-economic feasibility study, 2) represent and advise the city in a series of technical meetings with PG&E, and 3) compile and submit all MIP application-required documentation. To help applicants offset the costs of the study and grant application, MIP offers a $25,000 consulting reimbursement grant for the submission of a conforming MIP application, regardless of whether a MIP grant is ultimately awarded.

To apply for a MIP grant, an applicant must meet two key criteria. Applicants must be both vulnerable to PG&E outages and be located in a Disadvantaged and Vulnerable Community (DVC) zone, based on historical and census data. The City of Oroville meets both of these criteria. PG&E data indicates electrical power vulnerability to multiple Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events, and PG&E lines feeding the city may be subject to Tiers 2 & 3 High Fire-Threat Districts. US Census data shows Oroville to be in a DVC zone.

The primary goal of the MIP grant is to increase critical infrastructure resilience against PG&E energy supply limitations, power shutoffs, and natural disasters. Another goal is to deliver economic benefits, including potentially reduced energy bills and/or reduced future energy infrastructure upgrade investments for the city and the community. Further, by utilizing any renewable energy resources that prove to be feasible, there will be environmental benefits as well.

For the purpose of MIP grants, a microgrid is defined as a collection of PG&E-metered accounts combined with front-of-meter interconnected and qualifying behind-the-meter distributed energy-generation resources (DERs) (e.g., solar, wind, generators, etc.) that are contained within a clearly defined electrical distribution boundary. A MIP-funded microgrid must offer the ability for at least two separate meter accounts to disconnect from and reconnect to PG&E’s grid.

Common terms used to describe fundamental microgrid capabilities are “blue sky mode” and “island mode.” In “blue sky mode” PG&E’s grid is operating normally and the microgrid and microgrid DERs are interconnected with PG&E. In “island mode” the microgrid disconnects from PG&E’s grid and utilizes its own energy generation, independently from PG&E, for up to a specified period of time. MIP February 16, 2024 Page 2
164
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
qualifications require a minimum capacity of 24 hours of independent operation. Microgrid customers often prefer the ability to sustain protection against grid power outages for longer than 24 hours.

OurEnergy understands that the City of Oroville desires to apply for up to $18 million in MIP grant funding. The grant awarding process is competitive, and there is no guarantee that a grant will be awarded or that a full amount of $18 million will be awarded.

PG&E has provided a point system by which the MIP grant awards will be scored. During the preliminary feasibility study and grant application process, OurEnergy will apply its expertise and work with Oroville staff to evaluate and propose a microgrid approach to optimize the best possible competitive scores for Oroville’s grant application.

OurEnergy and City of Oroville staff members have already engaged in an initial informational consultation with PG&E. PG&E has indicated that Oroville scores highly in its qualifications for a MIP grant. Thus all conditions look quite favorable for Oroville’s grant application to qualify for, at the very least, a $25,000 application reimbursement.

Regardless of whether a large MIP grant is awarded, as long as Oroville and OurEnergy work together to satisfactorily complete the MIP application’s required checklist and propose a conforming project, PG&E will reimburse up to $25,000 toward consulting and grant application submission.

OurEnergy is expertly qualified and would be honored to assist the City of Oroville toward studying the feasibility of a municipal microgrid project, making optimized planning recommendations, and submitting the highest quality MIP grant application.

Proposed Approach & Scope:

Task 1: Discovery & Fact Finding
As part of a previous PG&E informational consultation, City of Oroville representatives have already provided an initial wish list of sites and facilities to consider for inclusion within a community microgrid.

Upon approval of this proposal, OurEnergy will engage with city representatives to narrow this list to fit within a preliminary feasibility study required for the MIP application stages to follow.

To lay the groundwork for a preliminary feasibility study, OurEnergy will meet with City staff to consider up to two microgrid boundary alternatives that could encapsulate and serve power to select, prioritized sites or facilities, possibly from this list:
● Public Safety Center (Police & Fire)
● County Jail
● Wastewater Treatment
● City Water Supplies
● Community Hospital
● Municipal Airport
February 16, 2024 Page 3
165
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
● Corporate Yard & Offices
● Tribal Health Center
● Veterans Housing
● City Hall
● Convention Center
● Schools
● Commercial Thoroughfare
○ Petroleum Fueling Stations
○ Grocery Stores
○ Motels
Encapsulating the entire list would require a microgrid development and construction budget far exceeding $18 million. Although additional government grants and/or public/private funding options may be available to finance such a project, and OurEnergy is quite capable of delivering such a project, a winning MIP application will require a strategic approach and may not include a request for the maximum funding amount. It is important to note that for the MIP program, a smaller grant request can score more highly in the competition, because overall scoring is based on the community benefit scoring divided by the amount of grant funds requested.

The above list does provide a starting point for discussions, and narrowing this list to two alternative boundary locations will be the goal of this Task 1. In the early days of kicking off Task 1, City representatives are welcome to add or remove wishlisted sites or facilities, and OurEnergy will advise in the process.

During this Task 1, OurEnergy will:
● Meet with City staff and discuss PG&E’s scoring system and consider location options ● Collect information to support evaluation of two microgrid boundary options, including:
○ Factors driving needs for improved resilience
○ Predicted community benefits
○ Number of PG&E meter accounts included
○ Number of PG&E microgrid isolation points required
○ Energy use history, trends, and projections for future needs ○ Pre-existing energy resources that may be utilized to reduce microgrid costs ○ Size, type, configuration and location(s) of new microgrid DERs ○ Overall MIP scoring considerations
● Analyze and report on the information collected
● Recommend a single microgrid boundary option best suited to score highly toward the MIP grant application.

February 16, 2024 Page 4
166
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
Task 2: MIP Study & Application Stage 1: Consultation
OurEnergy’s Task 2 is to assist the City in entering Stage 1 of the MIP grant application process. This requires a series of technical consultations with PG&E, whereby OurEnergy and the City will present and iteratively refine a microgrid project proposal with PG&E’s involvement.

From this Task 2 through the completion of Task 3 with the concluding deliverables of this proposal, OurEnergy will follow PG&E’s requirements for a conforming MIP application, specified in “Stage 1:

Consultation” and “Stage 2: Application” as documented in the PG&E MIP Handbook, found at https://www.pge.com/assets/pge/docs/save-energy-and-money/rebate-and-incentives/PGE-MIP-Handb ook.pdf.html.

The goals of PG&E’s Stage 1 are:
● Identify resiliency needs within the community
● Discuss potential projects/energy solutions to meet community’s need ● Review the eligibility requirements for MIP funding
● Discuss with Applicant’s engineering partner any design challenges, and coordinate on solutions in preparation for application
OurEnergy and City staff have already completed an Initial Resilience Consultation with PG&E, as described on page 15 of the PG&E MIP Handbook. Based on this consult, PG&E provided the go ahead to request the next step, a Microgrid Technical Consultation.

The following deliverables are required to open technical consultations with PG&E and to open the grant application process:
● Proposed Single Line Diagram (30% design)
● Proposed Site Map, including:
○ Planned Project Energy Generation Resources
○ Proposed Microgrid Electrical Boundary
○ Proposed Point of Interconnection for planned and existing Project Resources ○ Proposed Microgrid Islanding Point, if known
○ Location of controls and networking rack, if known
● List of customers to be served by the microgrid, including PG&E Meter Account IDs ● Proposed new generation type and size (e.g., Battery Energy Storage System – 1 MW/2MWh) and manufacturer, if known
● When in Island Mode, the desired minimum number of consecutive hours of service ● Evidence of Technical Representation
○ Engagement Letter from the Applicant Engineer (OurEnergy) ○ Name and contact for any engineering or development resources assisting the community (one contact per involved party)
○ Applicant experience attestation
February 16, 2024 Page 5
167
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
Following a continuing series of project feasibility evaluation actions and PG&E technical consultations, PG&E will provide templates to begin reviewing contractual conditions and processes that will emerge from the grant application process. Those templates will include:
● MIP Grant Agreement
● Information on the generator interconnection process
● Microgrid Island Study Agreement
● Microgrid Special Facilities Agreement
● Microgrid Operating Agreement (MOA)
Task 3: MIP Study & Application Stage 2: Application
At the completion of this Task 3 and this proposal’s Scope of Work, OurEnergy and City staff will have submitted a MIP grant application to PG&E.

The goals of PG&E’s Stage 2 are:
● Develop and gather information for your MIP Application ● Complete and submit the MIP Application to PG&E during a MIP Application Window ● Complete the Grant Agreement
OurEnergy will compile, review with Oroville staff, and submit the following MIP Application requirements:

Project Description
● Executive Summary describing the project, the resilience need it serves, its location, microgrid boundary and islanding point(s)
● A demonstration of how the project meets eligibility requirements “A” (Vulnerable to Outages) and “B” (Disadvantaged and Vulnerable Community)
● Locations of all Project Resources (both existing and planned), and any known non-project resources
● Additional information necessary to score the project:
○ The number of California Alternate Rates for Energy Program (CARE) and/or Family Electric Rate Assistance Program (FERA) or otherwise vulnerable customers, including an attestation from local or tribal authority having jurisdiction for vulnerable customer data
○ The number and description of Critical Facilities and Community Resilience Service facilities located within the microgrid project’s boundary ● Summary project cost estimate and Application Incentive Request, with details to be provided in Attachment section:
○ Actual costs incurred [or expected to be incurred] to develop the MIP Application (Application Development Grant request, capped at $25k) ○ Total estimated project cost that the community anticipates incurring and that is eligible for reimbursement
February 16, 2024 Page 6
168
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
○ Amounts that will be funded by your organization, other organizations or grants, and the MIP (Application Incentive Request)
○ Calculations showing how the Applicant accounted for actual and estimated costs eligible for funding under the MIP and actual and estimated non-MIP revenue sources, to arrive at the amount of its MIP incentive request.

Participating Loads and Project Resources
● Hourly aggregate load profiles of the customers within the microgrid boundary, including a forecast of how these metered load profiles will grow over the lifetime of the microgrid project (10 years). This information will be provided by PG&E during the Technical Consultation. ○ The number and types of planned and existing IFOM and BTM Project Resources (solar, wind, battery-based energy storage, etc.) and, if known, planned and existing IFOM and BTM non-Project Resources.
○ Each Project Resource’s manufacturer, technical data and operating parameters ○ If these Project Resources currently exist or if they will be new and need to submit an interconnection request to the utility
○ A brief showing how these Project Resources will support the load of the customers and facilities connected to the microgrid(detailed engineering analysis to be provided in Attachments)
● An estimate of the greenhouse gas emissions per kilowatt/hour (kWh) of electricity generated by Project Resources and Non-Project Resources when the Microgrid Project is in Island Mode.

Attachments
● AIR Request,11 including the following information:
○ Detailed estimate of costs to be incurred for those activities and facilities that are eligible for reimbursement under the MIP.
○ Detailed accounting of actual application development costs incurred, subject to reimbursement up to $25k through the Application Development Grant. ○ Breakout of costs to be funded by:
■ Self (community or CMG Aggregator) funding
■ Other grants or other sources
■ MIP
● Attestations/letters of support from local and tribal governments; if applicable ● Microgrid Proposal detailing MIP technical eligibility, including:
○ A 60% single-line diagram of the proposed microgrid that describes the microgrid’s:
■ Microgrid Islanding Point(s)
■ Boundary, e.g., geographic polygon indicating boundary ● Project Resources and Balance of System to extent known ○ Project site(s) details:
■ Location(s)
■ The status of control your organization will have over the project site(s) ■ Customers to be energized
■ Permits you will need to secure to deploy and operate your microgrid’s Project Resources
○ Microgrid development plan
February 16, 2024 Page 7
169
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
○ An engineering analysis demonstrating how the proposed microgrid’s Project Resources will support the projected loads for a minimum of 24 consecutive hours in Island Mode.12
● Copies of any relevant Interconnection Study applications for Project Resources (as applicable) All of the above Tasks 1-3 will culminate in a complete, compliant and successfully submitted MIP application.

Follow-on Proposals
Following the completion of this Scope of Work, and upon the award of a Grant Agreement by PG&E, OurEnergy is further qualified and will be available to negotiate and contract with the City of Oroville toward subsequent project stages, including further required technical implementation studies, financing, vendor contracting, project management, construction, and operations.

OurEnergy Company Profile
OurEnergy is a consulting, engineering and project development services company headquartered in Santa Cruz, California. We are a best-in-class, collaborative team of professionals that designs and implements sustainable energy infrastructure systems from concept to completion.

We serve select clients and work with industry collaborators in a variety of energy, sustainable design, consulting and construction projects including renewable energy, green building, sustainable systems, asset portfolio management, green buildings and infrastructure, and low impact development.

Our core team has held technical and managerial roles in implementing over 2GW of a mix of renewable energy technologies for community/residential, commercial/mixed-use, industrial and utility-scale projects. OurEnergy has played a key role in implementing over 250 MW of solar and renewables projects now operational and currently has approximately 750MW currently under development.

We are proud to be a leading developer of advanced microgrids. We pioneer and employ new and innovative project structuring, technical architectures, and approaches, and we help pave the way for a more resilient, participatory, and sustainable grid of the future.

OurEnergy’s core practice can be best characterized as full-scope project and program development services. Our expertise is in executing the process from early planning, strategy and feasibility, through implementation of complete engineering, procurement, construction management, commissioning and asset management (EPC/M). We also have an established track record of providing expert Owner’s Engineer representation services to a range of public and private clients.

We are agnostic and independent of any product manufacturers, meaning we can recommend the most appropriate technologies and competitive solutions. Our goal is to optimize around the customer/stakeholders, solutions and the delivery team - through leveraging our global procurement February 16, 2024 Page 8
170
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
strength along with our commitment to local partnerships. We view every engagement as a commitment to the project lifecycle and we will always strive to find creative solutions, add value and success.

Project Team
The core OurEnergy team members currently planned to support these efforts are as follows:
● Dustin Jolley, PE, LEED AP | Principal in Charge
○ Mr. Jolley will be the Principal in Charge and will be the lead technical expert overseeing all technical aspects of the project.
● Curt Dowdy | Program Executive
○ Mr. Dowdy will be responsible for team resource allocation and execution capabilities. ● Ashley Gremel | Program Manager
○ Ms. Gremel will serve as the primary point of contact during the work and will be supporting the project team and helping coordinate the timeline and task delivery. ● Tristan Massey | Senior Project Engineer
○ Mr. Massey will oversee, contribute to and review the technical development of the work and deliverables.
● Dario Mirabal Herrera | Project Engineer
○ Mr. Herrera will provide technical, analytical, design and project/task management support as needed.
● Meera Bhasin | Electrical Engineer
○ Ms. Bhasin will provide technical, analytical, design and project/task management support as needed.

Anticipated Project Schedule
Upon City of Oroville executing an agreement and issuing a Notice to Proceed (NTP), OurEnergy will provide the Scope of Work on an ongoing basis, and will continuously assist in aligning and maintaining our services and the services of other contractors under our management with City of Oroville’s partners schedule of development. Should circumstances or conditions result in a schedule change, OurEnergy will work with the City of Oroville to provide the Scope of Work on a mutually agreed upon schedule. A preliminary estimate of schedule is provided below:

TASK MILESTONE DATE
NTP & Kickoff 2/21/2024
1 Discovery/Fact Finding 3/4/2024
2 MIP Study & Application Stage 1: Consultation 3/15/2024 3 MIP Study & Application Stage 2: Application 4/15/2024 February 16, 2024 Page 9
171
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
Budget & Compensation
The Microgrid Incentive Program, administered by PG&E, offers a $25,000 reimbursement grant (Consulting Reimbursement) following the submission of a conforming MIP application. MIP stipulates that awarded funds are to be paid by PG&E directly to the City of Oroville.

OurEnergy proposes to provide this proposal’s Scope of Work on a T&M (time and materials) basis, with a budget of $20,000, for work performed up to grant application submission. From the Consulting Reimbursement, the City of Oroville may then utilize $5,000 from the $25,000 total to offset its own staff costs for time spent working with OurEnergy on the study and grant application.

OurEnergy’s consulting-reimbursable budget by task is estimated in the table below.

Upon approval of this proposal, OurEnergy will invoice the City of Oroville for a $5,000 good faith deposit. Work will commence following OurEnergy’s receipt of the deposit. The remaining balance of $15,000 will be invoiced, due and payable to OurEnergy upon the combination of Task 3 completion, submission of the MIP grant application to PG&E, and PG&E’s acceptance/approval that the application is conforming.

Note that a conforming grant application also requires collaboration and participation from City staff to provide City controlled information, reviews and approvals. Should the City abandon the application before it is completed, or should the City not comply with application-required information requests, then the full $15,000 balance will be due to OurEnergy, regardless of whether the application is deemed acceptable by PG&E.

When the City of Oroville receives the $25,000 Consulting Reimbursement from PG&E, it may refund itself the original $5,000 deposit paid to OurEnergy plus $5,000 toward offsetting the City’s staff costs.

Standard 2024 labor rates are attached. Labor rates are subject to routine annual increases.

OurEnergy will log and track T&M as it is expended during this Scope of Work. As this Scope of Work progresses, OurEnergy will notify the City of Oroville in advance in the event any T&M expenditures may risk trending toward exceeding the $20,000 budget. OurEnergy and Oroville may then mutually determine the acceptability of any proposed amounts that exceed the consulting reimbursement and assign those amounts to be reimbursed to OurEnergy via a subsequent phase MIP grant award, if such an agreement is made. Should a MIP microgrid grant not be awarded to City of Oroville, OurEnergy will waive and dismiss any amounts exceeding the original $20,000 budget.

February 16, 2024 Page 10

TASK MILESTONE BUDGET
1 Discovery/Fact Finding $2,500
2 MIP Study & Application Stage 1: Consultation $10,000 3 MIP Study & Application Stage 2: Application $7,500
Total Consulting Reimbursement Budget $20,000
172
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
OurEnergy may utilize specialty subcontractors as-needed and on prior approval. We will outline specific tasks for subconsultants where practical, planned in advance and approved by the City of Oroville.

OurEnergy will provide the City of Oroville with progress reports, no less frequently than monthly.

Any changes in level of effort or forward planning outside those referenced here that may justify a change in scope or compensation will be flagged in the monthly report and can be adjusted with mutual agreement with the City of Oroville as needed.

Additional lump-sum (LS) or Time and Materials (T&M) scope additions (add services) may be negotiated and amended on an as–needed basis. We are also open to discussing structures that may be preferable to the City.

We also wish to express that OurEnergy has an interest in developing and implementing the ultimate energy infrastructure and assets alongside the City of Oroville. In the case of MIP for example, as the “Microgrid Aggregator”. As next phase opportunities become clearer, we would appreciate the option to adapt our development services approach to a development arrangement, if appropriate. We will be happy to present the City of Oroville with a framework and development services agreement (DSA) if interested in this approach.

We additionally understand that not every potential project or facility in the City targeted for renewables, resilience and new energy infrastructure will be able to be included in the MIP application. In separate scopes of work we would be happy to work with the City in studying, scoping and implementing other projects, such as utility strategies, virtual power plants (VPPs), other Hybrid Power Generation, EV infrastructure (EVSE), electrifying Oroville’s airport, or others.

We have received and are currently reviewing the City’s standard consulting services agreement, which may form the basis of a relationship for professional services.

Once executed, a work order will be issued under that contract with this approved proposal. We understand timing is of the essence and we are willing to perform the initial work in pursuit of the timely submission of the grant application with the $5000 deposit while contracts are finalized.

February 16, 2024 Page 11
173
Item 9.

Grant Application: Microgrid Incentive Program
Closing Notes
Thank you for the opportunity and trust to work with you on this exciting project, and toward the future of the City’s critical infrastructure. Please feel free to contact us with any questions.

Dustin Jolley | CEO, Founder & Principal
Office: (831) 200-3969
Direct: (831) 252-0093
Email: [email protected]
February 16, 2024 Page 12
174
Item 9.
175
Item 9.
176
Item 9.
177
Item 9.
178
Item 9.
179
Item 9.
180
Item 9.
181
Item 9.
182
Item 9.
183
Item 9.

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND OURENERGY
AGREEMENT 3496-1
This First Amendment to the Agreement for Professional Services (“Amendment”) is made and entered into as of April 1, 2025, by and between the City of Oroville, a municipal corporation (“City”), and OurEnergy, a California-based professional energy consulting firm (“Consultant”).

RECITALS
A. City and Consultant entered into an Agreement for Professional Services on or about February 20, 2024, whereby Consultant agreed to provide services related to the City’s application for PG&E’s Microgrid Incentive Program (MIP) (the “Agreement”).

B. City now desires to amend the Agreement to expand the scope of services and increase the not-to-exceed amount of compensation.

C. Consultant represents that it is qualified and willing to perform the additional services under the terms set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1. Amendment to Scope of Services
The Scope of Services set forth in Attachment A to the original Agreement is hereby expanded to include:
 Preparation of a comprehensive infrastructure cost estimate for the Southside neighborhood of Oroville, including full roadway reconstruction, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, storm drainage systems, and street lighting.
 A preliminary feasibility analysis for a potential neighborhood-level microgrid in the Southside area.
 Continued availability for on-call consulting services related to energy infrastructure and funding opportunities.

2. Amendment to Compensation
The not-to-exceed amount of compensation under the Agreement is hereby increased by Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000). As amended, the total not-to-exceed amount shall not exceed Seventy Thousand Dollars ($70,000).

All services will be performed on a time and materials basis in accordance with Consultant’s standard 2024 labor rates unless otherwise agreed in writing. 184
Item 9.

3. Effect of Amendment
Except as expressly amended herein, all other terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed the day and year first written above.

CITY OF OROVILLE
By: ______________________________________
Brian Ring, City Administrator
Date: ___________________
CONSULTANT: OURENERGY
By: ______________________________________
Dustin Jolley, Principal
Date: ___________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: ______________________________________
Scott E. Huber, City Attorney
ATTEST:

By: ______________________________________
City Clerk
185
Item 9.

Oroville City CouncilApril 1, 2025

Oroville City Council
April 1, 2025