Bending the Rules in the Foothills—County General Planning in Exurban Northern California

References

• Abbott, C. 2000. Land for cities, scenery for city people: Managing urbanization in the American grain. In Land in the American West: Private claims and the common good, ed. W. G. Robbins and J. C. Foster 77–95. Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
   Google Scholar
• Abrams, J., and J. C. Bliss. 2012. Amenity landownership, land use change, and the re-creation of “working landscapes.” Society & Natural Resources 26(7):845–59. doi:10.1080/08941920.2012.719587
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abrams, J. B., and H. Gosnell. 2012. The politics of marginality in Wallowa County, Oregon: Contesting the production of landscapes of consumption. Journal of Rural Studies 28:30–37. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, G. 2011. Pluralism and property. Fordham Law Review 80:1017–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, M. W. 2012. Sprawl's shepherd: The rural county. California Law Review 100:365–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagheri, A., and P. Hjorth. 2007. Planning for sustainable development: A paradigm shift towards a process-based approach. Sustainable Development 15:83–96. doi:10.1002/sd.310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrow, C. J. 2006. Environmental management for sustainable development, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Beebe, C. W., and S. Wheeler. 2012. Gold country: The politics of landscape in exurban El Dorado County, California. Journal of Political Ecology 19:1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Berube, A., A. Singer, J. Wilson, and W. Frey. 2006. Finding exurbia: America's fast-growing communities at the metropolitan fringe. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Blomley, N. 2005. Remember property? Progress in Human Geography 29:125–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brogden, M. J., and J. B. Greenberg. 2003. The fight for the West: A political ecology of land use conflicts in Arizona. Human Organization 63(3):289–98.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, B. A. 1995. In timber country: Working people's stories of environmental conflict and urban flight. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Butte County. 2010, October. Butte County General Plan 2030. http://www.buttegeneralplan.net/products/2010-10-26_GP_Adopted/ (accessed June 30, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Butte County. 2012. Butte County Zoning Ordinance final draft. http://www.buttegeneralplan.net/products/2012-05-31_GPA_ZO_SEIR/ButteZoningCode_FinalDraft.pdf (accessed September, 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Butte County. 2013. September 10. Butte County Zoning Ordinance final draft (amended). http://www.buttegeneralplan.net/products/2013-09-10_ZO_Revision2_Adopted/ButteZoningOrdinance_2013-09-10_adopted.pdf (accessed September 10, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Butte County Department of Development Services. 2006. Overview provided to the Resource Conservation District Board. http://www.buttegeneralplan.net/ebindr/2006/2006-04-26_RCD_GP.info.pdf (accessed April 26, 2006).
   Google Scholar
• Butte County Department of Development Services. 2009. Agenda report for December 8, 2009 Board of Supervisors meeting. http://www.buttecounty.net/cob/BOS_Agendas/2009/Agenda_120809/5.06.pdf (accessed June 30, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Butte County Department of Development Services. 2011, April 26. Butte County Board of Supervisors agenda report/general plan 2030/draft zoning ordinance. http://www.buttecounty.net/cob/Agendas/2011/Agenda_042611/5.04.pdf (accessed June 30, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Butte County Planning Commission. 2011, September. Special study session. Butte County General Plan 2030 second draft zoning ordinance and map meeting series #8 (meeting 8‐3J‐1) Summary Meeting Notes from September 15 and 22: 2011. http://edocs.buttecounty.net/weblink7/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=93280&dbid=0 (accessed June 30, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Cadieux, K. V., and P. Hurley. 2011. Amenity migration, exurbia, and emerging rural landscapes: Global natural amenity as place and as process. GeoJournal 76:297–302. doi:10.1007/s10708-009-9335-0
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, M. S., P. J. Cohn, D. N. Seesholtz, and L. L. Higgins. 2005. Fire as a galvanizing and fragmenting influence on communities: The case of the Rodeo–Chediski fire. Society & Natural Resources 18:301–20. doi:10.1080/08941920590915224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chase, J., and D. Siegel. 2012. Absentee ownership in the fire-prone northern California foothills. Society & Natural Resources 25(10):1043–55. doi:10.1080/08941920.2011.651565
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Concow Citizens Committee for General Plan 2030 and Golden Feather Community Alliance. 2009. Vision statement. http://www.buttegeneralplan.net/ebinder/2009/2009-12-08/BOS_REPORT_wAttach.pdf (accessed June 30, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Cruz, M. 2010. A living space: The relationship between land and property in the community. Political Geography 29(8):420–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dana, S. T., and S. K. Fairfax. 1980. Forest and range policy: Its development in the United States, 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, T. 1999. Managing growth in the fringe countryside. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duane, T. P. 1999. Shaping the Sierra: Nature, culture, and conflict in the changing West. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Ellickson, R. C. 1991. Order without law: How neighbors settle disputes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esparza, A. X., and J. I. Carruthers. 2000. Land use planning and exurbanization in the rural Mountain West: Evidence from Arizona. Journal of Planning Education and Research 20:23–36. doi:10.1177/073945600128992573
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field, D. R., and D. A. Jensen. 2005. Humans, fire, and forests: Expanding the domain of wildfire research. Society & Natural Resources 18:355–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forester, J. 1999. The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fortmann, L. 1998. Bonanza! The unasked questions: Domestic land tenure through international lenses. In Who owns America? Social conflict over property rights, ed. H. Jacobs 3–15. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.
   Google Scholar
• Frank, K. I., and S. A. Reiss. 2014. The rural planning perspective at an opportune time. Journal of Planning Literature 29:1–17. doi:10.1177/0885412214542050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freyfogle, E. 2003. The land we share: Private property and the common good. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ghose, R. 2004. Big sky or big sprawl? Rural gentrification and the changing cultural landscape of Missoula, Montana. Urban Geography 25(6):528–49. doi:10.2747/0272-3638.25.6.528
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill, N., P. Klepis, and L. Chisolm. 2010. Stewardship among lifestyle oriented rural landowners. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 53(3):317–34. doi:10.1080/09640561003612890
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabbatin, B., P. T. Hurley, and A. Halfacre. 2011. “I still have the old tradition”: The co-production of sweetgrass basketry and coastal development. Geoforum 42:638–49. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.06.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiner, C. C. 2014. “Been-heres vs. come-heres” and other identities and ideologies along the rural–urban interface: A comparative study in Calaveras County, California. Land Use Policy 41:70–83. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurley, P. 2013. Whose sense of place? A political ecology of amenity development. In Place-based conservation perspectives from the social sciences, ed. W. P. Stewart D. R. Williams and L. E. Kruger 165–80. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Hurley, P. T., and P. A. Walker. 2004. Whose vision? Conspiracy theory and land-use planning in Nevada County, California. Environment and Planning A 36:1529–47. doi:10.1068/a36186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, B. E. 2011. The mis/alignments of exurban land use controls with the preferences of varied development interest groups. Spaces and Flows: An International Conference on Urban and Extra Urban Studies 1(2):27–46.
   Google Scholar
• Jun, H.-J., and M. M. Conroy. 2013. Comprehensive planning and sustainability in Georgia's exurbs. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 15:329–51. doi:10.1080/1523908X.2013.766575
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapping, M. B., T. L. Daniels, and J. W. Keller. 1989. Rural planning and development in the United States. New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, S. C., M. Foulkes, C. J. Sorenson, and A. Thompson. 2011. Environmental learning and the social construction of an exurban landscape in Fremont County, Colorado. Geoforum 42:83–93. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loh, C. G., and N. Sami. 2013. Death of a planning department: Challenges for regionalism in a weak mandate state. Land Use Policy 32:39–49. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.09.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magliocca, N., V. McConnell, M. Walls, and E. Safirova. 2012. Zoning on the urban fringe: Results from a new approach to modeling land and housing markets. Regional Science and Urban Economics 42:198–210. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2011.08.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, R. J. 2008. Collaborative land use management: The quieter revolution in place-based planning. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Masuda, J., and T. Garvin. 2008. Whose heartland? The politics of place in a rural–urban interface. Journal of Rural Studies 24:112–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCarthy, J. 2002. First world political ecology: Lessons from the wise use movement. Environment and Planning A 34:1281–302. doi:10.1068/a3526
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Needham, B. 2006. Planning, law and economics: An investigation of the rules we make for using land. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, A. C., and K. Dueker. 1990. The exurbanization of America and its planning policy implications. Journal of Planning Education and Research 9(2):91–100. doi:10.1177/0739456x9000900201
   Google Scholar
• Nesbitt, J. T., and D. Weiner. 2001. Conflicting environmental imaginaries and the politics of nature in central Appalachia. Geoforum 32(3):333–49. doi:10.1016/s0016-7185(00)00047-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peñalver, E., and S. Katyal. 2009. Property outlaws: How squatters, pirates, and protesters improve the law of ownership. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pezzoli, K., K. Williams, and S. Kriletich. 2011. A manifesto for progressive ruralism in an urbanizing world. Progressive Planning 186:16–19.
   Google Scholar
• Platt, R. H. 2004. Land use and society: Geography, law, and public policy. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Popper, F. J. 1984. Rural land use policies and rural poverty. Journal of the American Planning Association 50:326–34. doi:10.1080/01944368408976599
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rast, J. 2006. Environmental justice and the new regionalism. Journal of Planning Education and Research 25(3):249–63. doi:10.1177/0739456x05280543
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins, P. 2012. Political ecology: A critical introduction, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Robbins, P., S. Martin, and S. Gilbertz. 2012. Developing the commons: The contradictions of growth in exurban Montana. Professional Geographer 64(3):317–31. doi:10.1080/00330124.2011.601193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins, W. G., and J. C. Foster eds. 2000. Land in the American West: Private claims and the common good. Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, C. M. 1994. Property and persuasion: Essays on the history, theory, and rhetoric of ownership. Boulder, CO: Westview.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, W. A. 2008. Environmental politics and policy, 7th ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, A. J., C. Carter, M. R. Reed, P. Larkham, D. Adams, N. Morton, R. Waters, D. Collier, C. Crean, R. Curzon, R. Forster, P. Gibbs, N. Grayson, M. Hardman, A. Hearle, D. Jarvis, M. Kennet, K. Leach, M. Middleton, N. Schiessel, B. Stonyer, and R. Coles. 2013. Disintegrated development at the rural–urban fringe: Re-connecting spatial planning theory and practice. Progress in Planning 83:1–52. doi:10.1016/j.progress.2012.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selman, P. 2006. Planning at the landscape scale. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Selman, P. 2012. Sustainable landscape planning: The reconnection agenda. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stephens, P. H. G. 2009. Plumwood, property, selfhood and sustainability. Ethics and the Environment 14(2):57–73. doi:10.2979/ete.2009.14.2.57
   Google Scholar
• Talen, E. 2005. New urbanism and American planning: The conflict of cultures. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, L. 2011. No boundaries: Exurbia and the study of contemporary urban dispersion. GeoJournal 76:323–39. doi:10.1007/s10708-009-9300-y
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, L., and K. V. Cadieux. 2013. Introduction: Sprawl and the ideology of nature. In Landscape and the ideology of nature in exurbia, eds. K. V. Cadieux and L. Taylor, 1–30. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Theobold, D. M. 2004. Placing exurban land-use change in a human modification framework. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2(3):139–44. doi:10.2307/3868239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Travis, W. R. 2007. New geographies of the American West: Land use and the changing patterns of place. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Troughton, M. J. 1981. The rural-urban fringe: A challenge to resource management. In The rural–urban fringe: Canadian perspectives, ed. K. B. Beesley and L. H. Russwurm 218–43. Toronto, ON, Canada: Department of Geography, York University.
   Google Scholar
• Valverde, M. 2011. Seeing like a city: The dialectic of modern and premodern ways of seeing in urban governance. Law & Society Review 45(2):277–312. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00441.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dijk, T. 2009. Who is in charge of the urban fringe? Neoliberalism, open space preservation and growth control. Planning Practice and Research 24(3):343–61. doi:10.1080/02697450903020791
   Google Scholar
• Vince, S. W., M. Duryea, E. A. Macie, and A. Hermansen eds. 2005. Forests at the wildland-urban interface: Conservation and management. Boca Raton, FL: ICS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, P., and L. Fortmann. 2003. Whose landscape? A political ecology of the ‘exurban’ Sierra. Cultural Geographies 10(4):469–91. doi:10.1191/1474474003eu285oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, P., and P. Hurley. 2011. Planning paradise: Politics and visioning of land use in Oregon. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, P. A. 2003. Reconsidering ‘regional’ political ecologies: Toward a political ecology of the rural American West. Progress in Human Geography 27(1):7–24. doi:10.1191/0309132503ph410oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, P. A., and P. T. Hurley. 2004. Collaboration derailed: The politics of “community-based” resource management in Nevada County. Society & Natural Resources 17:735–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, P. A., S. J. Marvin, and L. P. Fortmann. 2003. Landscape changes in Nevada County reflect social and ecological transitions. California Agriculture 57(4):115–21. doi:10.3733/ca.v057n04p115
   Google Scholar