Monday, April 21, 2014

BOS has full plate of issues

From page A1 | July 01, 2013 | 10 Comments

Thursday’s El Dorado County Board of Supervisors special meeting workshop was more a tutorial on county policies and planning directions that included Economic Development, General Plan discussion and Land Use Policy Programmatic Update (LUPPU). More than 100 people nearly filled the board chambers and included residents with concerns specific to their neighborhoods, policy wonks, representatives of the Real Estate and construction industries and “at least 20 developers,” according to one speaker’s estimate.

Jim Brunello, spokesman for the El Dorado County Community and Economic Development Advisory Committee (CEDAC), presented a summary of the 2004 General Plan data regarding residential development. Under the plan, the county projected an increase of 32,491 housing units by the year 2025. Of that total, he explained that about 12,000 have already been built, and 75 percent of that number were built in one of the county’s five Community Regions that has “sewer service.” Brunello clarified that most of his statistics were limited to areas with that designation.

He further noted that the general plan requires that the majority of new residential units be constructed within the identified Community Regions — defined by the existence or availability of infrastructure such as water and sewer — and roadways that can accommodate increased traffic demands. He also described several categories of residential development that must be considered. The state mandates that each county allocate a portion of its available land to meet the needs for “affordable” housing which can include multi-family dwellings such as apartments and also detached, single family homes.

The Regional Housing Needs Assessment is demanded by the state and the actual numbers are established by SACOG, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments. The basis for RHNA is state law under Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 375 which set standards for air and water quality, “sustainable” communities and for addressing housing and transportation needs of families with very low to moderate income levels.

The county is obligated to identify enough parcels that could be developed for those classifications, although it is not required to assure that they be built, Brunello said. Currently, he stated that there is “very little vacant land” zoned for commercial and Multi-Family development within the existing Community Development Boundary Lines. Brunello said up to approximately 13,000 parcels for all categories of homes in those regions with sewer are needed, but only about 2,000 such parcels are available under present guidelines.

“General Plan policies determine the percentage of where the 12,000 units have been built,” and policies will drive the next set of numbers, he suggested. “But whatever you look at, we need more parcels.”

Brunello also advised that the county can “project where the mandated units will go without splitting much land in rural regions.” The critical issues for the future are integrating traffic demand which includes determining the “realistic capacity and the impact of that capacity.”

One of Brunello’s last slides showed a shadow of the “elephant in the room” the iconic notion that something very important is present but is not being acknowledged nor addressed. He described the elephant in the county’s room as “major land use changes that have been proposed and how do you deal with them?”

Those proposals include the San Stino Residential and the Tilden Park projects in Shingle Springs that are the subjects of intense opposition from several groups that have combined to form the Shingle Springs Community Alliance. Marble Valley and Lime Rock are other proposed developments that would need General Plan amendments in order to increase housing density.

Some in the audience expressed dismay at the swirl of numbers, regulations and laws being discussed, while others were more focused on their own neighborhoods, particularly the Shingle Springs Alliance contingent hoping to foil San Stino and Tilden Park by having their Community Region Boundary Lines, redrawn or removed altogether.

Brunello repeated his opening statement that, according to the 2011 Five-year General Plan update, there are to be “no land use changes” before the next Five-year Review. The meaning of that caveat may not be clear, however.

Sue Taylor, representing Save Our County suggested to the Mountain Democrat after the morning session that there are ways of creating changes in how land is used by means of zoning changes, for example. She also delivered an impassioned description of the county’s present and future needs for water and the real potential for water shortages in years to come.

Brian Veerkamp, District 3 Supervisor followed District 5′s Norma Santiago’s concern about the semantics of the issues. “You say no land use changes, but the problem is that these projects are requiring changes.”

“But the projects that came forward followed the process,” Brunello clarified. “You may need to change the process.”

The board eventually directed county staff to continue its work on the LUPPU process and to return in 60 days with a detailed discussion and set of options regarding Community Region Boundary lines.

Contact Chris Daley at 530-344-5063 or Follow @CDaleyMtDemo.


Discussion | 10 comments

  • EvelynJune 30, 2013 - 11:44 am

    Jim Brunello and CEDAC should be thrilled with this report. And they weren't even the group that ASKED for the special meeting.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fran DuChampJune 30, 2013 - 12:07 pm

    It was a very long meeting...really long. what I do not understand is that these reports are based on imaginary numbers--projections...assumptions of what may happen. Some of the numbers come from people off the street giving their opinions at workshops...I dont get it. One thing is for sure--there will not be enough water....ummmmm I was glad to see so many passionate people--they did number the most...but CEDAC wasnt about communities...majority didnt matter. When you have a spokes person --representing reality people speak up know right away the people that said no to development must be on to something. Realtor s make their money selling property, homes...whatever. Really long meeting....I admire the courage and passion of shingle Springs. and the developers were very well dressed. I worry that the red line around Pollock --doesnt have green in it--what about the farms? They kept saying sewer only--yet one supervisor said sewers were easy...We have three supervisors in Pollock...Pollocks name came up a few was interesting...just not for the "people." The draft of the last item was the most interesting--it would be a check off process for building applications--and if the applications dont fit the general plan--they will be put to the side--so that the application that does fit--can be looked at to move forward.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fran DuChampJune 30, 2013 - 4:15 pm

    luppu now...ludes--1999 Land projects for El Doradocounty--apple hill--human footprints....

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Sue TaylorJuly 01, 2013 - 2:19 am

    Bottom line of meeting... Keep moving with the General Plan Overhaul to increase densities in the land uses and put the public off for another 60 days and see if they will go away.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fly on the WallJuly 02, 2013 - 7:46 pm

    I am tired of the SACOG made up numbers that people in this county think we must abide by. The Regional lines must go away. What is the deal with "sustainable communities", SACOG, high density housing, transit hubs and Regional Boundaries? Who stands to make money on this agenda and what will the end result be? I have a very bad feeling over this. Anyone who knows the answers to these questions likely has a bad feeling over this, as well. In addition, it seems that the BOS have high money interests to please, don't understand what all of this really means (as if they actually care) and they like to cede control to other entities without really knowing what they're doing. All of this really can't be good for the people. Actually, it's almost dangerous. Once you've gotten rid of control by the people, which includes our freedom and liberty, good luck getting it back. Has all of this already been predetermined? Just my thoughts. Hopefully, I am wrong.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Over InformedJuly 03, 2013 - 7:05 am

    Participation in SACOG is mandated by the Feds and assigned by the Governor. Avoiding all money controlled by SACOG does not relieve any of the state regulatory burdens or the numbers that are assigned. Kind of a regulation of regulators as SACOG is compiled of elected officials from within the area. District 1 Mik is EDC's representative. It started with the Feds highway funds in 1962 and has expanded many times including a regional planning act in 1997. SACOG was founded in 1980 and the state is leveraging these regional "planning" entities for their own purposes. Look no further than AB32 and SB375 which are the latest mass upgrades of the much discussed Agenda21. A gift from the Governator. It is easy to vilify CEDAC, but they are really just the messenger as they do not write the rules at the UN, the fed or the state level. Your elected representatives and the thousands of unaccountable agencies have been busy "doing the work of the people". Much has been happening while the public at large has been sleeping. It is not a pretty picture.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Foaming at the MouthJuly 03, 2013 - 8:21 am

    We still have our most vital freedom - the ability to blog anonymously on the MD website!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fran DuchampAugust 25, 2013 - 12:15 pm

    LUPPU is based on forecasts--projections..NOT REAL NUMBERS. It is not mandated. 13-1073 1 2. Agenda Item Measure "y" challenges LUPPU--you voted on "Y"--is it being ignored? Supervisor Briggs recommending Board receive presentation provided by Bill Center and Jim Moore on Measure Y, that includes: 1) The history of Measure Y and the General Plan Transportation and Circulation Element Policies; 2) Discussion of the Measure Y Policies as part of the Land Use Policy and Programmatic Update (LUPPU); and, 3) The General Plan Policies that guide the County's review of proposed development projects to confirm consistency with the Goals and Policies of the County's General Plan. 8/26/2013 9:00 AM Board of Supervisors Meeting Room Special Meeting - Workshop

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fran DuchampAugust 25, 2013 - 12:21 pm

    El Dorado County, CA November 3, 1998 General Measure Y Control Traffic Congestion Initiative County of El Dorado General Plan Amendment 32847 / 61.0% Yes votes ...... 20968 / 38.9% No votes

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Fran DuchampAugust 25, 2013 - 12:24 pm

    BOS the morning: What is Measure Y? The Control Traffic Congestion Initiative, aka Measure Y, was passed by voters in 1998 and again in 2008. It requires developers of five or more dwellings to pay the cost of traffic mitigation if the new homes cause roadways to reach “Level of Service F” — bumper-to-bumper traffic during peak hours. It also applies to commercial projects.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Posts

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • .


    Air quality rating up in the air

    By Chris Daley | From Page: A1

    GDPUD: Budget and GM are top topics

    By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A1, 1 Comment

    Mountain lion seen in Placerville

    By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A1, 6 Comments

    CTE a pathway to higher wages, higher-demand jobs

    By Wendy Schultz | From Page: A1

    Heard over the back fence: Earth Day at the library

    By Bob Billingsley | From Page: B1

    New top 10 fugitive could be in area

    By News Release | From Page: A3

    Community Action Council seeks new member

    By Health and Human Services Agency | From Page: A3

    Rattlesnake Avoidance Clinics May 3-4

    By Hangtown Kennel | From Page: A9



    Retain Joe Harn as auditor

    By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4, 12 Comments

    Belltower: El Niño or el nada?

    By Michael Raffety | From Page: A4, 1 Comment | Gallery

    The balancing act: Save the whales

    By Larry Weitzman | From Page: A4



    Tell the truth, don’t confuse voters

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 1 Comment

    Local petitions circulating

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 6 Comments

    Chess club

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5

    True Christian

    By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 2 Comments



    Sports Scene: April 20, 2014

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: A6

    All Star team shows competive balance

    By Special to the Democrat | From Page: A6

    Australian rugby team visits Cameron park

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: A6 | Gallery

    Roundup: Cougars drop finale

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: A6

    Red hot Rico Abreu blazes to victory

    By Gary Thomas | From Page: A6

    Schedule: April 21-26, 2014

    By Democrat Staff | From Page: A6

    Rains to present at AMA conference

    By David Albee | From Page: A7



    As we were: Supervisors can’t decide

    By Ken Deibert | From Page: B2

    Spend time in River City

    By Wendy Schultz | From Page: B2 | Gallery

    Help with healthcare decisions

    By Snowline Hospice Thrift Stores | From Page: B3

    Time to enter El Dorado County Fair

    By El Dorado County Fair | From Page: B3

    Cantare Chorale seeks new director

    By Cantare Chorale | From Page: B3

    Volunteers needed for day of service

    By Mimi Escabar | From Page: B10



    Lake levels 4-17-14

    By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

    DUI Log: Feb. 28-April 3

    By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2



    Dianne Johnson

    By Contributor | From Page: A2

    Michael R. Sponsler

    By Contributor | From Page: A2

    Daniel Bish Sr. funeral notice

    By Contributor | From Page: A2


    Real Estate



    Horoscope, Tuesday, April 22, 2014

    By Contributor | From Page: A8

    Horoscope, Monday, April 21, 2014

    By Contributor | From Page: A8

    TV Listings

    By Contributor | From Page: A8

    Speed Bump

    By Contributor | From Page: A8


    By Contributor | From Page: A8


    By Contributor | From Page: A8


    By Contributor | From Page: A8

    American Profile Crossword

    By Contributor | From Page: A8


    By Contributor | From Page: A8

    New York Times Crossword

    By Contributor | From Page: A8