📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Calaveras County Grand Jury • 2006-2007

Calaveras County General Plan Update

2 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings and Recommendations 5 findings

F1 Page 38
The current General Plan, adopted in 1996, does not meet the statutory requirements of the state Government Code. California requires each county and city to adopt a general plan for its future development (Government Code §65300). In 2006, the BOS decided to initiate a General Plan update. The plan update is anticipated to take two to three years; during that time a quasi- moratorium is in place to curtail certain types of development.
No recommendations for this finding
F2 Page 38
At this time within the County there are two general viewpoints regarding the proposed General Plan: 1.) A community vision to guide decisions about development and land use. 2.) A State mandated, legally defensible document of land use restrictions. Both viewpoints are incorporated within the proposal submitted by contracted planning consultants, Mintier and Associates (Mintier).
No recommendations for this finding
F3 Page 38
Costs to the county for the update have been estimated to be $1,350,000, which includes the estimated consultant fee of $1,000,000. This estimate is most likely unrealistic since real costs for the update do not tabulate all of the direct and 33 indirect costs to all of the county agencies involved in the process. Cost estimates also do not include overruns generated by possible litigation.
No recommendations for this finding
F4 Page 39
After reviewing the work plan proposed by CDA and Mintier, the Grand Jury concludes that ample consideration for land use planning has been given to the Calaveras County general public. Input regarding the general vision for planning as well as specific input by special interest groups and individuals is part of the Public Input sections of the draft.
No recommendations for this finding
F5 Page 39
Special interest requests have already come to the BOS during the kickoff meeting with the public. Two basic approaches to the update process are planning either from the general to specific or from specific to the general. Working from the general to specific (community and special interest planning) is the approach represented by Option 2 work plan supported by the CDA. SUMMARY Community development as represented by the General Plan is a lengthy and contentious process. It is the opinion of the Grand Jury that the public would be better served with a General Plan starting from a general overall vision and moving to specific community planning. Delays created by planning starting with specific and local needs can cause significant delays and therefore increased costs to the citizens. Obtaining public input on a vision for the county general plan is planned during the public comment process. That overall vision statement is currently lacking in the current General Plan draft. Vision is a generalized statement regarding land use and future of the county. Specifics of the plan can grow out of a general vision.
No recommendations for this finding