📋
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.
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 5 findings
F1
Page 67
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.
F2
Page 67
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).
F3
Page 67
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 indirect costs to all of the county agencies involved in the process. Cost estimates also do not include overruns generated by possible litigation. 64
F4
Page 68
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.
F5
Page 68
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.
Recommendations 14
-
R1Page 71Pre-Application- Could be a phone call just to verify their zoning or a drop in at the counter. Review if general plan/zoning change and/or use permits are required for the use. a. Non discretionary permit – entitled project under zoning b. Discretionary use permit – needs some sort of conditions to be met.
-
R2Page 71Pre-Application meeting – Planner meets with applicant to discuss the project; may include Planning Director or Community Development Director. Planner will assist the applicant with preliminary information needed to fill out application, then it is given to applicant to identify additional needs and complete remaining items prior to coming in with the completed application. Planner will help identify which items need to be submitted with the application and which can be submitted after application.
-
R3Page 72Application submitted – Stamped as received, but not considered complete until additional review is completed.
-
R4Page 72Planning site visit – Completed by the same planner from the pre- application meeting to make sure everything on the application and plans is reflected on site. Identify any environmental issues.
-
R5Page 72Application accepted as complete. County has thirty days to deem complete for processing, beginning the date application is submitted and fees are paid. (Government Code Section 65920)
-
R6Page 72Technical Advisory meeting – To bring impacted/involved agencies together to identify and discuss all issues. Potential participants include Planning, Building, Public Works, CDF, Environmental Health, Water District, Sewer District, Fire Districts, Fish & Game, and Army Corp. Only County agencies will be required to be there.
-
R7Page 72Applicant commissions additional studies. Based on results of staff and technical advisory meeting.
-
R8Page 72Initial agency circulation of project – Notification sent out to all agencies involved letting them know about project and giving them the opportunity to comment on proposed environmental review.
-
R9Page 72Initial comments received & additional studies approved.
-
R10Page 72Preparation of Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report.
-
R11Page 72Public circulation of environmental documents - Circulated to agencies and the public; publish a public notice.
-
R12Page 72Staff report prepared. Report includes project and environmental documents, and a recommendation of approval or denial.
-
R13Page 72Planning Commission – Reviews public records and takes public testimony. Basis of decision/recommendation has to be based upon substantial facts.
-
R14Page 72Board of Supervisors – Additional step required for general plan changes, zoning changes & ordinance changes. Final approval.