County Planning Commission and BIA fight EDH CSD park development


Last week's local news included the April 26th rejection by El Dorado County's Planning Commission of our Community Service District's nexus study, which is necessary to enable updating of our park development impact mitigation fees. The Planning Commission claimed to find it inconsistent with the County General Plan, apparently with regard to policies for affordable housing. This accompanies very vocal advocacy by the Building Industry Association to minimize park impact mitigation development fees. The result is yet more serious budget shortages for park development needed to accommodate population growth.

So far reports from two people to the Citizens Alliance can be summarized as reporting the Planning Commission's action to be outrageous. County staff had found the CSD's nexus study to be consistent with the General Plan, but the Planning Commission overstepped its authority to effectively generate its own new requirements for the CSD. The commissioners failed to recognize that the CSD has neither authority nor responsibility for management of affordable housing development:  The CSD's requirement is to build parks fast enough to serve the population growth authorized by the County, yet the County is acting in step with the BIA to reduce CSD funding below the needed level.

It appears that the Planning Commission's own actions are in conflict with several provisions of the County's 2004 General Plan. A further problem is that a County Ordinance (13.30.050) exempts commercial development from payment of CSD impact mitigation fees. That provision is itself in conflict with the County General Plan, as well as with prevailing practice in our region. Almost all local governments in the Sacramento region collect park development impact fees in the range of $.20 to $.40 per square foot for commercial development.

We also received adverse reports of the Planning Commission's handling of a rezone to allow subdivision and development of a 10-acre parcel of land in Equestrian Village. Most Equestrian Village residents and a surprisingly high number of homeowners in neighboring areas have strong desires to maintain the rural character of this area. Our report from one who attended the 4/26 meeting was that the Planning Commission in fact is operating as a rubber stamp for development.

We need to talk about this in the Citizens Alliance, it may be appropriate to advocate very strongly for changes in the Planning Commission as quickly as possible. The ideal would be to have a second planning commission to serve only El Dorado Hills, with members required to be El Dorado Hills citizens who understand our community's values and goals. At this time only John Knight represents us on the Planning Commission, and the accumulating record places him in the camp of those who advocate development that most EDH citizens would not support.

We hope the Planning Commission will promptly reschedule a new public hearing on the EDH CSD's nexus study; that this meeting will be at the EDH CSD Pavilion; and that the meeting time will be 7 p.m., to allow attendance by typical EDH citizens.