By Holly Boitano -

The Gold Rush Ranch and Golf Resort’s environmental review process has encountered an obstruction which will push back the City’s goal of project approval by the end of the year. California state law says that in order for a project to be approved, it must be consistent with a city’s general plan – the document which serves as the proto-blueprint for city development. According to the Sutter Creek Planning Commission, Gold Rush’s Draft Environmental Impact Report contains numerous disparities with the Sutter Creek plan. This issue was first articulated by Planning Commission Chairman Robin Peters at the September 18th meeting, where Peters called for a formal evaluation of how the DEIR’s content coheres with the General Plan tenets. Peters also expressed concern that the project DEIR substitutes General Plan amendments for impact mitigation in several circumstances. At Monday’s meeting, the commission spent nearly three-and-a-half hours examining the first 17 pages of the 70-page Consistency Evaluation, prepared by the City’s planning consultant Hauge Brueck and Associates. Controversy reared its head with only the second posture of the Land Use Element, Goal 2.2, which states “topographically sensitive features shall be protected by requiring the use of creative land development designs that transfer density and construction to less sensitive areas.” Planning Commissioners were not convinced that the project’s overall grading, which will require 3 million yards of dirt to be moved, is consistent with that goal. “I am of the mind that the developer needs to take a harder look at this goal, and apply it to the grading approach,” Peters said. Commissioners also took issue with the following Policy 2.1, which states, “Growth management is necessary in order to preserve Sutter Creek’s existing quality of life.” Commissioner Mike Kirkley said “Historically, this community has grown at a rate of about 2 percent per year. This project will take us into the 6 percent category, which will make us one of the fastest growing communities in Northern California. I don’t think we can assume the demand for housing.” The Planning Commission will continue this discussion at its next meeting, 7 p.m. Wednesday, October 1st.