Amador County – Plymouth drew criticism for its ambitious draft Sphere Of Influence last week as the Amador County Supervisors and Planning Commission ended a 3-day General Plan Update meeting Thursday in Jackson. Talk turned to inclusion or exclusion from city spheres of any property that would get a proposed new land designation, that is, the “Urban Reserve” designation. The panel also talked about possible adverse affects on properties. The sphere of influence, the imaginary line around cities, indicates areas a city council intends to annex. County Planner Susan Grijalva said if a property is not annexed, the property owner can request to be removed from a city’s sphere of influence. She said “if a city has no general plan adopted for a sphere, then the county’s designation would remain.” Sutter Creek Assistant City Manager Sean Rabe said “city planners do really feel that this is a good thing.” Property splits can still happen, but in the sphere, the owner goes to the city, rather than the county. Grijalva said rejection of annexation of a property into a city limit does not create an “automatic ejection from a Sphere of Influence.” The property owner must ask the Local Agency Formation Commission for removal from a Sphere. Supervisor Brian Oneto asked what would happen if a request were rejected by LAFCO. Grijalva said the property would then be “stuck” in the Sphere. Rabe said annexations are rejected because projects on properties are not built to a city’s standards. Grijalva said “some cities’ spheres have been overbroad” and they cannot serve the land they seek to annex. She said “LAFCO must approve a city’s ability to serve its sphere.” In public comment, Art Marinaccio of Amador Citizens For Responsible Government said the issue “needs to be clearly understood” and “a lot of background information should come forward” for the panel to decide the Urban Reserve question. He said “it is unfair to criticize Plymouth” for looking farther than 10 years out in their plan. Supervisor Richard Forster criticized the ambition of Plymouth, which he said has a draft Sphere of Influence in which it would be “looking at 8-and-a-half square miles of total annexation.” Marinaccio said “let’s ask for actual information, rather than speculation.” Forster recommended supervisors workshop the issue with commissioners, and Grijalva said staff will get more information on Urban Reserve and bring it back to the panel, which resumes the meeting 1 to 4 p.m. Wednesday, April 8th in the Supervisors’ chambers. A second meeting, if needed, would convene noon to 5 p.m. on Thursday, April 9th. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Monday, 30 March 2009 22:45
Amador Genereal Plan Update
Amador County – Plymouth drew criticism for its ambitious draft Sphere Of Influence last week as the Amador County Supervisors and Planning Commission ended a 3-day General Plan Update meeting Thursday in Jackson. Talk turned to inclusion or exclusion from city spheres of any property that would get a proposed new land designation, that is, the “Urban Reserve” designation. The panel also talked about possible adverse affects on properties. The sphere of influence, the imaginary line around cities, indicates areas a city council intends to annex. County Planner Susan Grijalva said if a property is not annexed, the property owner can request to be removed from a city’s sphere of influence. She said “if a city has no general plan adopted for a sphere, then the county’s designation would remain.” Sutter Creek Assistant City Manager Sean Rabe said “city planners do really feel that this is a good thing.” Property splits can still happen, but in the sphere, the owner goes to the city, rather than the county. Grijalva said rejection of annexation of a property into a city limit does not create an “automatic ejection from a Sphere of Influence.” The property owner must ask the Local Agency Formation Commission for removal from a Sphere. Supervisor Brian Oneto asked what would happen if a request were rejected by LAFCO. Grijalva said the property would then be “stuck” in the Sphere. Rabe said annexations are rejected because projects on properties are not built to a city’s standards. Grijalva said “some cities’ spheres have been overbroad” and they cannot serve the land they seek to annex. She said “LAFCO must approve a city’s ability to serve its sphere.” In public comment, Art Marinaccio of Amador Citizens For Responsible Government said the issue “needs to be clearly understood” and “a lot of background information should come forward” for the panel to decide the Urban Reserve question. He said “it is unfair to criticize Plymouth” for looking farther than 10 years out in their plan. Supervisor Richard Forster criticized the ambition of Plymouth, which he said has a draft Sphere of Influence in which it would be “looking at 8-and-a-half square miles of total annexation.” Marinaccio said “let’s ask for actual information, rather than speculation.” Forster recommended supervisors workshop the issue with commissioners, and Grijalva said staff will get more information on Urban Reserve and bring it back to the panel, which resumes the meeting 1 to 4 p.m. Wednesday, April 8th in the Supervisors’ chambers. A second meeting, if needed, would convene noon to 5 p.m. on Thursday, April 9th. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
