Last Tuesday the Supervisors held a workshop on the RTP given by Public Works Director Larry Peterson and Amador County Transportation Commission Executive Director Charles Field. That workshop reviewed the process that developed the RTP and its associated fee schedule, as well as an emphasizing the dire conditions of Amador County Road impacts. This week Larry Peterson stated to the Board that current zoning of the property would allow two single family homes generating approximately 19 car trips per day. With the proposed zoning changes those trips go up to over 2000 trips per day according to the developers own traffic studies. “This project will affect a number of roadways and intersections by its traffic generation” stated Peterson. The question before the Supervisors is how much should that cost one developer? Is it more than their fair share under the RTP’s “Fairshare” costs? Supervisor Richard Forster asked the Charles Field about a second workshop. “You recommended that we delay action until we can have further workshops- we do not want to delay the developers an inordinate amount of time. How long will it be until we can do a follow up workshop?” asked Forster. Field responded “Two or three weeks”. Field explained that if minor revisions are requested to the RTP it will take about a month to revise- however, if the Supervisors request major changes that require substantial revisions to the RTP’s Environmental Impact Report it could be as long as 6 months to one year.

Supervisor Louis Boitano asked for a review of the developer’s traffic study by an outside source. Boitano expressed discomfort with the model numbers for the impacts of the development which did not include customers that walk to the development, use the trip for multiple stops in Pine Grove. Also, he was concerned that traffic coming up 88 from Jackson and Sutter Creek was a substantial part of the study. Boitano feels that traffic impacts from lower parts of the county should be discounted as it is unlikely there will be a flood of lower county residents coming to Pine Grove to shop. Field stated that he understands that the Supervisors want to revise the RTP’s requirements for a traffic study to include a chapter that takes into account real life, practical patterns- a chapter on what is happening as opposed to using a flat, inflexible formula that may not reflect reality.

The Public Works Department has officially recommended delaying action on this issue, according to a memo from Larry Peterson, stated Charles Field. Developer Phil Longacre approached the Supervisors calling himself a “Guinea Pig”, and expressed his concerns over the projected costs of the road improvements stating the project will be out of reach and therefore will not happen. He also said that they realize there are fees associated with developments, but he said he felt the numbers are extremely excessive. A neighbor of the project expressed his concerns about traffic asking that the developers appeal be denied. He stated that the traffic is already heavy, and that CalFire and CalTrans, already have issues pulling onto or across the roadway.The estimate of 2000 trips per day seemed reasonable to her as well as the fact that the project is on a Y shaped intersection which increases safety requirements and traffic impacts, she stated. She related that the failure of Measure K, the sales tax ballot measure to pay for improvements to county roadways, is a sign that Amador County residents will not pay for what is perceived to be impacts by developers. She felt strongly that the developers should pay for the improvements and that the fees were fair. This is not a necessary project for Pine Grove- it’s just another strip mall, she stated. Kathy Allen, of Sutter Creek then stated that she opposes a waiver of the fees. This would shift the burden onto the taxpayer.

Kirk Lindsey, Vice Mayor of Amador City, stated the Supervisors are really facing an ethical decision. He stated that the General Plan is the county’s commitment to the folks already in a neighborhood. The plan gives its residents an expectation of what will happen. What is the impact on the people in the immediate area of the development? He suggested a lower density development or an office development. The issue is not can the developer develop the property but what can they develop it into? “I don’t think that what is on the table now it the best.” he stated. Linda Berman, President of the Pine Grove Council stated that high on the list of concerns of the citizens is traffic impacts and safety on Hwy 88. She has no problems with zoning of this property as commercial- but she does have a problem with the county reducing something special for a particular developer. “I think you need to be bite the bullet” she stated.

Developer Longacre re-approached the Board stating that the developers are willing to help with some improvements including corridor improvements in Pine Grove; side walks, intersection improvements at Irishtown Rd, and a turning pocket at Ridge Rd. Longacre said he agrees with the public comment that the roads are crowded, but he said “reality is that it is not going to be solved by one project.” He also reiterated that the both he and his partner, Stewart, are here to stay and are not just building a development and leaving behind massive issues associated with it. Again, the Board of Supervisors has elected to continue this hearing, and not issue a final determination, until they can have another workshop to review the RTP and its rules and fees. There was no date established for the continued public hearing.