Amador County – The Amador County Board of Supervisors set its Land Use Committee to work on looking at lifting a moratorium, to the county’s General Plan amendments, to make way, for more work in the mining-related industry.
Planner Susan Grijalva requested “direction to staff regarding, whether to consider the possibility of adding an exception to the county’s moratorium prohibiting the acceptance of applications for general plan amendments”, which are on hold while the General Plan is being updated.
Grijalva said in a staff report that “the highest paying jobs in Amador County are mining related”. At a recent economic development workshop, it was asked if the board might consider amendments “to allow applications that would provide for ‘value added’ product manufacturing and processing operations which utilize the county’s existing natural resources.”
She wanted to consult with General Plan consultants, EDAW, to make sure there are no ramifications to the General Plan update.
Supervisor Ted Novelli asked if there would be a cost to look into the issue, and if so, how much. Grijalva said she was concerned that an amendment could create a “need to redo anything we’ve done in the General Plan so far.”
She said any application would be separate, and “being that they are General Plan amendments as opposed to zoning changes,” it may be different, but she expected applicants would pay for the cost of changes.
Supervisor Brian Oneto asked if they could charge the applicant, if indeed there were costs. Grijalva said she was unsure, but an example would be the cost to rerun a traffic model, which she thought likely, would be a cost to the applicant. She said EDAW has been through this before and would know the answer.
Novelli said he would like to “have the land use committee say, why they want to go forward with this.” Forster said he did not want to hear EDAW say a $3,000 study was needed to look at this feasibility. He said “it doesn’t involve major housing complexes being located in the county. This is something completely different.”
Chairman John Plasse said they should “question but verify” what EDAW says about the situation. He said for the sake of economic development and revitalization, the “government can get out of the way,” in this case, for the “harvesting of natural resources.” He said the self-imposed regulations of the General Plan were passed by the state in 2005, and the county still has not completed the update it began in 2008.
The board voted 5-0 to refer the issue to the land use committee, as Forster motioned, “to let them come up with a recommendation and bring it back to the full board.”
Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
