Calaveras County General Plan

[carlshome]

dpalme,

I agree, statutes live forever, so it is important to act now.

I shared my concerns about this plan with friend who is a long time real estate agent in Arnold. She was also unaware of the proposed changes to the General Plan. The post card I received noted that the plan was made public in December 2014. But it took the county three months for me to receive notification. That would be ok, except the deadline for comments is March 20th. It makes me wonder how many people in the county are aware of these proposed changes that may affect their properties.

Fingers crossed the County adds the language to protect owners of per-existing legal un-improved lots.

Carl

[dpalme]

Happy to be of help, Carl.

Personnel come and go, but statutes never seem to die. And if we ever do decide to sell (lot, home or both), it’s easier to just be able to point to the General Plan.

And thank you for taking the time to start this thread. To be honest, I’d not have done the digging if you’d not brought it up.

[carlshome]

Thank you deplame for the research and further information. I too have a lot which is undeveloped. I will follow your lead and write an email to the County Planning Commission asking that they clarify land use of pre-existing legal lots.

[dpalme]

I called the Planning Department today to ask about development/rezoning of pre-existing lots in the BTV subdivision (as we have one).

Per the woman with whom I spoke, BTV will fall under the Residential Low-Density designation. That said, as long as the lot is a pre-existing, *legal* lot, the change in zone will not affect the ability to develop. There is a statute that allows for a single-family dwelling to be sited and for a perc test to be done to confirm septic suitability. So, as long as the lot tests ok for percolation, development would be allowed.

(For those following along, the questionable language is in the Land Use Element section, Page LU4. You can find that here: http://bos.calaverasgov.us/Portals/bos/Docs/BCC_SupplementalDocs/Planning_Commission/General%20Plan/2%20Land%20Use%2012-18-14.pdf)

The contradictory language is in defining the density for lots that have public water AND public sewer (<1 acre ok for development) and those that have public water and septic/OSWT) (min 1 acre), the latter being what we have here in BTV.

So, reassurances aside, I wrote an email to the Planning Commission requesting that the language be clarified regarding pre-existing legal lots such as ours. Not that we intend to build, or even sell off, but it’d be reassuring to have the right language in the General Plan.

[caleach]

Sounds like lawyer-speak to me. Sorry if any of you are lawyers but really seems like they are being intentionally ambiguous.
Steve

[carlshome]

Today I got a post card from the Calaveras County Planning Director. It states that the county is updating its General Plan and that the play MAY affect the land use designations of property you [we] own. You can review the plan at a website: http://planning.calaverasgovus/generalplanupdate.aspx So I went and looked at the plan. Now I didn’t spend hours reading it, so I may have interpreted it incorrectly. But if you look at the maps Dorrington appears to be identified as “Residential Low Density,” which allows 1-6 dwellings units/acre. Ok. But when you click on the link for “Draft General Plan Land Use Map Definitions 2014” and look for “Residential Low Density” it appears that housing with public water and a septic system would be limited to 1 du/1 acre, or 1 dwelling unit / 1 acre. Help me here. Did I read this correctly? Would this mean that any lot that is not yet built on, would have to be a minimum of one acre to have public water and a septic? Which essentially would stop all new homes from being built in Dorrington as few lots are one acre or larger. If I interpreted this correctly this could be a problem.

[Author]

Posts