Crazy Horse stalled at the starting gate

By Alicia Castro | Posted: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 8:13 am

Board denies controversial planning appeal

Crazy Horse Estates, a proposed subdivision on Pool Station Road, has been in the works since 2008, but Thursday, the development was stopped in its tracks by a unanimous decision by the Board of Supervisors to deny the applicants’ appeal.

“We were obviously disappointed by the decision the board came to,” said Sam Mosby, a builder from Elk Grove who purchased the property with the intent to subdivide it. “He (Supervisor Cliff Edson) told me we had the votes. And something changed toward the end, or I never would have went this far. I never would have gone through this gargantuan mess.”

Crazy Horse Estates would have been a small development surrounded by mostly agricultural preserve land. Mosby and his partners proposed four 10-acre parcels and one 65-acre remainder lot.

“When I first met Mr. Mosby, first thing is – I want to make it happen,” Edson said.

Mosby first approached Edson with the project in December 2012 and Edson was enthusiastic about moving it forward. But when he began learning more about the laws in place, Edson said he realized the project would be in violation of the Calaveras County General Plan.

When asked about whether he made promises to Mosby, Edson said he had not.

“I wanted more than anything for this project to happen,” Edson said. “According to the law and the General Plan and the rules we have in place, I just don’t see a path forward with it right now. … The only thing that was holding him back was the road.”

In the General Plan, roads are designated in one of six categories; Pool Station’s Level D falls in the low-middle category. And, according to Libby Rader-Kassik whose ranch is near Mosby’s proposed site, the road is far from ideal for development.

“It is an old stagecoach road that has had minimal upgrades,” she said. “It has been paved over several times throughout its existence, but no major grading changes have been made. It sits upon the original rock retaining walls. It is narrow. It is twisty and curvy. It has poor visibility. There are no shoulders. The pavement is deteriorating.”

The plan was brought before the Planning Commission Aug. 8, and it was unanimously denied on the grounds that it was inconsistent with the county’s 1996 General Plan.

But Mosby did not wish to defer the project, construct improvements to Pool Station Road or form an improvement district – the three options afforded by the General Plan. So he paid a fee of $100 to appeal this decision to the Board of Supervisors. Staff time, materials, publishing and mailing costs exceeded the fee and were paid out of the General Fund.

Mosby requested a delay in the public hearing for his project, but it was denied by the Planning Department. Former Planning Director Rebecca Willis – who resigned Sept. 13 – said the appeal must be heard within the time period set forth in government code.

As such, Mosby sent a letter of appeal to the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors, knocking down the Calaveras County Planning Department’s report as “riddled with inconsistencies.” And his concerns were not just with the report but also with the General Plan.

“The county still has a General Plan with land-use designations that do not correlate or correspond with the circulation element,” Mosby said. “Calaveras continues to defy state statutes, court mandates and, of course, logic.”

Planning Department staff addressed each point made in Mosby’s appeal letter in a report prepared by Planner Andrew Mogensen. For the correlation of elements, Mogensen outlined its history in the existing and previous general plans.

In a court case nearly 30 years ago – Concerned Citizens of Calaveras County v. Board Supervisors – the land-use element and circulations element of the county’s General Plan were invalidated by the court. With projected growth, there were no proposals to mitigate the inadequacy of state roadways.

In response, the Board of Supervisors chose to limit growth on poorer quality roads in the circulation element rather than limit growth in the land-use element. The amended 1985 General Plan, as well as the 1996 General Plan, included these measures in their appendices. But, because the General Plan can only be amended a limited number of times each year, the county removed this appendix from the General Plan in 2005.

To review the Crazy Horse Estates project, the Public Works Department used the removed General Plan appendix for information and then analyzed Pool Station Road to see if it was indeed still in poor condition. It was.

“Public Works recently verified the level of service classification of Pool Station Road in response to comments about this project and Pool Station Road remains level of service D along portions of the road that access the project site,” Mogensen said in the Planning Department’s response to Mosby’s appeal.

He also said there was no legal requirement for the Board of Supervisors to approve the methodology used by Public Works in determining level of service for road in the county.

“However,” Mogensen continued, “the level of service definitions in the General Plan and road classifications in the appendix were approved by the Board of Supervisors when the General Plan and appendix were approved.”

In the General Plan update, which is currently in the works, there will be a new land-use map that aims to more closely correlate land-use designations with limitations in the circulation element – “to avoid the very confusion experienced by the appellant,” said Thomas Infusino of the Calaveras Planning Coalition.

“By failing to correct this inconsistency in the land-use designation and road rating system, Calaveras County has effectively paralyzed developers who have purchased property that can literally never be developed,” Mosby said. “This must stop.”

Indeed, Mogenson said the update will aim to “fix” these elements by doing a better job of getting relevant planning documents into one place. And the Planning Department is busy – it recently cleared a project review backlog and is working to move forward with the General Plan update.

But some officials fear Willis’ exit may stall the forward motion.

“Unfortunately, with the recent resignation of yet another Planning Director, we expect that completion of the General Plan update will be delayed,” Infusino said. “We encourage the county to give more job security to the next Planning Director, so that he or she will not have to fear losing the job simply for doing it well.”

District 3 Supervisor Merita Callaway said no interim director has yet been selected.

As for the General Plan update, Edson hopes it will help responsible development projects get out of the starting gate.

“The goal is that we as a board need to take a look at the rules and regulations that are preventing some of these smaller projects from happening,” he said.

To read the full Mosby’s appeal letter and the Calaveras County Planning Department’s response, visit calaverasenterprise.com.