 |
| Members of the Sutter Creek Planning Commission listen as public comment is taken on the Gold Rush Ranch project Monday. |
| Photo by: Kelly Scott |
The official deadline for filing written comments is today at 5 p.m. Monday night was the final opportunity to make verbal comments to the Sutter Creek Planning Commission on this phase of the project. Comments pertaining to the environmental impact analysis, criteria and thresholds of significance, mitigation measures and alternatives presented in the draft EIR will be considered by the city in its preparation of the final EIR.
A brief introduction of the project was made by Bob Delp of Environmental Stewardship and Planning Inc., preparers of the DEIR.
Delp told the audience that Gold Rush Ranch and Golf Resort is planned to be a 945-acre project within the city limits of Sutter Creek. The project consists of an 18-hole public golf course, community clubhouse, 60-room hotel, up to 57,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial use, including a 13,000-square-foot police and fire station site, 1,334 single family homes and 300 interval ownership vacation units. The project also proposes to dedicate 20 acres to the city for passive recreational use and 300 acres as permanently preserved open space with hiking trails.
Delp explained that the draft EIR evaluates three alternatives - the no-project alternative, the development consistent with existing land use and zoning designations alternative, and the reduced project alternative.
In addition to the three full alternatives, two component alternatives are evaluated. Component Alternative A provides a full public roadway access to Highway 88, as opposed to the emergency vehicle access proposed under the project. Component Alternative B provides an internal access to the project's mixed-use site adjacent to Highway 104, as opposed to the project's provision of access to this site solely from the highway.
Amador Water Agency candidate and Jackson resident Bill Condrashoff, who submitted a 22-page written comment, presented an abbreviated version at Monday's meeting. Condrashoff questioned the validity of the water supply assessment portion of the DEIR.
Former Amador County Grand Jury Foreman and Sutter Creek resident Jim Edwards said that he was "favorably impressed" with the DEIR, but felt that the city had not fully recognized all of the issues related to the project. He spoke of the Local Area Formation Commission and its recent Municipal Services Review as possible avenues to clarification.
Teacher and Sutter Creek resident Alan Vosburgh both wrote and spoke of the $750,000 investment made by the city and the Amador Regional Sanitation Authority for an easement that allows disposal of 1,300 acre feet of treated effluent on the Noble Ranch, which is the site of the Gold Rush project. Vosburgh worried that the project would not contribute sufficient funds to build a new wastewater treatment plant, produce more effluent than it absorbs and cause the city to have to pay again for disposal easements.
Representatives of the Amador Transit Project, Mike and Sharon Hewitt, expressed their appreciation of inclusion of Neighborhood Electric Vehicles in the project plan. As advocates of Bob Devlin's NEV plan for the county, they asked whether there would be solar charging stations and dedicated transit lanes to the planned Valley View Drive transit center.
Sutter Creek Elementary School teacher Lottie Tone said, "A group of us teachers looked this over and realized it does not address overcrowding of the schools. I hope that you will consider a secondary impact report for that."
Fifty-year community member Ben Klotz said that he favors the project because the growth it will bring will be a great thing for Sutter Creek. Klotz deemed it a bonus that the developers were willing to work with the city instead of against it.
Foothill Conservancy Executive Director Chris Wright made a brief statement to the commissioners, telling them that his organization had submitted written comments. An excerpt from those comments states, "The Gold Rush development is not small and it is not consistent with fundamental aspects of the current Sutter Creek General Plan."
Parked in front of the Sutter Creek Auditorium was the "No On Gold Rush" pickup truck belonging to project opponent and Sutter Creek resident Bart Weatherly.
Sutter Creek Assistant City Manager Sean Rabe later explained the complex road stakeholders were navigating.
"The environmental review process required by the California Environmental Quality Act is meant to make sure that all environmental impacts associated with the project are fully identified," he said. "The fact that we have comments on only a handful of impacts shows that we have an environmental document that we can stand behind."
Rabe also promised that all comments that are received will be fully evaluated by the city for the final EIR.
There will be a joint session of the city council and planning commission at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, Sept. 2, followed by Monday meetings at 7 p.m. on Sept. 8 and 15 of the planning commission and city council, respectively. Meetings are generally held in the Sutter Creek Community Center on Church Street. Due to anticipation of a large turnout, Monday night's meeting was held in the larger Sutter Creek Auditorium on Main Street. This may be the case for future meetings, as well.
| Jerry Budrick |