planning department says report is inaccurate
Donna Tam/The Times-Standard
Posted: 06/03/2011 02:40:19 AM PDT
A recently released Humboldt County Grand Jury report alleges that the county planning department violated government code through its procedure regarding the Ridgewood Village project.
The report, released this week, questions the Community Development Services Department's staff procedure in terms of interactions with planning commissioners and agencies interested in the Ridgewood Village project.
Controversy has followed the 386-acre subdivision, located in Cutten just south of Eureka city limits, since its application process began several years ago. The development, also known as the Forster-Gill project, aims to build 1,442 residences in seven phases over 10 to 25 years.
According to the grand jury, it has received several complaints regarding the project, including how the draft environmental impact document was written.
The civil grand jury looks into citizen complains and is authorized to investigate county and city governments, elected officials, special districts, jails, service districts and nonprofit agencies that receive public funding.
In its most recent report, the grand jury alleges government code violations related to public participation, education and input and the consultation of relevant agencies. The report criticizes the planning department's “this is the way it's always been done” attitude.
”The grand jury has concluded that the excuse 'that's the way we have always done it' is unacceptable,” the report states. “The planning commission needs to be brought up to speed to enable them to function at the highest level of effectiveness for the people of Humboldt County and especially the (Forster-Gill) project.”
Community Development Services Director Kirk Girard said much of what is in the report is “plain inaccurate.”
”A lot of what they said raised questions in my mind of where they got the information,” he said. His department will have 90 days to file a formal response to the report.
Girard said the report may unfairly add more controversy to the project.
”That this report is in the middle of the application process is difficult because the application is still in process and it deserves a fair hearing,” he said. “If they felt like there was some systematic problems with the permitting process, then that would be a fair report, but to make it about a particular project is unusual.”
Ridgewood Village project manager Mike Atkins said his company was not interviewed for the report. He said he has been in contact with all interested agencies about project concerns.
”We were never interviewed or allowed to comment to the grand jury in regards to this report, so all of this is very unexpected,” he said in an email to the Times-Standard. “All we can say is that we are surprised and disappointed that the grand jury did not allow us to participate in their review of this complaint. We would have been glad to meet with them and provide them factual information that would have resolved many of their concerns.”
According to the report, the grand jury's investigation found that some planning commission members were unhappy with staff performance in terms of how timely information is presented to them, particularly when they requested it.
”Telling commissioners they do not need certain information is not the decision of the planning department staff or director,” the report states. “This has been a reoccurring comment through our interviews.”
Additionally, the report recommended that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors should allow planning commissioners to present their opinions and decisions before the supervisors instead of limiting presentations to planning staff and applicants.
The report stated that several findings were based on interviews with commissioners.
Grand jury foreman Tim Marks said the grand jury did not interview all commissioners for the report but said documentation was obtained to support the concerns of the commissioners interviewed.
Marks said he could not release the commissioners' names, citing grand jury secrecy.
Girard said the grand jury's findings lacked specifics, which would make it difficult for his department to respond.
”Normally, the grand jury does state their claim, their findings on specific findings based in fact,” he said. “I wish they had given us more to go on in terms of their claims.”
Marks disagreed.
”We felt that the information that is in the report is sufficient enough considering that it listed all the violations that occurred,” he said. “That there should be sufficient information for (Girard) to make an intelligent response.”
The findings also include concerns over the lack of a Citizen Advisory Group, an eminent domain threat to a homeowner to acquire a portion of a property for road access and the use of outdated growth calculations as a basis for the project. The grand jury recommends that the county establish a Citizen Advisory Group.
Additionally, the report states that the planning department did not consult concerned agencies -- the city of Eureka, Caltrans, California Department of Fish and Game, Humboldt No. 1 Fire Protection District and the county public works department -- in the creation of the draft environmental impact report.
Girard said the county followed protocol and issued the necessary notices to agencies, and staff is now in the process of responding to comments made about the draft EIR.
He said he expects the final responses -- and the final design of the project -- to go back to the planning commission in the next few months.
While officials at most of the agencies said they did receive a notice of the document, they also said they weren't consulted. Representatives at the city of Eureka, Caltrans and the Department of Fish and Game said they made extensive comments after the draft EIR was released, while the fire protection district said they never received a copy of the document due to a mailing issue.
Eureka officials, who have been very vocal about their concerns with the size of the project, the project itself and its impact on traffic and economic blight, said the communication situation has improved since the EIR was released.
”Leading up to the issuance of the EIR, we were frustrated that there wasn't more contact made with city staff. We did attempt to make our concerns known to the county,” City Manager David Tyson said, adding that since then the city has been having meetings with county planning regarding the concerns.
Fish and Game environmental scientist Gordon Leppig said Forster-Gill made contact early on and has tried to work with Fish and Game to address concerns, but county staff has not had any meetings with his agency.
Humboldt No. 1 Fire Protection District Chief Ken Woods said he had a similar experience. With a project of this size, he said, he expected more communication with the county. The county has publicly said the district supported the project, based on a 2006 letter from the previous fire chief, but Woods said the county did not contact him before releasing the draft EIR in 2010.
”That was concerning, to say the least,” Woods said. “There seems to be a disconnect still and, pretty much, I think the developer has stepped in to alleviate our concerns and work on solutions that we saw that need to be mitigated. The planning department is pretty much out of the picture.”
_______________________
To get the report
Write: Grand jury of Humboldt County
Room G03, County Court House
825 5th Street
Eureka, CA 95501
Call:
476-2475
Online:
www.co.humboldt.ca.us/grandjury
http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18198043
No comments:
Post a Comment