Dennis Ryan Letter: General Plan & TPZ

Public Comment to BOS – Preserve Integrity of Gen Plan Update

Good Morning,

My name is Dennis Ryan. I reside in Carlotta. My wife and I purchased our Carlotta property approximately 3 years ago. The parcel is approximately 35 acres, almost equally split zoned Ag Exclusive and TPZ. The parcel is significantly impacted by an Alquist-Priolo Zone, which goes through the middle of the parcel. I would hope that we could all agree that neither a 20-acre Ag Exclusive, nor a 20-acre TPZ parcel are self-sustaining resource parcels. We currently reside in what we are told is an 80 to 100-year old cabin with a rotting floor and no foundation.

We bought our property with the dream of finding a way to build a home on the only portion of the property not adversely impacted by existing easements or the Alquist-Priolo zone. This is a small knoll in the back corner of the property within the TPZ portion of the property. My wife and I invested our life savings in our property with the full knowledge that there are existing rules regarding the use and enjoyment of the property. These rules are the General Plan and Zoning designations that have been adopted by the County. These rules represent a contract between the County and the property owners – most of which are residents and constituents of this County – which both agree to abide by. FURTHER – there is a contract – A COMMITMENT that if these rules are found to need change, there is an adopted process by which they will be revised – this being the General Plan amendment or Rezoning process. We bought our property trusting that there is integrity behind this commitment, and that these are the rules and the process by which we could use and enjoy our property.

I know there are many others in the county – similar to my wife and I, who have made good-faith decisions – LIFE ALTERING decisions, based upon the assumption that there is integrity behind the County’s commitment in the General Plan and Zoning documents.

I have followed the General Plan update process carefully – recognizing that the update could have a profound effect on the life-altering decisions that my wife and I have made to invest in our property. It is crystal clear to me that what we are now dealing with is a thinly veiled attempt to incrementally implement the Planning Department’s private political agenda regarding TPZ parcels within the County – while at the same time circumventing the General Plan amendment process. It is my opinion that Planning Staff recognizes that there is considerable opposition to these policies, and their agenda may not muster the General Plan update process. This agenda has been clear throughout the General Plan Update process, and I cannot find fault in the intentions – REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF VIABLE INDUSTRIAL TIMBER PRODUCTION PARCELS WITHIN THE COUNTY. The problem is that this agenda is being applied to all parcels zoned TPZ – even those that are NOT REMOTELY viable industrial resource parcels.

If, as has been represented, these actions are NEEDED on an emergency basis to protect the county from a conceptual, pie-in-the sky proposal from large timber holdings to subdivide large portions of TPZ lands, all I can say is the Planning Department must have absolutely NO FAITH in the current General Plan and Zoning documents, the Environmental Review process, and the their own land development review and appeal process which provides for comment and input which is to be considered in the DISCRETIONARY PERMIT PROCESS. This is why it is called a DISCRETIONARY process – there is supposed to be some discretion involved.

The General Plan and Zoning update processes are the proper venue for these revisions, because it allows for all of the impacts of the changes to be addressed, not incremental and piecemeal implementation of select policies. An example of this is that IF these changes are made, in conjunction with a General Plan Update process, parcels which are NOT viable resource parcels should be properly identified and recognized, and the General Plan and/or Zoning Designations on these parcels changed to realistically reflect their potential. Adopting the changes requested by Staff in a piecemeal, emergency fashion – is a lazy way to implement their agenda. It completely ignores substantial collateral damage, and the profound impact to MANY tax-paying property owners in the county. People have made life-altering decisions based upon the commitments this County has made in their General Plan and Zoning documents and processes, and who are paying taxes based upon assessments that reflect the current rules and restrictions.

IN CONCLUSION:
Please preserve the integrity of the County’s General Plan and Zoning documents and processes by ensuring that these type of changes are made in the manner prescribed by law, and in conjunction with the commitments this County – which you as the Board of Supervisors represent – have made to the General Plan and Zoning documents and process.

And Second – if these changes are deemed necessary – consider the unintended collateral damage, and maintain the integrity of the process to address these damages by accurately reflecting General Plan and Zoning designations on parcels that are clearly not viable industrial resource parcels.

Thank you for your time and the opportunity to speak to you this morning.

Dennis Ryan Letter/Spoke to HC-BOS On General Plan & TPZ
October 23, 2007