It has been several weeks since the last public meeting regarding the Elk Grove Triangle, and we thought it would be helpful to let you know about the behind-the-scenes work which is under way and what you can expect to see at the next public workshop.  We hope that this letter also clears up some of the questions and concerns you may have—if it does not, please feel free to call us (numbers are provided at the end of this letter).

Direction from the Planning Commission

At the January 23, 2003, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission provided the following direction to staff:

 1)         The alternatives developed and discussed at the December and January public workshops (which generally would allow the splitting of land into 1-acre lots) were deemed by the Commission to be unimaginative and not responsive to the needs of the Triangle area.  The Commission directed staff to bring back more alternatives, and to explore how similar land use issues have been dealt with in other communities.  More on this later . . .

 2)         Infrastructure planning should continue, assuming development with 1-acre lots as a “worst-case” scenario.

 Staff Work

 In response to the Commission’s direction, Planning staff is engaged in the following work efforts:

 1)         We are meeting with representatives of all of the agencies which provide services to the area: County water and sewer, Elk Grove Water Service, Elk Grove Unified School District, and the Elk Grove Community Services District.  Each of these agencies is being asked to identify the facilities (water and sewer lines, parks, schools, etc.) that would be needed to support development of the Triangle area.  In addition, Planning staff is coordinating with the City’s Public Works department on roadway, drainage, and other issues.

 2)         Based on these infrastructure needs, Planning staff is preparing an initial cost estimate of the price of the infrastructure that would be needed to make development with one-acre lots feasible.  More on this later . . .

 3)         We are collecting examples of the types of planning techniques which have been used in similar rural areas.  These will include clustering, buffers, transitions in lot sizes, etc. 

 What to Expect at the Next Triangle Meeting

 The next public meeting will focus on several issues:

 1)         Staff will present the results of our discussions with the various service agencies (water, sewer, schools, parks, drainage, etc.), and the types of infrastructure which would be necessary to serve the Triangle area if more development (such as additional 1-acre lot development occurs in the Triangle area.

 2)         Staff will present information on the cost of infrastructure, how these costs would apply to persons wishing to develop one-acre or larger lots, and how these costs could be covered.  This portion of the meeting will include an examination of whether development of one-acre lots throughout the Triangle area appears to be financially feasible and, if not, what steps would need to be taken to make this feasible.

 3)         Staff will present a variety of alternatives (including the maps generated at the previous public meetings) for the future development of the Triangle area.  At the direction of the Planning Commission, some of these alternatives will draw on the experience of other agencies and may not necessarily provide for equal development opportunity on all of the land within the Triangle area.

The meeting will include a discussion of the alternatives, and how each responds to the general goals for the area (preserving rural character, etc.)

The next public meeting has not been scheduled.  Please watch the Planning web site for information on the next meeting, or call Eric Norris or Steve Flint for the time and date.

 Commonly Asked Questions

The following are some of the questions we are frequently asked about the Triangle Area planning process:

Why is the planning process going so badly?  Hasn’t a decision been made already on land use?
In staff’s view, the planning process is on track and working well.  We hope to provide more information at future meetings which will make some of the planning issues more clear to everyone involved.  At this point, initial ideas regarding overall goals for the area have been developed, and a first draft of a land plan for the Triangle has been prepared.  This first draft is now being refined and “tested” (as discussed earlier) to see if it is technically and financially feasible—this is not at all uncommon and is to be expected when dealing with land use issues in an area like the Triangle.

No decisions have been made on land use or any other issues.  As noted earlier in this letter, the Planning Commission specifically asked that more alternatives be developed and presented.  These alternatives will be presented and discussed at a future meeting.

"Developers" are dominating the process!  Can the public meetings involve only residents?  Can input from the "developers" be ignored?
The public meetings on the Triangle area are just that—public meetings.  No interested person can or will be excluded from the discussions.  (In addition, several “developers” are also residents and/or property owners in the Triangle area.)  At the time the Planning Commission and City Council make final recommendations and decisions regarding the Triangle area, they will consider the input from all of the persons involved.

How could the City adopt a plan that gives some owners one-acre lots and requires others to maintain larger lot sizes?
While the City’s land use decisions are required to be based on sound evidence and to further the City’s goals and policies, it is not required to maximize the development potential of all land, or to provide all property owners in a given area with an equal opportunity to profit from the development of their property.  The City’s General Plan and zoning map, for instance, designate lands for a variety of uses, some more financially advantageous than others—two adjacent properties could be designated for different uses (such as commercial for one parcel and housing for the other) that could result in a higher value for one of the parcels.  This is a sometimes inevitable outcome of land use planning, and should not be viewed as a “losers and winners” situation but rather as a reflection of the fact that the goals of the City may not correspond with the development goals of every property owner.

Will there be more voting at the next meeting?
We have not yet decided on the format of the next meeting and how public input on the various alternatives will be taken and recorded.  We will seek to make sure that everyone’s voice is heard—however, all ideas may not be reflected in the ultimate plan for the Triangle area.  Participants should be ready to accept that, where different ideas are mutually exclusive, compromise may be necessary.

Petitions are circulating in the area.  Should I sign them?
Use your own discretion, but we advise you to be certain that you understand and agree with the petition before you sign.  Planning staff has not seen the petitions and cannot comment on them; when they are presented to the City, they will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council for their consideration.

What is the difference between “gross” and “net” acres?  Aren’t “gross” lots bigger?
In simple terms, lots measured on a “gross” basis include both the buildable area of the lot and any roadways, drainage channels, etc, that may lie within the lot.  At this time, the Elk Grove Zoning Code measures lots in “Ag Res” zoning districts based on “gross” acreage.

In the case of a 1-acre “gross” lot, the buildable area is actually less than one acre—the rest of the lot is taken up by roads and other “unbuildable” area.  A 1-acre “net” lot has a buildable area of one acre—the roadway that serves the lot is not included in the lot itself.  So, while both a 1-acre “gross” and “net” lot are each “one acre,” the gross lot has a smaller buildable area because its area is measured differently.

How would switching from “gross” to “net” size affect me?
This depends on your particular situation.  This change (which has not been decided on) could make it difficult or impossible to split an existing parcel.  For example, if you have a parcel that is 2.00 gross acres and your zoning is changed to allow one-acre gross lots, you could potentially split the parcel into two, one-acre lots.  However, if the zoning is changed to require one-acre net lots, you probably would not have enough land to split into two parcels—you would need land in addition to the two acres to provide for roadways, etc.

The figure at left shows an example of “gross area” lots—each lot (bounded by the dashed line) in the example has one acre of gross area, but this includes the roadway in front; the useable area of the lot is less than one acre.  One-acre lots measured using “net” acres would have one acre of useable area; the street in front of the lot would not count toward meeting minimum lot size requirements.

 We hope this letter answers your questions about the Triangle planning process.  If it does not, please call, write or email us: