[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6316260,"mediaKeyId","2377280-b6c8d2c7d3ab42f7399c01e1215d2144","parentId",2377280,"title","GPAC backs LAPAC consensus items, urges planned mixed‑use, sphere‑of‑influence congruence and agricultural/resource conservation protections","audioSeconds",3903,"startMs",6113000,"endMs",10016000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2377280-b6c8d2c7d3ab42f7399c01e1215d2144&start=6113&end=10016","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2377280-b6c8d2c7d3ab42f7399c01e1215d2144/thumbnail_6113000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6316260/Lake-County/California/GPAC-backs-LAPAC-consensus-items-urges-planned-mixeduse-sphereofinfluence-congruence-and-agriculturalresource-conservation-protections","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316260-7f0ceff5014beeb4847dbf966be5b311/orig.mp4?Expires=1775413713&Signature=EHoPMDDgB0aODbBGhau55AieBVKLvPu9Yf4DoniSlaKlURiy3me5d97hgUzmxaOjTrOxQk5kr41-uukJ4s3MuQqqaBoMI9-X2Wt0~y-xXodJ4r6P5NiSv2PixFSEW7OXAIxDiZiPA17y30u198begeDUWCNiZqxXtTXsIY6qCkXo3lh88by6LKBgABuIwrF60SlG3WFwiAibQf4Pz2b8FUzw-522Shg~JCidudXCjlfNDQz8CQrOEpdMg4LSlbz0MhS8N7HTKgbF3~KRIx6KEGSu9ZvmdoWR2d0H4vBKk~FzqfGnRLJDXd~-~80pC-qgC9IUHUTGReFKCck1VZgrvw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Lake County CA","date","2025-02-21T14:27:36Z","article","The General Plan Advisory Committee voted to support LAPAC recommendations that had consensus among local area planning groups and to forward those consensus planning‑area boundary recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.

In a series of voice votes the committee then approved several countywide recommendations and policy priorities for the Board to consider when reviewing local mapping and implementation actions:

- Planning‑area consensus: The GPAC moved, seconded and voted by voice to support LAPAC recommendations for planning area boundary changes where the LAPACs had reached agreement. Staff will forward those consensus recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.

- Planned mixed‑use and infill: The GPAC approved a motion encouraging the Board to support “planned mixed‑use” approaches that enable housing over or adjacent to existing commercial space, support walkable neighborhoods, and create options for live‑work or adaptive reuse in community growth boundaries and existing commercial areas. Committee members emphasized the need for implementation tools (funding options, streamlined permitting) so small building owners and local businesses can convert or rehabilitate spaces for mixed use.

- Sphere‑of‑influence congruence: The GPAC approved a motion recommending the county require congruence between proposed community growth boundary expansions and ongoing Sphere of Influence (SOI) reviews for critical public services (water, sewer, fire, emergency response). The motion urged that planned boundary expansions be aligned with the planned expansion capacity of the service providers to reduce the risk of proposing growth where services are not planned or funded.

- Agricultural and resource conservation protection: The committee voted to “preserve agricultural land use designation areas” primarily for food production and to preserve resource conservation land use designated areas. Members discussed language carefully, noting that some agricultural parcels support wine/grape or nut production that differs from vegetable production; several speakers asked staff to frame the recommendation so it supports agricultural economies and protects prime soils and resource conservation lands while allowing appropriate commercial uses on non‑prime lands.

All votes were taken by voice; motions were made from the floor and seconded by committee members (movers and seconders were not recorded by name in the transcript). Each motion passed by voice vote and “motion carries” was announced.

Ending: Staff will package the GPAC’s consensus LAPAC recommendations and the committee’s countywide recommendations for transmission to the Board of Supervisors for consideration on the Board’s March 11 agenda and during general plan drafting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING #3, Part 2","oneSentenceSummary","The General Plan Advisory Committee voted to forward LAPAC planning‑area consensus recommendations to the Board of Supervisors and adopted countywide policy recommendations including planned mixed‑use, required congruence with SOI reviews, and protections for agricultural and resource conservation lands.","taxTitle","Lake County, California","taxId",17505,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6316265,"GPAC hears LAPAC recommendations on community growth boundaries; staff says Lower Lake water district can add about 10 new connections",249,3088000,3337000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2377280-b6c8d2c7d3ab42f7399c01e1215d2144&start=3088&end=3337","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2377280-b6c8d2c7d3ab42f7399c01e1215d2144/thumbnail_3088000.jpg","/articles/6316265/Lake-County/California/GPAC-hears-LAPAC-recommendations-on-community-growth-boundaries-staff-says-Lower-Lake-water-district-can-add-about-10-new-connections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316265-9c0e3031af329b91835b23fb19182acc/orig.mp4?Expires=1775413713&Signature=TS2kXIUnsVxVJS5HjVHM6nfSqjHTDxavtxydPJhJ4xQdoSQ7QCZViajFYPf6pmUBW68NZEKgR9SEl~szV9TBgRykAYdqpzZgPuOS~3hYRqyr6n~26RMteZxHc4EG3KhJfS85jkByYDostYNZJQN58zBCF6bPBQ34qfB-3yZGfI4jp-pytDfRFtUWEeHA8T7b3uINcJ7eAd1QH6H-9oiGf84VSMugAyY~8INZj0HQJ2Mo40Be-9Lv7rjCRUlM4vaIoQBuRNTZrMjh5gpJJKmZZgo3udwJg1EFfJyMPEdYaypWCjWXsoCbOf1M2sRJkyTYsA0vep25Cz8Jvkf7kdIFyg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Sonia Sundbergen of PlaceWorks briefed the General Plan Advisory Committee on recommended changes to community growth boundaries forwarded by local area planning advisory committees (LAPACs). The LAPAC proposals shown to GPAC were informational only; GPAC was not asked to vote on them at this meeting.

Sundbergen described two LAPAC recommendations highlighted at the meeting: a northwestern expansion of the Kelseyville community growth boundary (the mapped area includes lands currently designated agriculture on the west side and industrial on the east side) and a southeastern expansion of the Lower Lake growth boundary into an area now designated suburban residential reserve. The Kelseyville suggestions included areas already rezoned or designated for industrial uses in prior planning actions; staff noted one expansion parcel had already been amended in the county planning record.

Separately, staff followed up on a February 13 GPAC request about water capacity for potential new residential connections in Lower Lake. County staff reported that the Lower Lake Water District has no current moratorium and said, in staff’s hypothetical check, the district could accommodate about 10 additional single‑family dwelling connections at this time. Staff emphasized that each new connection requires individual district approval when homes are built.

Property owner Michael Santarelli spoke to the committee about eight parcels near the Lower Lake boundary that he said already have seven homes connected to Lower Lake Water and are close to existing municipal services and paved roads. Santarelli asked the committee to consider adding his parcels to the community growth boundary in the future; staff answered that LAPAC and later GPAC review would be the vehicle for such a request.

The presentations were informational; staff said LAPAC recommendations (and any GPAC recommendations) will be transmitted to the Board of Supervisors for consideration. No GPAC action was taken on community growth boundary changes at this meeting.

Ending: Staff said the LAPAC proposals that have consensus will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors; items without consensus will be scheduled for further review or left for Board consideration.","PlaceWorks and staff presented LAPAC‑recommended community growth boundary amendments (Kelseyville, Lower Lake). County staff reported the Lower Lake Water District has capacity for roughly 10 additional single‑family connections; LAPAC recommendations were informational only and no action was taken at this meeting.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6316269,"County consultants outline housing action plan, propose mixed‑use infill combining district",473,1860000,2333000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2377280-b6c8d2c7d3ab42f7399c01e1215d2144&start=1860&end=2333","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2377280-b6c8d2c7d3ab42f7399c01e1215d2144/thumbnail_1860000.jpg","/articles/6316269/Lake-County/California/County-consultants-outline-housing-action-plan-propose-mixeduse-infill-combining-district","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316269-9f45ecc34acf21bcf1c3dc0d03510bb0/orig.mp4?Expires=1775413713&Signature=jegrC7uNndwxZWtrf0giOfRqJoFTR5OKLzhSUpzLWX0PK8x3W8OoP1GpzD3lY0ufvQui9GO9HhCTkuDSpJZjAUadB4VG9gf6-EL0NYpMy-igbxadrVRPZVaU9zAHZkDgLhoxzyRTBaZ4Lzs58jWD5O09O9X5gjr-6DLhuAOJPxwImQNFwC2Ti~AteIXcQ0d3HZIOfyFE~z~hlCDZIgzUpzU9Pmhh~trACvBx3ggbg3bGrxxfFskGm4M-xfcnrm1b1hpHCX3eZpOR28ugZaljYnemX8RAj2dTuIqaDMVme0wTYUJeweJyxpeyRbdqElLO7txiLRsy8vt07k~fBnLlXw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Nicole West, a PlaceWorks consultant on the Housing Action and Implementation Plan (HAPE) team, told the Lake County General Plan Advisory Committee that the plan is “a comprehensive manual to address housing demands throughout the county.” The presentation outlined analysis, outreach findings and an initial implementation idea for mixed‑use, walkable neighborhoods.

The HAPE presentation summarized key findings: the county needs a wider variety of housing types and price points; residents supported more-flexible zoning and faster residential construction; and many commenters favored infill development directed away from agricultural land, open space and wildfire hazard areas and toward existing infrastructure such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and water and wastewater services.

West said the draft HAPE includes a sites analysis and an interactive web map, and staff is preparing a public draft. She described a preliminary concept for a “mixed‑use infill combining district” that would be applied, where appropriate, within community growth boundaries and local area plans. The combining district is intended to encourage pedestrian‑scaled development, housing variety, and projects that score well for affordable housing funding such as TCAC competitive tax credit applications.

Committee members and residents asked when the state RHNA number will be available and how areas that are not currently zoned residential were evaluated for housing potential. West said the RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) number is set by the state and has not yet been released; when it is released it will be passed through the Lake/Mendocino area planning process for allocation between the county and cities. She also said staff identified parcels that meet criteria for affordable housing funding (TCAC) but emphasized that local LAPAC feedback will be needed before applying combining districts in specific locations.

Public commenters supported infill and mixed use while urging protections for agricultural land and local notification when land use changes are proposed. Resident Wes Baker said the mixed‑use images shown “looked like somewhere you'd go to on vacation” but supported living‑over‑work conversions and warned: “stay away from the ag. You know, let's not do the ag.”

The presentation was informational; PlaceWorks and county staff said the concept will be refined during the forthcoming zoning code update and local area plan work and will be carried into the separate housing element process later in the planning cycle.

Ending: The HAPE team is finishing an administrative review and plans to release a public draft. Committee members asked staff to return HAPE materials when the RHNA number is available and to coordinate combining‑district criteria with upcoming local area plan work and the county’s zoning code update.","PlaceWorks consultants presented the Housing Action and Implementation Plan, highlighting need for diverse, affordable housing and proposing a mixed‑use infill combining district to concentrate housing near existing services while avoiding agricultural and hazard areas.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

GPAC backs LAPAC consensus items, urges planned mixed‑use, sphere‑of‑influence congruence and agricultural/resource conservation protections

GPAC hears LAPAC recommendations on community growth boundaries; staff says Lower Lake water district can add about 10 new connections

County consultants outline housing action plan, propose mixed‑use infill combining district