Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Papanos topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission asks supervisors to direct staff and counsel to pursue lawful options for Papanos campground proposal
Summary
The Plumas County Planning Commission voted to recommend the Board of Supervisors direct the planning department and county counsel to develop a lawful pathway — including but not limited to a general plan amendment, zoning change, or code amendment — to address the Papanos request for campground/RV uses in mining‑zoned land.
The Plumas County Planning Commission voted to forward a recommendation that the Board of Supervisors direct the planning department and county counsel to develop and bring forward a lawful action addressing the Papanos general plan amendment and zone change request.
Planning staff summarized the history: the planning commission previously recommended denial of the applicant’s request to change mining‑zoned parcels to recreation zoning for campground/RV uses, and the Board of Supervisors denied the general plan amendment on May 5. Planning staff said the resolution of intention (PC 20 26 01) is intended to provide the board with a recommended pathway for possible economic development while maintaining consistency with the county code, the 2035 general plan and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The staff presentation laid out three main options: (1) pursue a more comprehensive general plan amendment and zone change for multiple parcels; (2) amend the county code to add campground use to the mining zoning district subject to a conditional (special) use permit; or (3) amend the ordinance to add a set of recreational uses. Planning Director said the department would work with county counsel to identify which lawful action (or actions) would be feasible and compliant with CEQA and county code.
Commissioners split on whether the planning commission should present the board with multiple options or narrow the recommendation to a single preferred path. Commissioner Foster pressed for a clearer recommendation to the board so the planning department’s workload and the county’s priorities would be focused. County Counsel advised that the resolution is discretionary and that staff could prepare a staff report comparing the options, the legal implications, and the likely time and resource commitments for each.
After discussion, a motion to accept the resolution of intention as amended — directing staff to work with county counsel to address providing economic development and viability while maintaining compliance and compatibility with CEQA, the Plumas County Code of Ordinances, and the 2035 General Plan — was made, seconded, and approved by voice vote. The planning director said staff will return a refined staff report and proposed language and then present the board with the recommended lawful action; the Board of Supervisors was scheduled to receive related materials in early June.
What’s next: staff will work with county counsel to refine the proposed lawful action(s), prepare a staff report that clarifies legal implications and workload, and return recommendations to the planning commission and the Board of Supervisors for subsequent action.
