The Vintage at Kings Canyon
Submitted by Carson Now Reader on Sat, 12/15/2018 - 3:21pm
I read with great interest the two letters in response to Guy Farmer's op-ed piece related to the Vintage at Kings Canyon development.
While the individuals were correct in that the Andersons have every right to sell their land, the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors are not automatically obligated to approve a zoning amendment from agricultural to residential to allow for said land to be developed.
When these zoning requests or Special Use Permit requests are submitted to the Planning Department, I believe there are findings that need to be made in order for the request to be sent to the appropriate entity.
What has always puzzled me about the Vintage project was how the Planning Department arrived at a finding that there would be no detrimental effect to the surrounding neighborhoods or to the traffic in that area. That is absolutely counterintuitive given the scope of the project.
So, from my perspective, the Andersons have sold their land. Congratulations to them. Unfortunately, the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors also approved a zoning amendment, despite a huge community outpouring against said approval.
So, now it will be up to the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to determine whether or not the upcoming changes being
requested meet the findings of no detrimental impact to the surrounding areas or to the traffic on the two dead-end streets that are being proposed as through streets to the new development.
Can't hardly wait to see how all that goes.
