It was standing room only and the public’s opinion was in full force at a special July 5th meeting of the Jackson Planning Commission. The special workshop was prompted by local resident Thorton Consolo who requested that the current C-2 commercial zoning for the 58 acres be reconsidered by the City. This property is owned by the Surian family and is located adjacent to the Kennedy Mine along Highway 49 in north Jackson. The possibility that this land could become the location for a 136,000 Home Depot and up to 4 other large retail establishments has created an extraordinary amount of public concern to prevent this project.
Using sentiment as well reasoning, most of those who spoke tried to persuade the Planning Commission to change the commercial zoning on this property, stating that this valley has become recognized both for its historical significance and for being the signature view within Amador County. After hearing over two hours of public comment from both sides of the issue, in the end the Planning Commission decided unanimously to vote ”no” for rezoning this property.
Commissioners cited consideration for property owner’s rights and the lack of any compelling reason to change the zoning from its current commercial designation as the reasons for their decision. There was also a general consensus that rezoning this parcel could be construed as “spot zoning” which may not be legal. However, the Commissioners did agree to recommend that the zoning for this property receive a “planned development overlay” designation added. Although this would not prevent future commercial development, it was generally agreed that it would put greater control over how a future project here would fit in with Jackson. Further, it was suggested that the City look into going another step by also designating both a “historical overlay” and a "Viewshed" designation to this property which would mandate that even more stringent guidelines be met. The public was reminded that the Planning Commission’s decision is a recommendation to the City Council and not a binding agreement.
The public’s many comments on both sides of the issue could be both compelling and heartfelt. One theme that was echoed several times was the feeling of “being home” when the view of this valley came into sight. Others lamented the loss of Jackson’s small town feel due to the development of this land and the traffic issues it would create. Elaine Zorbas who was representing the Foothill Conservancy, suggested that the commercial zoning designation for this land “is wrong and is a throwback to past times and not the present.” Her comment that putting a retail development here would make Jackson “anytown, USA” drew applause from the large crowd. Zorbas concluded her remarks by stating that “we have the opportunity to do something farsighted and lasting”.
It was suggested by several people that the best use for this property would be as open space or for recreational use. This could include picnic areas, a nature park and hiking and biking trails. Another suggestion would be to connect it to Detert Park with a trail. Tony D’Arcy, a local commercial realtor working with the Surians on the land sale, received groans and grumbles when he stated that “open space only brings trash collectors and transients to the area”. He had earlier explained that he had worked with the Kennedy Mine for years in the past and saw these kinds of things happen.
Jack Georgette got laughs from the crowd when he stated to the Commissioners, “judging from this large crowd here tonight, you guys need to get on board!” He went on to state that it is “unjust” for one property owner to have such a large affect on all of Jackson.
Kathy Dubois used her five minutes at the microphone to explain that current traffic studies already show the Highway 49 and 88 corridors at unacceptable levels. Her concern was that should a bypass ever be built, people would have to “bypass the bypass” to go to this shopping complex making the traffic even worse.
The Surian family was also in attendance and was represented during the public comment session by their legal council, Larry Watson who spoke on their behalf. He asked for the Commission to respect the rights of property owners and asked “how would you feel?” He also explained that they have owned this property since 1964 and that testing done in the past has shown the area unsuitable for residential development due to unacceptably high arsenic levels. Therefore their only option was the commercial zoning. He concluded his remarks by expressing concern that the value of the land may be diminished should it be rezoned.
Several other individuals, including local developer Ron Reagan who laughingly referred to himself as "one of the bad guys", spoke out to oppose rezoning this land and to support the importance of protecting the rights of property owners. To offer an alternative viewpoint, Mike Rolf pointed out that the public has “the right to change the zoning and that by law, property rights are limited to what a city permits”.
Bill Condershoff suggested that the City buy the property. He said that “as long as the Surians get their money they should be happy.” There were further suggestions to consider a bond measure to fund such a proposal. Although she expressed her skepticism that it could actually happen, Commissioner Terri Works stated that she would be in support of a bond issue.
Jackson is currently is in the midst of revamping the General Plan. Due to the complexity of reconciling the current zoning with future changes, there were numerous times that the Commissioners had to consult with City Planner Susan Peters and among themselves for clarification of various points.
Most of those in attendance appeared disappointed at the final decision. In a later discussion with Commissioner Dave Butow, he clarified that if the City Council endorses the Commission’s recommendation by allowing the addition of the “planned development overlay” as well as the “historical overlay” to the current commercial zoning, it may make large scale development of this scenic valley more difficult to win approval.

I think the historical overlay is a sensible compromise. What does everyone else think?
The property rights issue is certainly a concern; however, you have the right to own a gun, bear children and own pets; that doesn’t negate you from doing those things responsibly. Everything you do affects others. Very few things in life affect others the way land use does. Whether the land is public or private doesn’t change that fact.
Dear Sir,
I find your story clear. Did the Commission’s action serve to support Home Depot’s plans? Your lead says the public’s opinion was in full force, but it seems by what I read that the Commission did not react to public opinion.
Please clarify.
Thanks,
Terry Grillo
From The Editor:
The consensus is that no, the Planning Commission did not specifically react to the public’s request to change the zoning since they did not do so.
However, since they did recommend greater zoning restrictions than currently in place, (Historical and Viewshed designations) it may make this project extremely difficult to approve.
Therefore, it could be said that, no, they did not specifically support Home Depot’s plans either.
In my opinion they felt constrained by legal ramifications should they have actually rezoned the property. "Down Zoning" (to open space, agricultural, etc.) could have resulted in a legal challenge by the property owners. They did not want to go in this direction.