CEDHSP (Central El Dorado Hills Specific Plan) in a Nutshell

Proposed Project (1000 Dwelling Units) as proposed by Serrano Associates. (1299 pdf pages!)

I have tried to summarize the alternatives (163 pdf pages!) here:

Alternative 1 No Project (312 Dwelling Units)

  • Assumes that the land uses within the project area would remain as currently entitled (Serrano Village D1, Lots C and D) and as current General Plan land use designations allow (Pedregal and the former El Dorado Hills Executive Golf Course). 
  • A General Plan amendment, El Dorado Hills Specific Plan amendment, or rezoning would not be required. 
  • Buildout of existing plans and/or entitlements under the theoretical maximum density for the project area would allow development under the No-Project Alternative of up to 759 dwelling units on 181 acres. 
    • Pedregal planning area limits allowable development to a total of 312 dwelling units on the 341-acre project site (93 developed acres).
      • 168 detached, single-family residential units at a density of <1–5 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) 
      • 144 multifamily residential units at a density of 14–24 du/ac. 
    • The Serrano Westside planning area encompasses Serrano Village D1, Lots C and D, which would be developed with residential uses consistent with the 1988 El Dorado Hills Specific Plan (EDHSP). Within the Serrano Westside planning area, 41.2 acres would be developed with detached, single-family residential units at a density of <1–5 du/ac (135 dwelling units). 
    • The former El Dorado Hills Executive Golf Course property would remain in its existing state as maintained vacant land. 

Alternative 2 Reduced Density (672 Dwelling Units)

  • Reduced Density Compared to the proposed project, the Reduced-Density Alternative would reduce the total number of dwelling units from 1,000 to 672 but would increase the development footprint by over 50 acres to accommodate the reduced density (from 134 acres for the proposed project to 185 acres under this alternative). 
  • This alternative would provide the least open space—130 acres—of all the alternatives, and 39 fewer acres of open space than the proposed project. This alternative assumes development of Village D1, Lots C and D (135 units) and combines the current approved land uses and existing housing types within the Serrano Westside planning area with development of the Pedregal planning area as envisioned under the proposed project. 

Alternative 3 Reduced Wetland Impact (915 Dwelling Units)

  • This alternative is Intended to reduce wetland impacts compared to the proposed project through changes to the location and density of development. A total of 0.24 acre of wetland would be affected under this alternative, versus 2.9 acres of wetlands and other waters of the United States under the proposed project. The Reduced-Wetland-Impact Alternative would reduce the quantity and density of potential dwelling units in the Serrano Westside planning area and would include the development of Serrano Village D1, Lots C and D (135 units), which would be designated as Open Space under the proposed project. Of the 341-acre total site area, 168 acres would comprise the development footprint and approximately 173 acres would remain in open space use. 
  • Buildout of this Alternative would result in the development of 
    • 68 low-density units
    • 294 medium-low density units
    • 200 medium-high density units
    • 353 high-density units
    • total of 915 dwelling units on approximately 139 acres. 
  • Assumes construction of duplexes and half-plexes within the Pedregal planning area as a means to increase density, while reducing and configuring the development footprint to avoid wetlands. 

Alternative 4 Zoning-Consistent  (654 Dwelling Units)

  • Assumes that the land uses in the project area would be developed pursuant to current zoning therefore a County General Plan amendment and EDHSP amendment would not be required. 
  • Consists of developing 
    • 510 detached, single-family residential units at a density of less than 1 to 5 dwelling units per acre on the Westside planning area north of Serrano Parkway 
    • 135 units on Serrano Village D1 Lots C and D and 375 units on Pedregal
    • 144 attached, multifamily residential units at a density of 14 to 24 dwelling units per acre on the Pedregal planning area. 
  • Open space and parkland would be dedicated (173 acres). 
  • This alternative would include 5 acres zoned for a church. 
  • The former El Dorado Hills Executive Golf Course property would remain under its current zoning of Recreational Facilities, High-Intensity (RFH).5 and would be developed as active recreational facilities that could include uses permitted by the RFH zone district such as a tennis and aquatics facility, day-use and night-use sporting fields, amusement complex, indoor or outdoor entertainment facilities, hotels, and general merchandise sales. 

Alternative 5 Senior Living (1763 Dwelling Units)

  • The former Executive Golf Course south of Serrano Parkway would be developed as a senior living facility. 
  • The senior living facility assumes a continuing care retirement community (CCRC), which provides residential services, on-site amenities and recreation, and health care.
  •  A County General Plan amendment and EDHSP amendment would be required. The Senior Living Alternative would consist of developing 
    • 37 detached, single-family residential units at a density of <1–5 dwelling units per acre on the Pedregal planning area, identical to the proposed project, 
    • 226 single-family residential units at a density of 8–14 dwelling units per acre on the Serrano Westside planning area north of Serrano Parkway, and 
    • 300 attached, multi-family residential units at a density of 14–24 dwelling units per acre in both planning areas. 
    • The former Executive Golf Course south of Serrano Parkway would be developed as a senior living facility with 
      • 1,000 independent living dwelling units
      • 200 assisted living dwelling units. 
  • Open space and parkland would be dedicated. 
  • 11 acres of civic–limited commercial land use. 

Public Comments and Email Petitions Associated With the CEDHSP Project as of 6/11/2020

Most if this information is buried in the County Website for this project, and is quite voluminous.  It is presented here so residents of the County can easily view this information if they wish.

Public Comments

Please note, the following topics reference the items found on the County website here. They have been separated from each other (on the county website they are all crowded together).

Public Comment Rcvd 06-11-20 PC 06-11-20 (Kim Cross)

Public Comment Rcvd 06-10-20 PC 06-11-20 (Sam Morley)

Public Comment Rcvd 06-09-20 PC 06-11-20 (John and Katalin Walcott, Robert McCarthy, Binay & Melissa Ackalloor, Walt and Shirley Sikes, Timothy Tamplin, Lisa Gregerson, Lyle R. Cunningham)

Public Comment Rcvd 06-08-20 PC 06-11-20 (Bonnie Bastian, Jeanette Anderson, Jim Schulz, Jacqualine McCarthy, Somit Joshi, James Pridemore, James Wittrock, Joe Zuccolotto, Michael Jahangiri, Bina Mcconville, Julie A. McIntosh, Mary A Levernier, Leslie Ellwood and Dan Ellyson.)

Public Comment Rcvd 06-04-20 PC 06-11-20 (Eric Fechter) 

Public Comment Rcvd 04-23-20 PC 04-23-20 (Kenny Croyle) 

Public Comment Rcvd 04-22-20 PC 04-23-20 (Eric Fechter) 

Public Comment Rcvd 03-20-20 PC 03-26-20 (Betty January)

Public Comment Rcvd 03-18-20 PC 03-26-20 (Dean Getz) 

Public Comment Rcvd 02-18-20 to 03-09-20 PC 03-26-20 (Leslie Ellwood, Eric Fechter, Dean Getz, Merrilee Posner and Adam Baughman)

Public Comment Rcvd 02-12-20 PC 02-13-20 (Wayne Haug)

Public Comment Rcvd 02-05-20 PC 02-13-20 (Mary Levernier) 

Public Comment Rcvd 02-04-20 PC 02-13-20 (Mary Levernier) 

Public Comment Rcvd 01-14-20 to 01-25-20 PC 02-13-20 (Bonnie & Scott Wolfe, Leslie Ellwood, Bill Wasdyke, Hugh & Lisa Baca, Cheryl Adler, JAMES KERR, Romeo Manzano, Jeffrey Maus, Diane Amerson, Shirley and Walt Sikes, David Kempker, Laura Harling, Diane Seip, David Keneller, Tom Lusi, John Richard, Kristofer Mickelson, Michael Miro, Donn Neher, Susan FaGalde, Merrilee Posner, Georgianne Knight, Sue Cantlin and Cathy and William Kerr.

Public Comment Rcvd 01-13-20 PC 01-13-20 (Phil Richardson, Karen Coomes, Leslie and John Borasi, Phil Caserta, Rebeca Gagetta, Annette Lee, Melissa Swart-Weikel, Richard Slepian, Cory Smart, Steve Lucia, Briana Finley-Link, Emille Smart, Brigit Barnes, Joe and Annette Chinn, Mary Levernier, Ivy Hendy, Hilary Krogh, Amber Forte, Dan Forte, Don Sacco, Cathy Devito, David Kane, Linda Youngs, Casey O’Looney, Nora Koltoff, Betty January, John Burns, Shirley and Walter Sikes, Hugh and Lisa Baca, Judi Oswald, Laura Patane, Charles “Buzz” Nunn, Georgianne Knight and Melinda Peak)

Public Comment Rcvd 01-11-20 to 01-12-20 PC 01-13-20 (Neely Lawton, Rachel Wade, Garth Hoffmann and Andy Schildt)

Public Comment Rcvd 01-10-20 PC 01-13-20 (Jason Reidenbach, Rob and Lisa Burns, Paula Autry, John Davey, Mitchell Peter, Debbie LaBotz and Rusty Everett)

Public Comment Rcvd 01-07-20 PC 01-13-20 (Bryan and Melissa Peebler, Bill Moore, Lawrence Ellsworth, Nathan Miller, Georgianne Knight, Robert Sacco, Jim Lawler, Benjamin Glickman, Flora (no last name), Janet Schultz, Chris and Nancy Engdall, Rob Vomund, Bonnie Bastian, Richard and Roma Turoff and Peggy Zappan)

Public Comment Rcvd 01-07-20 to 01-09-20 PC 01-13-20 (Peggy Zappen, Wanda Hall, Merrilee Posner, Howard Mahoney, Lisa Skube, Rachelle Carson, John Davey, recommends non support of the project, John Richard, Peter Eakland)

Public Comment Rcvd 01-06-20 PC 01-13-20 (Merrilee Posner, John and Chris Modin, Mark Denholm, Leslie Ellwood, Iverne and Jeff Hendy, Briana Finley-Link, Patrick and Debra Lanius)

Public Comment Rcvd 01-02-20 PC 01-13-20 (Gail Kopp and David Daniel) 

Public Comment Rcvd 12-31-19 PC 01-13-20 (Suzane Paullin, Jennie Baggaley)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-23-19 PC 01-13-20 (Donn Neher, Zach Presnal) 

Public Comment Rcvd 12-27-19 PC 01-13-20 (Brett Jakovac)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-12-19 to 12-20-19 PC 01-13-20 John Richard, Gordon Allred, Cathy Devito, Wendy Jones, Kevin Ratliff, Dianne Gross)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-11-19 to 12-12-19 PC 12-12-19 (Miscellaneous public comments – 49 pages)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-11-19 PC 12-12-19 (Review of Critical Traffic Issues in Latest Traffic Analyses for Proposed Revision to Central – 9 pages)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-09-19 PC 12-12-19 (Laura Patane, Carole Braverman, Sharon Nunes, Bill Osgood)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-06-19 PC 12-12-19 (Ray Cavanagh, Shirley and Walter Sikes and Diane Gross)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-05-19 PC 12-12-19 (Rakesh Sethi and Albert & Paula Autry) 

Public Comment Rcvd 12-04-19 PC 12-12-19 (Sheryl Sage)

Public Comment Rcvd 12-03-19 PC 12-12-19 (Dr. Gene Gowdey, Member, Board of Directors Elms, Oaks, and Willows Homeowner’s Association — Promontory Village 8. ) 

Public Comment Rcvd 11-27-19 to 12-02-19 PC 12-12-19 (Kerry Marini, Natalie Marini , Karen Brown, John Bowles, Sherrie Bunk-Petersen and John Moreno) 

Public Comment Rcvd 11-20-19 PC 12-12-19 (Kenny Croyle)

Public Comment Rcvd 11-18-19 PC 12-12-19 (Dean Getz regarding CEDHSP’s Proposed Sidestepping of Serrano’s CC&Rs )

Public Comment Rcvd 11-14-19 PC 11-14-19 (Richard Ross and Kevin A. Loewen)

Public Comment Rcvd 11-12-19 PC 11-14-19 Albert and Paula Autry  and John Burns) 

Public Comment Rcvd 11-07-19 PC 11-14-19 (Lisa Plummer, Renee Gilpen, Drew Gilpen, Sara Adams, and Eric & Becky Brandon) 

Public Comment Rcvd 11-06-19 PC 11-14-19 (Angela Martin and Neal Takahashi)

Public Comment Rcvd 11-05-19 PC 11-14-19 (Cam Squires)

Public Comment Rcvd 11-04-19 PC 11-14-19 (Susan Hansen)

Public Comment Rcvd 10-30-19 PC 11-14-19 (Nathan and Julia Roos, and Stephen Miller)

Email Petitions – caution, large downloads. The text is repetitive, most notable is the volume of residents signing the petition.

Email Petitions 01-12-20 to 01-22-20 PC 02-13-20, 214 petitions 

Email Petitions 01-06-20 to 01-11-20 PC 01-13-20, 263 petitions 

Email Petitions 01-02-20 to 01-05-20 PC 01-13-20, 81 petitions 

Email Petitions 12-22-19 to 01-01-20 PC 01-13-20, 513 petitions

Email Petitions 12-15-19 to 12-22-19 PC 01-13-20, 133 petitions 

Email Petitions 12-08-19 to 12-15-19 PC 01-13-20, 35 petitions 

Email Petitions 12-01-19 to 12-08-19 PC 12-12-19, 83 petitions 

Email Petitions 11-24-19 to 12-01-19 PC 12-12-19, 48 petitions 

Email Petitions 11-17-19 to 11-24-19 PC 12-12-19, 347 petitions F

County Website, Made Easier To Navigate and Read

If you go to the county website for this project, you will see gobbledgook.  Not sure why it is not user friendly, perhaps to discourage people from using it?


Here is a list of the attachments from the website.  (Note: when you click on a link the file will be downloaded onto your computer where you can open it for viewing)

1. 2A – Attachment 5(1)-Draft EIR-Appendices A-L PC 12-12-19 (638 pages a quick scan shows most of this documentation is out of date and goes as far back as 2007)

2. 2B – Attachment 5(3)-Final EIR Appendix L-Attachment PC 12-12-19  (May 16, 2017 Traffic Study, 209 pages)

3. 2C – Staff Memo 12-09-19 (Information on Commission Requested Discussion Topics) PC 12-12-19, (12/9/2019, 14 Pages)

Why are the Pedregal Planning Area and Serrano Westside Planning Area not being
processed as separate projects?
• County inventory of multi-family land area, current regional housing needs allocation for
the County, report back on County staff and applicant discussions on the inclusion of
affordable housing in the project.
• Traffic impact analysis overview, including the impacts of the Country Club Drive and
turning movement level of service (LOS) at intersections.
• Overview of the Development Agreement (DA) and input on whether the DA
commitments apply to subsequent developers and consideration of adjustments to the
Community Benefit Fee and dwelling unit triggers for Country Club Drive extension
• Report back on meeting between County staff and El Dorado Hills Community Services
District (EDHCSD) on increases in parkland dedication in the Serrano Westside Planning
Area.
• Overview of recommended Statement of Overriding Considerations 

4. 2D – Staff Memo 12-09-19 (Technical Analysis-Final EIR Appendix L) PC 12-12-19

5. 2E – Staff Memo Attachment-Transportation Impact Analysis-Oct 2015 PC 12-12-19 NOTE: This is out of date, 2015

6. 2F – Staff Memo Attachment-Appendix A-Existing Conditions Technical Calculations PC 12-12-19 (Existing Conditions Technical Calculations All Traffic Data, Out of Date March 2015)

7. 2G – Staff Memo Attachment-Appendix A-Cumulative Technical Calculations PC 12-12-19, (APPENDIX A: Cumulative Technical Calculations (Updated October 2015) Traffic Data – 93 Pages)

8. 2H – Staff’s Powerpoint Presentation PC 12-12-19,

9. 2I – Applicant’s Powerpoint Presentation PC 12-12-19,

10. Public Comment Rcvd 12-11-19 to 12-12-19 PC 12-12-19  (Miscellaneous public comments – 49 pages)

11. Public Comment Rcvd 12-11-19 PC 12-12-19 (Review of Critical Traffic Issues in Latest Traffic Analyses for Proposed Revision to Central – 9 pages)

12. Public Comment Rcvd 12-09-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment Laura Patane, Carole Braverman, Sharon Nunes, Bill Osgood)

13. Email Petitions 12-01-19 to 12-08-19 PC 12-12-19, (83 pages of Email Petitions)

14. Public Comment Rcvd 12-06-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment from Ray Cavanagh, Shirley and Walter Sikes and Diane Gross)

15. Public Comment Rcvd 12-05-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment from Rakesh Sethi and Albert & Paula Autry)

16. Public Comment Rcvd 12-04-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment from Sheryl Sage)

17. Public Comment Rcvd 12-03-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment from Dr. Gene Gowdey, Member, Board of Directors Elms, Oaks, and Willows Homeowner’s Association — Promontory Village 8. )

18. Public Comment Rcvd 11-27-19 to 12-02-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment from Kerry Marini, Natalie Marini , Karen Brown, John Bowles, Sherrie Bunk-Petersen and John Moreno)

19. Email Petitions 11-24-19 to 12-01-19 PC 12-12-19, (48 pages of Email Petitions)

20. Public Comment Rcvd 11-20-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment from Kenny Croyle)

21. Public Comment Rcvd 11-18-19 PC 12-12-19, (Public comment from Dean Getz regarding CEDHSP’s Proposed Sidestepping of Serrano’s CC&Rs )

22. Email Petitions 11-17-19 to 11-24-19 PC 12-12-19, (347 pages of Email Petitions)

23. A – Staff Report PC 11-14-19, (RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the staff report, receive public comment, recommend certification of the Central El Dorado Hills Specific Plan Final EIR, and direct staff on recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding the CEDHSP. )

24. B – Attachment 1-Central El Dorado Hills Specific Plan PC 11-14-19, (398 pages)

25. C – Attachment 2-Proposed Edts to Specific Plan PC 11-14-19, (ATTACHMENT 2 PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE TEXT OF THE CENTRAL EL DORADO HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN (CEDHSP) – 43 pages)

26. D – Attachment 3-Draft Public Facilities Financing Plan PC 11-14-19, (dated April 2017 – 77 pages)

27. E – Attachment 4-Draft Development Agreement PC 11-14-19, (COMMUNITY BENEFIT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT – 24 Pages)

28. F – Attachment 5(1)-Draft Environmental Impact Report PC 11-14-19,

29. G – Attachment 5(2)-Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report PC 11-14-19,

30. H – Attachment 5(3)-Final Environmental Impact Report PC 11-14-19,

31. I – Attachment 6-General Plan Consistency Analysis PC 11-14-19,

32. J – Attachment 7-Fiscal Impact Analysis PC 11-14-19,

33. K – Attachment 8-CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations PC 11-14-19,

34. L – Attachment 9-Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program PC 11-14-19,

35. M – Staff Report Exhibits A-K PC 11-14-19,

36. N – Notification Map PC 11-14-19,

37. O – Notification Map-Sacramento County Detail PC 11-14-19,

38. P – Proof of Publication-Mountain Democrat PC 11-14-19,

39. Q – PowerPoint Presentation PC 11-14-19,

40. R – Applicant’s PowerPoint Presentation PC 11-14-19,

41. Public Comment Rcvd 11-14-19 PC 11-14-19, (Comments from Richard Ross and Kevin A. Loewen)

42. Public Comment Rcvd 11-12-19 PC 11-14-19, (Comments from Albert and Paula Autry  and John Burns)

43. Public Comment Rcvd 11-07-19 PC 11-14-19, (Comments from Lisa Plummer, Renee Gilpen, Drew Gilpen, Sara Adams, and Eric & Becky Brandon)

44. Public Comment Rcvd 11-06-19 PC 11-14-19, (Comments from Angela Martin and Neal Takahashi)

45. Public Comment Rcvd 11-05-19 PC 11-14-19, (Comment from Cam Squires)

46. Public Comment Rcvd 11-04-19 PC 11-14-19, (Comment from Susan Hansen)

47. Public Comment Rcvd 10-30-19 PC 11-14-19 (Comments from Nathan and Julia Roos, and Stephen Miller)