122,464 / 31.0% Yes votes ...... 272,298 / 69.0% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Any amendment to or repeal of the provisions of this initiative, except as to requests by an owner of real property in the development would require voter approval.

This age-restricted residential community of between 2,700 and 3,000 dwelling units would be built on 2000 acres located adjacent to Rancho Murieta. A Senior Community would not be an Urban Growth Area, New Growth Area, or New Development Area, and development would be controlled by its own specific policies and standards as provided in the amended provisions of the General Plan and Zoning Code, as well as those specified by the ordinance.

A variety of uses would be allowed. Residential area density would range from 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre and include attached and detached residences. Between 10 and 20 acres would be designated for retail, commercial and other similar non-residential land uses. Medical and other health care facilities would occupy another 15 to 25 acres. Not less than 50% of the land would be non-contiguous open space, improved and unimproved, and include one or more golf courses.

Water supply, wastewater, and sewer systems are not to result in any additional cost to existing county taxpayers. These systems may be owned and operated by an existing or newly formed Community Service District or other entity independent of the County, and need not annex to the Rancho Murieta Community Services District or the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District.

Infrastructure facilities, such as pumps, pipelines, water and wastewater storage and treatment facilities could be located off-site on property commonly known as the Lopes Property, which is generally located east of the Cosumnes River, north of Folsom South Canal and west of Dillard Road.

The development plan calls for construction of a new two-lane rural road between the Deer Creek Hills Senior Community and White Rock Road, to be open to traffic prior to occupancy of more than 100 residential dwelling units.

The Public Facilities Element of the General Plan relating to location, construction and financing schools would not be applicable to a Senior Community.

Design of a Senior Community development would require seeking reductions in vehicular emissions by providing some services within the community, providing a privately financedinternal and external shuttle transit system, and a golf cart/low-speed vehicle path system.

Measure 0 would expire January 1, 2030. Prior to that date, amendment or repeal, except as requested by real property owners in the development, would require voter approval.

A Senior Community would not be an Urban Growth Area, New Growth Area, or New Development Area, and therefore will be exempt from certain General Plan provisions otherwise applied which address water quality protection and conservation plans, sewer and other infrastructure, traffic and transportation issues, and regional impacts on public services and resources.. Instead, development of a Senior Community would be controlled by the policies and standards enunciated in Measure 0. The Urban Services Boundary would be expanded to include the Deer Creek Hills development, and some General Plan considerations generally applicable at the rezone stage would be deferred for this project to the time of tentative map approval.

The Senior Community land use designation permits an age-restricted residential area providing a variety of uses, including detached and attached residences up to 3,000 units, with density ranging from 5 to 20 dwelling units per acre, recreational facilities, community center, medical, congregate care and skilled nursing facilities, restaurants, shopping and offices. Not less than 50% of the land must be noncontiguous open space, improved and unimproved, and include one or more golf courses.

The Public Facilities Element of the General Plan concerning location, construction and financing of schools would not apply. The Conservation Element involving water resources would be qualified relating to intended surface water sources.

A Senior Community would be obliged to construct water, wastewater, and other infrastructure systems without additional cost to existing County taxpayers. There is no similar obligation for ongoing costs for maintenance and assignment of those costs is uncertain. These systems could be located outside the Senior Community Land Use designation, the Urban Policy Area and the Urban Services Boundary, and autonomous or County serviced. A stand-alone, independent sewer system would be allowed. An infrastructure financing plan would be required, specifying the extent, timing and estimated cost of all necessary infrastructure. A system for wastewater recycling for irrigation of landscaped and open areas is compulsory.

Development design would require seeking reductions in vehicular emissions by providing some community services, a privately financed internal and external shuttle transit system, and a golf cart/low-speed vehicle path system. The Deer Creek Hills Senior Community must design a new two-lane rural road running to White Rock Road.

Impact on oak woodlands must be mitigated with onsite replacement plantings designed to result in no net loss of canopy. The added requirement for preservation of the main, central portions of consolidated and isolated groves would become alternative.

Contact FOR Measure O:

Deer Creek Hills
3286 Fitzgerald
Rancho Cordova CA 95742
916-635-9370
916-635-2734 (fax)
http://www.deercreekhills.com

Contact AGAINST Measure O:

Taxpayers Against Senior Housing HOAX
564 La Sierra Drive, PMB 100
Sacramento, CA 95864
916-419-4629
916-354-1289 (fax)
http://www.votenomeasureo.org

Sacramento Bee

• Measure O foes launch TV effort - November 3, 2000
• Spending record on rezoning initiative: Measure O foes seek free ads to offset Myers' media barrage - October 28, 2000
• Two views on Measure O - October 26, 2000
• Builder rises to challenge: Myers pushes rezone initiative - October 23, 2000
• Measure O backer paid to promote it: Foe calls arrangement 'inappropriate' - October 10, 2000
• Builder's motives at center stage -- Measure O: Sound senior housing plan or ruse for growth? - October 8, 2000
• Air board: Reject project -- Agency fears tract would add to smog - September 29, 2000
• Proposed housing has air agency up in arms - September 28, 2000
• Proposed housing to worsen dirty air? Report: Smog high now at Deer Creek Hills site - September 8, 2000

• Deer Creek initiative pits urban limit vs. senior housing - November 3, 2000
• Vote could lead to $27M gain or $4M loss - November 3, 2000
• Air Pollution regulators oppose Deer Creek Initiative - September 4, 2000