SEBASTOPOL
By Paul Payne
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Sebastopol 's controversial Laguna Vista housing project returned to the public eye Tuesday after two years of revision, environmental studies and attempts to scuttle it with a lawsuit and endangered flowers.
As in the past, opposition to the 145-unit subdivision near sensitive wetlands dominated its debut before the city's Planning Commission.
Critics argued the project remains too big, and would generate too much traffic, deplete ground water and threaten plants and wildlife in the Laguna de Santa Rosa .
"Why was avoidance of wetlands not even examined?" asked Holly Downing of the Laguna Preservation Council, whose members sued the city over Laguna Vista. "Seasonal wetlands and vernal pools are valuable resources that need to be protected, not filled."
And as before, Santa Rosa developer Schellinger Bros. made a plea for approval, arguing Sebastopol desperately needs the 30 affordable housing units and other amenities the project offers.
Schellinger's attorney, Cecily Talbert, said state law requires the city to support the developer's application unless it finds a surplus of housing or zoning inconsistencies, two things that are not present.
"It is a project that needs to be approved after many years of delays and redesign," Talbert said.
Because of widespread interest, a follow-up hearing is set for Nov. 8. The commission's recommendation will be passed to the City Council, which is to consider it Dec. 6.
Tuesday night's meeting at the Masonic Center was at least the second time the 21-acre subdivision near the intersection of Gravenstein Highway and Fircrest Avenue was before the commission.
In 2002, the seven-member panel endorsed it with some revisions, saying it would create much-needed housing and open space on the eastern edge of Sebastopol .
However, in June 2003, the council asked for more information about traffic, runoff, threats to endangered species and other potential negative impacts. The council requested a separate analysis of the visual impact of the apartments and mixed-use commercial buildings and called for a revision to environmental studies.
Laguna Vista was further delayed by a lawsuit that alleged the city violated its own ordinance while handling the application. The suit was dropped earlier this month.
And last spring, controversy swirled with the discovery of a dozen endangered Sebastopol meadowfoam flowers on the site.
Although the state Department of Fish and Game ruled they had been illegally planted, city officials recommended a vernal pool be preserved.
At its next meeting, the City Council will decide whether to ask Fish and Game for proof of its finding in the meadowfoam matter.
Meanwhile, Kenyon Webster, the city's planning director, recommended the commission approve the project with changes.
He called for larger buffers between the subdivision and neighbors and asked the developer to alter traffic circulation and lower roof heights.
Webster also asked the developer to return to an earlier design for a commercial building and to remove a live-work structure.
The changes, he said, would not require additional studies.
But his voice was countered by dozens of critics, who urged the commission to reject Laguna Vista. Many said it would change the character of the town of about 7,700 people, which is known for environment-friendly politics.
"Let us protect what we are so fortunate to have," said Adriane Hatkoff, who lives near the Laguna Vista site. "As Sitting Bull said, let us put our heads together and see what kind of world we can make for our children."
Others agreed.
"The Laguna Vista project is too large, in the wrong place and not wanted by next-door neighbors at the Fircrest Mobile Home Park," said Dorothy Anderson, who had a petition with 50 signatures.
Others said the development would drain the city's ground water.
"How will we be compensated when our wells go dry?" asked Nan Waters.
Still others worried about traffic. The subdivision is expected to generate 1,000 more car trips in the area a day.
"The street is already dangerous," said Paul Silver, who lives near the intersection of Gravenstein Highway and Fircrest Avenue . "If you allow more traffic, you'll increase the danger."
Paula Pierce worried approval would lead to more development in the area.
"If we approve the housing project ... isn't it setting a precedent for other development and malls?" she asked. "That's what I'm scared of: a domino effect."
http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051026/NEWS/510260326/1033/NEWS01
© The Press Democrat. For copyright information view our User Agreement