Developer appealing Planning Commission decision

"You know, I travel a lot, and I really enjoy visiting the towns and cities that have preserved and cultivated their cultural history."

What would that look like for Sonoma?

I'm told by someone in the Sonoma City Planning Department that the developer has hired an attorney and will be appealing the Planning Commission's refusal to "certify" the EIR.

I haven't been told by people in the city, yet, when it will be on the City Council's agenda but someone else said September 1.

Now what?

It has been demonstrated that there is no organization that is going to step up and say "We don't like this plan and we want something else like ____." It's a small town, tomorrow you're going to need the person you piss off today.

All of this hot air about the EIR is perhaps... delay tactics. We're going to get up and do this all over again when the developer applies for a Use Permit (after the EIR is certified.)

- What is it that the community doesn’t like?
- Any development on that lot?
- Or that particular plan using simplified architectural elements and repetition?
- Apartments in the heart of the historic area?
- What does the community want?

- Is the community still infuriated with the Mixed Use zone “Mission Cubed” plan?
- They don’t like or trust the family?
- They have a tremendous love of the historic significance of Sonoma and THAT area in particular?

What do we WANT to see in that lot - that's what we should be talking about.

Is it still a viable option for the city to trade this lot for one of their city-owned lots? I'll ask.

EIR was not "certified" - what next?

The Planning Commission in a 4-3 vote did not "certify" the Environmental Impact Report as "complete." This in effect delays this project. They could have "certified" the EIR and that would have given the developer a green light.

I think what happened last night was a good thing although I always try to think through the unintended consequences.

The developer will have to address the Cultural Resource and other issues raised last night in the next EIR and go through this Planning Commission meeting process all over again. OR appeal this decision before the City Council...

Even if the EIR is certified it will have to go to the Planning Commission AGAIN to get a Use Permit (is this the best use of this lot.)

Honestly, while I am against this project I have greater empathy for developers. The big surprise was one Commissioner completely changed his position 180 degrees from the last time this was before the Planning Commission a month ago and was very upfront about his disapproval of the project. I wonder what happened???

If you want to see last night's meeting (and the packed audience) it's on Ch. 27 at 10am today, Wednesday, and it's possible to order a DVD of the meeting from Ch. 27.

Thank you to everyone who spoke in favor of maintaining the character of this historic area!

Please write to the Commissioners and thank them for their vote!

- Gary Edwards - "voted NOT to certify EIR is complete" "this is a jewel of a property; tourists identify with the historic nature of Sonoma"

- Robert Felder - "voted NOT to certify EIR is complete", concerned about the integrity of the setting, the lack of water supply, vibration of construction on the Blue Wing"

- Michael George - "voted NOT to certify EIR is complete", concerned about the historic nature of Spain Street, had concerns about dropping apartment into the heart of Sonoma, "What's the give back? Nothing." The audience responded to his comment "The Pinelli Bungalow has been neglected for years and is urban blight, what? give the owners an even larger project NOT to maintain??"

- Matt Howarth, Chair - "voted NOT to certify EIR is complete"

- Mark Heneveld - voted to Certify, believes the EIR is complete

- Alternate, Matthew Tippell - voted to Certify, believes the EIR is complete

- Raymund Gallian - voted to Certify, believes the EIR is complete, liked the previous project with its high density, the goal was to make that area more economically vibrant

- Chip Roberson (removed from the dais because he missed last month's meeting)