'Developers asking to build more homes'
Copyright News-Ledger, Aug. 15, 2007
West Sacramento's city council mulls the problem of how to evaluate the pluses and minuses of requests for higher density development in south area
By Steve Marschke
News-Ledger Editor
West Sacramento’s city council last week struggled with the notion of how to prioritize and evaluate several different Southport development proposals which each hope to build more homes than anticipated by city guidelines.
The decisions are being pushed by three “live” development applications for the city’s 7,000-acre southern area (one is actually beyond the southern city limits), and by smoke on the horizon from several more potential development projects.
The “live” projects, whose proponents have filed applications, are:
n “Vina del Lago” (formerly “Live Oak”), proposed by Live Oak Associates for over 500 acres just south of current city limits. The development envisions 2,200 homes, and has asked West Sacramento to consider annexing the county land into the city and granting development approvals.
Vina del Lago proponents are also working with city officials to come up with a plan they feel might benefit both parties: the developer proposes extending and improving the current southern city levee around its land, with some kind of cost sharing for the resulting flood safety benefit to city residents.
n“Yarbrough,” proposed by David Stroud and ASB Properties, is asking for permission to build about 3,000 houses along with a golf course and other amenities in the southwest part of Southport.
n“River Park,” from Richland Planned Communities, proposes about 2,800 homes and other amenities along the city’s southeastern riverfont.
The city’s current “Southport Framework Plan” foresees a “buildout” level of about 16,000 homes in Southport. These three projects would push the number to over 20,000.
Meanwhile, city planners have reason to believe another Southport riverfront project, “Harbor Point,” may soon begin rolling along in its planning once again. And they have started working with a “master developer” partner, the Cordish Company of Baltimore, to develop 200 city-owned acres along the barge canal dividing Southport from the rest of West Sacramento.
City staff asked the council last week how the council wanted to approach the various proposals.
“We’re asking them first the order in which they want to view the projects – ‘first come, first serve’, or starting with the two (“live” projects) inside city limits first. Or should we wait for all three,” City Planner Steve Rikala told the News-Ledger.
He added that the council is also being asked for guidance on the criteria for evaluating the proposals and their requests to build higher densities. Some of the issues include the impacts of the new homes on local traffic (already a major concern for many Southport residents) and the ability of new homes to help generate money to pay for roads and for levee improvements that benefit everyone.
“One thing the council told us was ‘show us how it looks on the ground, show us how the projects are going to look’,” said Rikala.
Some residents, like Irene Eklund and Pat Flint of the “Save Our City” group, have asked the city several times not to study the proposals “piecemeal.” They’ve asked for the city to study all the requested extra homes at one time, and only after that evaluation, to come to a decision on each individual development request.
Mayor Christopher Cabaldon told the News-Ledger he used to feel the same way.
“My original perspective was that we ought to look at all the projects together,” said Cabaldon. “I realize that was a bit naïve.”
Since last year when he opined in favor of looking at all the proposals together, those proposals have already changed, added Cabaldon.
“There has been a complete re-doing of the University Park project (now Vina del Lago); the withdrawal of the KB project (Harbor Point) and its possible resubmittal; the rezoning of Summit’s property (near the barge canal); and now the Stone Lock District. This is going to continue to be a very dynamic environment. There’s not going to be a moment when you have a static list of projects.”
Cabaldon added that the main goals of the Southport Framework Plan, adopted in the early 1990s, remain true: “We still want a comfortable suburban environment that respects the rural habitat and environment. . . and the ‘village’ approach to achieve that is still the fundamental way to approach it.”
The council is slated to continue discussion of the growth issue at its September 12 meeting.