From the archives of

::: COMMUNITY NEWS

Reynen & Bardis environmental manager Kellie Berry presented the alternative map for the Riverview subdivision at the CCPAC meeting. The 28 custom lots on the map are colored orange and the production home lots are yellow. Riverview Park appears on the lower left.

Community planning group rejects proposal for homes next to RM Airport

• Pop-up window: Click for a four-year archive of development coverage -- news, maps, photos and more

Rewritten Sunday, June 26, 2005
First published Saturday, June 25, 2005

About 30 Murietans were present Wednesday evening when the Cosumnes Community Planning Advisory Council turned thumbs down on a proposed housing development next to the airport and postponed acting on a second development project until next month.

Residents of Murieta Village joined pilots and members of the Rancho Murieta Development Concerned Citizens Committee in objecting to a plan to build 208 single-family homes next to the airport and across from the Village. The plan for the 53-acre commercial site also includes a shopping center anchored by a Bel Air supermarket, office space, a self-storage facility and a church.

Representatives for the Murieta Gardens project said the housing component calls for homes ranging in size from 1,000 to 2,017 square feet on 50-by-50-foot lots, resulting in a density of 9.4 units per acre. The houses would be 44 feet wide and spaced six feet apart. Fifteen percent would be 800 square feet in size and meet the requirements of the county’s affordable housing ordinance. The other homes would be sold at market rate, which was estimated, in present values, at the mid-$200,000s to $300,000.

Audience members criticized the density of the project, the lack of recreational amenities, shortage of parking, and the encroachment on the airport.

The four CCPAC members present voted to recommend disapproval of the project to the county Planning Department because of the housing component. As a citizens’ advisory group, CCPAC’s views are recommendations to county officials, not final decisions.

Rancho Murieta resident and pilot Wally Boeck referred to the proposed housing development as “a slum.” He was applauded when he concluded his comments by saying, “There is no way in hell you put houses next to an airport and expect the airport to continue.”

Boeck maintained he knows of a corporation that wants to occupy 30,000 square feet of the site.

Douglas Wiele, president of Foothill Partners, the lead developer for the project, explained that the housing element was added because the 600,000 feet of commercial space outstripped demand for commercial use in the area. He said the county’s adoption of the urban services boundary in the early 1990s limited development that would have supported the originally planned commercial use. Housing is an allowed use under the commercial zoning designation for the site, he said.

County Senior Planner Michael Winter, the CCPAC advisor who was present, verified that housing was allowed under a use permit.

Wiele said a Cameron Park-style development of homes built with hangars and connected to the airport had been evaluated and wasn’t considered feasible.

Wiele recently acknowledged that he is part of an investor group that has entered into escrow for the purchase of the airport. He said the group is not connected to the Murieta Gardens project, but some in the audience said they viewed the offer as part of an effort to shut down the airport. “We have agreed to keep the airport open for some period of time,” Wiele responded.

CCPAC Chairman Jay Schneider said the four members represented a quorum under the rules of the eight-member council.

In his comments before the vote, Schneider said there was “no question in my mind” that the proposed housing would lead to the closure of the airport. He also agreed with others who said the commercial designation for the site that appears on the planning maps led to the expectation that there would be commercial development only. He noted wryly that supporting the land use designation was a departure for the RMDCCC, which has questioned the validity of land use designations indicating the level of development planned for properties on the North.

Schneider said he was convinced the Murieta Gardens project was “a very, very wrong thing” because no one came out to support it. If it were retirement housing or a Cameron Park-type proposal, it would have supporters, he said.

When the project was first introduced to the community, in December 2002, there was some support. Wiele presented the plan at a meeting held at the Rancho Murieta Association Building. The meeting was videotaped and broadcast on Channel 5.

Members of the Rancho Murieta Community Church were a sizable portion of that meeting’s audience and applauded when a church official thanked the developer for providing a site for the church in the plans. Others in the audience wanted to know how soon the supermarket and drug center would open.

When contacted later about the CCPAC meeting, a member of the church staff was unaware the matter had come before the council and said there was a church activity scheduled Wednesday evening. The church, which currently has space in the same building as the fire station, is raising funds for the new church.

Earlier in Wednesday’s CCPAC meeting, the council voted to continue discussion of an alternative plan for the Riverview subdivision in Murieta South until next month after RMDCCC member Ted Hart raised questions about grading, lot sizes and the number of trees that will be removed. Much of this information was not provided in the packet that was sent out for comment.

When the alternative map was discussed at the June RMA board meeting, there were no representatives from Reynen & Bardis present. The RMA board asked for larger maps and more information in its comments to the county on the alternative map.

In response to a question from a CCPAC member, Reynen & Bardis environmental manager Kellie Berry said the developer has not presented the project to the community.

When he learned from Reynen & Bardis representatives at the CCPAC meeting that the production lots remain 55 by 105 feet in the alternative map, Hart said the narrow size was “totally unacceptable.” He said the developer showed a tendency to “compress” lots on the South, resulting in a mere five feet of separation between homes in the Greens subdivision now under construction, a first for Rancho Murieta, he said.

The 28 custom home lots on the alternative map range from 70 by 120 feet to three-quarters of an acre, according to the developer. (At the RMA meeting, it was said there were 29 custom lots.)

Hart said the production lot size on the alternative map “was not what we were told (Reynen & Bardis) would go to” during private talks between RMDCCC and the developer.

“There is no way we are endorsing that map,” said RMDCCC member Candy Chand.

The new map is not intended to replace the original map, which was approved in 1993. The alternative map adds 2.5 acres of open space, reduces the number of lots from 154 to 144, and preserves additional trees and wetlands areas.

CCPAC member Edward Rutkoski said Hart and the developer “should sit down again” to work out a compromise on the lot sizes and other issues.

The crowd seemed amused when Rutkoski remarked that he doesn’t like Rancho Murieta, but “I’m here to represent you.” Rutkoski later said his comment was facetious and referred to a standing joke among council members about his aversion to homeowner rules, especially ones that prohibit driveway parking.

Since resident John Kershaw resigned from CCPAC in April, there is no representative from the Rancho Murieta development on the council. Schneider is a neighboring rancher.

CCPAC members joined Rutkoski in recommending a compromise. Hart said that was his goal in meeting with the developer initially, but the effort “went off track.”

Rutkoski proposed the motion to continue the issue to the July meeting. The motion also directed the developer to provide more information and to discuss the map further with community representatives before returning to CCPAC.