From the archives of

::: COMMUNITY NEWS

Developers, community organizations at odds over idea to eliminate four-acre park
Also: Plan for Clementia bathrooms; river crossing on schedule

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

Published Saturday, March 12, 2005

The Rancho Murieta Association is discovering that eliminating a park site from a development plan is easier said than done.

The Parks Committee voted last month to keep a four-acre park when the Community Services District representative and the two development representatives on the five-member committee overruled the two RMA representatives. The RMA board is seeking a legal opinion about the Parks Agreement in relation to the matter and will discuss the matter at next week’s board meeting.

The vote was already discussed at a special session of the RMA board last month where some directors criticized the CSD vote. Director Dick Cox reiterated his view that the CSD shouldn’t even be on the Parks Committee because it doesn’t contribute to the parks fund. The CSD led the effort that resulted in the Parks Agreement and the parks system. It is one of the signers of the agreement.

In addition to the consent of the RMA board and the Parks Committee, eliminating a park site requires the approval of the County Board of Supervisors and, preferably, the re-allotment of the open space acreage elsewhere in the community, then-RMA General Manager Greg Vorster told the Parks Committee.

The idea of eliminating the park originated with the Rancho Murieta Development Concerned Citizens Committee, according to Brett Hogge, land development manager for River West Investments, the firm that’s creating the map for the subdivision. The RMDCCC opposes current plans for development and considers the preservation of open space one of its major goals.

CSD General Manager Ed Crouse noted “the most recent community dialogue was to save open space.” He said the CSD board would need “more input and more dialogue” before revisiting the vote. Although eliminating a park to create larger lots sets a precedent, one he characterized as “a slippery slope,” Crouse didn’t rule out the possibility that the CSD board would consider another vote on the matter if the RMA made the request.

RMA officials contacted both Crouse and CSD President John Merchant about the vote after the Parks Committee meeting. Neither was present at the meeting.

CSD Director Dick Taylor, the district’s representative on the committee, said, “I voted as I did in all good conscience … I didn’t feel that there was any need to change the designation. … There has always been a park there. … I may be naive, but I really don’t understand the issue (the RMA) is making out of it.” He said he thought he would vote the same way if the issue came up again on the Parks Committee “and I expect it will.”

The park site is part of 14 acres on Escuela Drive that was designated for decades as a school site. When the school district decided to build its school elsewhere, River West Investments submitted plans to develop 64 single-family homes on the entire 14 acres. The RMA board opposed the plan in a letter to the county.

At the end of 2003, River West donated the property to a nonprofit charitable foundation as a tax write-off, but River West continues to guide the project through the county approval process. The firm will also market the property once the map is approved.

River West’s plans changed dramatically once the property was donated.

Last December, the RMA board was presented with a new conceptual plan that reduced the number of houses from 64 to 39, replaced tract houses with custom ones, and reinstated the four-acre park site. Under the new plan, the project would annex to the RMA and abide by its CC&Rs, pave Escuela out to Stonehouse Road and make a $25,000 contribution for a gate at Stonehouse.

In explaining the about-face, Hogge told the board in January, "We're not looking at it so much as a developer anymore. … Our obligation is to get map approval." The goal is to make the project "as palatable as possible" to the RMA to expedite the county approval process, he said.

At that time, the RMA directors said they wanted to see quarter-acre lots compatible with the surrounding homes. After Hogge said that wasn’t possible without a significant reduction in the number of homes, the directors, with the exception of Director Pamela Haines, decided the park acreage could become part of the privately owned lots. Haines suggested building the homes on 50-by 50-foot cottage lots that would be surrounded by common area so the homeowners would have the feel of a large yard without a large lot.

At the Parks meeting, the two developer representatives, Robert J. Cassano of Murieta Holdings, who represents the Pension Trust Fund of the Operating Engineers, and Bruce Palmbaum of Corinthian Homes, who represents South developer Reynen & Bardis, expressed surprise at the RMA’s position regarding the park, because of the concern the community’s expressed about the amount of available park land and open space.

“If you’re just modifying your (parks) matrix, that’s one thing,” Cassano said. “But if you’re taking land that’s designated for a park use and allocating it to residential, that’s a whole other issue.” Cassano said he believed all parties to the Parks Agreement had to agree to this kind of change.
Cassano called eliminating the park “misguided” and Palmbaum remarked, “It sounds like political suicide to give up a park.”

Vorster suggested that other landowners could provide four acres of open space elsewhere to make up for the loss of the park. “It seems like an unlikely scenario,” Cassano responded.

Cassano pointed out that the community has required the Residences of Murieta Hills, his proposed development across the road from the River West project, to have an open-space buffer between the existing homes and the new homes, even though the Murieta Hills lots “are bigger than the existing lots or the lots proposed for the 39.”

Hogge said it wasn’t his idea to do away with the park. “The idea for getting rid of that park came from two members of the RMDCCC who called me and suggested, ‘Why don’t you get rid of the park so you can have bigger homes?’ I also got a letter from Candy (Chand) saying the same thing,” Hogge said.

When asked to comment, Chand, who was not at the Parks meeting, said the letter she sent Hogge was the same one that appears on RanchoMurieta.com, and RMDCCC members Terry Hanson and Tom Brierton were representing themselves, not the RMDCCC, when they shared their ideas with Hogge.

Nevertheless, Chand supports getting rid of the park, which she characterized as “poor planning.” She said, “You build on the ugly stuff and you try to preserve some of the good stuff. … This is flat, treeless, ugly property.” She termed the developers’ opposition to the proposal “sabotage” against the RMA and the RMDCCC. The plan to annex and build custom homes “makes them look bad. … (It) would have been a shining example of how it can work.”

Clementia restrooms – time to get off the pot?

The RMA board will discuss the restrooms proposed for Lake Clementia Park at Tuesday’s board meeting and decide whether to authorize the two RMA representatives on the Parks Committee to vote in favor of funding the project from the Parks Fund. The committee voted to approve the project at the February Parks Committee meeting and then had to rescind the vote when it was realized the RMA representatives didn’t have permission from the board to vote as they did.

The committee capped the expenditure for the restrooms at $250,000 last year and looked for cheaper alternatives after the low bid came in at $346,000 for the same design used at Stonehouse Park. At the same time, a resolution that would have allowed the RMA general manager to approach local groups about making donations for the project died for lack of a second.

This year, the committee voted to approve a cost estimate for a pre-fab concrete structure that costs only $10,000 less than the larger, better-built design that was rejected last year. The committee discussed getting donations for the project, and RMA Director Donni Quinlan, one of the two RMA Parks representatives, said she was sure the groups she belongs to will make donations if asked.

The committee also approved spending up to $100,000 for concrete paving at the park that will bring it into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. That approval was also rescinded.

The RMA board considered both proposals at a special board session the following week, but was unable to reach agreement on either one, postponing both to next week’s televised meeting.

Although board members agreed the bathrooms are needed, some balked at the cost. A major component of the cost is plumbing, including a lift station, pump, back-up generator and a sewer line that has to travel all the way to the lift station at Camino Del Lago. The cost for sewer service is estimated at around $100,000.

Director Dick Cox wanted to postpone the project until next year, in hopes that the Operating Engineers trainees could save about $20,000 by digging trenches and laying the sewer pipe. It was pointed out that the work has to meet the course needs of the training center, and the increase in costs will wipe out the savings in labor costs.

RMA staff estimated the cost of building materials increased by about 20 percent over the past year.

A motion to fund the ADA improvements failed on a 5-2 vote. RMA counsel is looking into the issue, and President Paul Gumbinger suggested bringing the matter back to the board at the March meeting for more discussion and another vote.

River crossing on schedule

The pedestrian bridge project is on schedule and on budget, with the required permits expected to be in place by April, the Parks Committee was told at its February meeting.

Jim Foster, senior engineer with Quincy Engineering Inc., said the project is expected to continue on schedule. “It’s looking very good,” he told the group. A delay or unforeseen problem with the permits is “very unlikely,” he said.

The design/build contract with Viking Construction is predicated on constructing the bridge this year, said Randy Jenco, owner of the bridge-building firm.

Greg Vorster, whose last day as RMA general manager was March 8, will continue as project manager for the bridge project through April, it was announced at the meeting.

The bridge is being built by the Parks Committee with developer funds and will be owned by the RMA once it’s constructed.

The committee agreed to release $80,000 from the $1.5 million fund for the bridge to complete the drawings. This brings the total cost of the planning phases of the project to $305,000, the amount that was budgeted.

The committee is expected to meet in April to move on to the next phase, ordering the fabrication of the bridge superstructure, which is done off-site.

The environmental review of the project was completed and approved by the Community Services District, the lead agency, in January. This allowed applications to be submitted to the permitting agencies.

The bridge is scheduled to be completed by the end of the year.

© RanchoMurieta.com