This stretch of the Cosumnes River, just off the South Course's second green and third tee, is the area the Rancho Murieta Association has proposed for a $1.3 million river crossing.

South developer asks to be freed of responsibility for bridge over Cosumnes

See what your neighbors say in Community Views

Published Monday, February 3, 2003

The South developer has asked the county to waive the requirement that a river crossing be in place by the time the 601st home is built on the South.

Todd Chambers of Reynen & Bardis made the announcement at the January meeting of the Parks Committee.

The developer’s action came as no surprise. In December, Rancho Murieta Association President Mike Schieberl said Reynen & Bardis was expected to ask the county for relief from the condition, which is predicated on the use of the Yellow Bridge for the crossing.

The 601st threshold will be reached in the next phase of development in the South. The roads and utilities are in place for both the Crest and the Greens subdivisions, which will be constructed at the same time.

“We’ve asked the county to allow us to continue building at this point in time,” Chambers said. “… What’s magic about 601? There’s no study. I think it was just an arbitrary number. … I’m anxious to hear what the county’s response will be to that.”

The 601st home is about the halfway point in the development of the South.

Like Reynen & Bardis, the RMA has given up on being able to use the Yellow Bridge as the crossing for pedestrians, bicyclists and golf carts. The Rancho Murieta Country Club, which leases the bridge and the golf course properties from the Pension Trust Fund of the Operating Engineers, has rejected proposals for constructing an access path on the golf course and sharing the bridge with non-golfers.

The RMA wants the condition shifted from the Yellow Bridge to a new bridge. The association has presented a plan for a $1.3 million bridge to the county.

“I think this alternative is probably the best that we’re facing right now,” said Parks Committee member Mike Burnett. “There should be a resolution from the committee to adopt this. … We don’t have a solution with the Yellow Bridge.”

Community Services District Director John Merchant, a former RMA president who now represents the CSD on the Parks Committee, commented, “I don’t think anything’s changed from the standpoint that we’re at a crossroads here with the developers and the county and the 601st lot. … If we don’t get it now, we don’t get it. … They are petitioning the county to take the provision away.”

The committee passed a motion to recommend to the county the new bridge location and a trail system that provides access to it to satisfy the river crossing condition.

Before the vote, Murieta Holdings developer Robert J. Cassano asked Chambers if Reynen & Bardis had requested relief from the condition, but made no request to move the crossing requirement from the Yellow Bridge. That is correct, Chambers replied.

RMA directors Paul Gumbinger and Mike Burnett voted in favor of the resolution, as did Merchant. The other two voting members of the committee, Cassano and Chambers, abstained. Cassano represents the PTF on the Parks Committee.

When asked by Burnett how he would have voted if he hadn’t abstained, Chambers said he would have voted no because he didn’t have enough information about the plan for a new bridge.

“We are willing to do something else, but I don’t know what (that) is,” Chambers explained. “And I don’t think that another river crossing is a practical response based on what I see in my experience in dealing with federal agencies on very small and insignificant pockets of wetlands on properties that aren’t next to a major resource protection area.

“I see what it takes to get things done and, in order for another bridge crossing to be developed over the Cosumnes River, I would fathom you’d have a tough time getting permits.”

Cassano’s partner, Gerry N. Kamilos, has portrayed getting permission from government entities to construct a bridge on the Cosumnes as a virtual impossibility.

Burnett expressed confidence that the bridge would be approved because it’s an area he described as “an urban development zone of Sacramento County. It’s not in the country in some unzoned, undeveloped area.”

The bridge would be built upstream from the Yellow Bridge, near the South Course's second green and third tee. (See previous coverage here.)

The RMA's proposed bridge would be upstream of the Yellow Bridge.

The RMA is counting on strong support from the county to facilitate the permitting process. RMA General Manager Greg Vorster said county officials and planners think the new bridge proposed by the RMA is “a great idea.”

Merchant remarked that it’s a “potential liability issue (for the county) if they don’t do what they were supposed to do.”

Burnett said, “I don’t think they’re (the county) going to allow any more construction over here, even on the North side, until this issue is resolved.”

Vorster suggested the committee consider facilitating construction of the bridge by “accepting $1.32 million from R & B, relieving them of that condition.” The money would be placed in the Parks Fund and the committee would sign the contract with Viking Construction for construction of the bridge, which includes a six-month permitting process. The Parks Committee would serve as the administrator of the contract, Vorster said.

Merchant remarked, “That’s a pretty dramatic proposal.” He said it could be on the agenda for the next meeting, but both the RMA and CSD boards should be consulted first for their reaction.

CSD General Manager Ed Crouse said building the bridge was beyond the scope of the Parks Agreement and would require amending the document.

The next Parks Committee meeting is scheduled for Feb. 28 at 8:15 a.m. at the RMA Building. It is open to the public.

Other matters the committee discussed:

Ballfield lighting at Stonehouse Park

The lights for a ball field at Stonehouse Park are expected to arrive in about six weeks, according to resident Mike Martel. About $30,000 worth of lighting equipment is being donated by the volunteer group that stages the Summerfest fundraising event in August.

Martel said if shields are required for the lights, the number of lights needed could double.
Shields were suggested for the lights to preserve the night sky for stargazing at a resident’s request.

The committee will hear from the lighting designer for the project at February’s meeting to determine the impact of accommodating the request.

Will Clementia restroom be ready for summer?

The restroom facility planned for Clementia Park will not be built in time for summer, RMA Architectural Manager Mark Parsons told the committee. Later, an RMA official disagreed.

Health department requirements concerning the distance the facility needs to be located from the water and the elevation are delaying the project and might affect its location, according to RMA General Manager Greg Vorster.

The nearest sewage pump station is some distance away, at Camino Del Lago, making plumbing a significant cost factor.

These issues are adding $200,000 to the project, Vorster said. The original estimate for a facility at Clementia on the order of the one at Stonehouse Park was about $250,000.

Vorster later said the entire cost of the restroom facility is expected to be in the $200,000 to $250,000 range. He said siting issues and other concerns have been resolved without additional cost with the help of RMA President Mike Schieberl, who is a project manager for a construction management company.

Vorster said the additional costs would not have totaled $200,000 in any case. An earlier RanchoMurieta.com report of the additional costs, quoting Vorster, was in error.

Schieberl said he expects the facility to be finished by July 1.

Do you have thoughts on this coverage or subject? Share them at RanchoMurieta.com's Community Views page.