<<<<More
CNPS News Articles
From The Mendocino Beacon
Dec 8, 2005
Albion
residents resist two land use developers
By CONNIE KORBEL Of The Beacon -
The county Planning Commission met in Fort Bragg's Town Hall last Thursday on coastal matters. Of primary interest to residents were two projects in the Albion Ridge Road area.
First in the lineup was Coastal View Associates, followed by Mid Stream Partners. The two public hearings, collectively lasting all day, were well attended by the public. Of the 50-plus present, over 30 people spoke on the record; some more than once. Nearly all spoke in opposition to the projects.
After receiving extensive public hearing testimony and discussing the issues among themselves, the commissioners voted to request a full environmental impact report from the Coastal View Associates owners and denied the project presented by Mid Stream Partners.
Coastal View Associates
|
First up, the Coastal View Associates' application is, according to the staff report, for "a minor subdivision" of a 58.7-acre parcel to create four parcels containing 7.1-acre, 7.5-acre, two 10-acre lots, and a 24-acre remainder parcel, a coastal use permit, an exception to the section regarding road width requirements and development of individual onsite water and sewage disposal systems on each parcel.
The property is located in the coastal zone at 3560 Albion Ridge "D" Road, which is one mile east of Albion at the northern end of Albion Ridge "D" Road, a quarter-mile north of its intersection with Albion Ridge Road.
Senior county Planner Frank Lynch said, "A lot of folks have a lot of concerns about [this] project" as he lifted a stack of papers.
The owners' agent, Jim Ronco, said, "knowing we're in a highly scenic area" the applicant had integrated the character of the neighborhood into "harmonious" changes made to the project. He said the California Department of Forestry had given them a clean bill of health, and as a "remainder parcel" there won't be any more subdivisions and it won't encroach into sensitive areas.
When the commission opened the matter to the public, Albion residents began taking their places in line. Among those who spoke out were Nancy Fish, Mario Abreu, Dorothy Lane, Carmen Goodyear, Steve Heckeroth, Bill Heil, Michael Issel, Frieda Feen, Alan Graham and others.
Goodyear said "D" Road "should not be used as an easement at all."
Ronco said, "If we don't get the easement, we don't have a project."
Residents addressed everything from distrust of the owners to obscuring the viewshed; from increased traffic to increased development of houses whose sizes cannot be restricted; from contaminated gardens to enormous noise pollution; from perceived violations of the adopted county general plan to problems from a lack of a county grading ordinance; and from encroaching on spotted owl sites to disturbing rare plants.
Fish said the project is changing the entire nature of the area. "We consider our garden an active crop. [It's] now covered with dust and fume residue churned by traffic. I consider us an endangered species. Pardon me if I sound emotional; it's all being destroyed."
Heckeroth, a former planning commissioner, reminded them of the duties of the commission to protect and maintain the timberland. "These are the guiding policies that determine what you do," he said, citing from the general plan.
Overall, the public stressed that to look at the project out of context of the cumulative issues would be a mistake. One person said the negative declaration is "woefully in violation, inadequate and not considering the system as a whole."
Issel told the commissioners, "Your job is to do the right thing. It's simple. This plan is lacking in all aspects.
Commissioner Don Lipmanson asked, "Are you asking for an EIR?"
Issel replied, "You're putting yourself in mitigation peril. You know that. I'm just reminding you. Get subject matter experts here. An EIR would be very useful."
At the conclusion of the hearing, Lipmanson said he believes land has been severely depleted, but remains viable as timberland. He felt there was a lack of cumulative evaluation and there are unknowns. He made the motion to require an EIR, rather than to categorically deny the project, which was approved with a 6-1 vote. Chairman Jim Little was the only dissenting vote.
Mid Stream Partners
Lynch said, of the stack of letters the commission has received on this project, "By thickness they're roughly the same to support and oppose."
Dean Strupp and Eric Da Rosa, owners of Mid Stream Partners, are local residents and active in the community. They defended the clearing they had done, saying some conifers were destroyed, but they had replanted with Douglas fir and grass seed and had built oversized culverts for drainage.
"I'm proud of the work we did," Strupp told the commission.
Nice Alterman, wife of Dean Strupp, characterized the project as "a lot-line adjustment only" and stated there were no violations.
Adam Strupp supported the project fully and reported he had personally observed the removal of cars and marijuana cultivated trash. He said, "It was a dumping ground for local people in that area. That's what the concern should be here."
Jeff Whitehouse said he's been a friend of Dean's for about 20 years and he was "not a slash and burn merchant."
Dr. Gary Taff came forward to say the county needs the tax revenue that would be generated and the size is similar to other parcels in the neighborhood.
According to the staff report, this project is a boundary line adjustment to reconfigure two parcels containing roughly 24 and 42 acres to create a minor subdivision of the 42-acre parcel into two parcels of equal size. The site is located about five miles east of Albion, on both sides of Albion Ridge Road, about a half-mile east of its intersection with Middle Ridge Road.
Albion residents and others speaking out against this project included Linda Perkins, Chris Skyhawk, Bernard MacDonald, Skip Wollenberg, Shirley Freriks, Sandra Berrigan, Louise Mariana, Ann Kissack, Monroe Robinson, Jim Ehlers, Mary Walsh, Els Cooperrider, Debra Scott, and Lori Hubbart of the California Native Plant Society, as well as some who also spoke out against the first project on the day's agenda.
Perkins displayed an enlarged aerial view photograph of the clearing, as well as photographs of the land showing damage from work done last January. She summarized her presentation by saying, "There's been a lot of impacts across this property over the past year. I don't believe that this was legal." She also said the area is an important wildlife corridor.
Hubbart reported that there are rare plants, wetlands and a pygmy cypress forest plant community on the property. She said that "the project can't avoid certain plants and not impact the overall condition of the community soil." She added, "Pygmy is not people-friendly and susceptible to human activities." She also noted there are flaws in the original botanical survey done by Da Rosa, one of the partners, which was "not conducted in a best-practices manner." She requested the area be acted on in its entirety, as piecemealing could obscure problems and said her organization is requesting the county get a grading ordinance.
MacDonald said, "This is not a simple zoning project, [but] part of a larger project that needs our oversight. If not treated as such, we are derelict in our duty. The community deserves the right to determine its future."
Feen asked for an immediate stop-work order and requested the commissioners conduct a site visit before allowing the project to progress further.
Freriks said she left Marin some years ago because of the way it was developed. "I would be very unhappy if what happens here is what happened in Marin," she said. She urged overall planning that would prepare for the eventuality to start now.
Berrigan said, "We do not want to destroy Albion by the removal of its trees. They have cleared much more land than is needed to develop the parcels. We do not know what the future holds for this much land."
Robinson said, "If you turn the green lights on, you're really setting the stage for the other lands up for sale for residential lots. Eventually [we won't] be able to restore [the land]. Now is the time to work with the community versus [taking] the piecemeal approach that sends the wrong message."
At the conclusion of the public hearing, the applicants, agent, Jim Jackson, asked the commissioners to "focus on the application which is a lot line adjustment only, or a subdivision." He concluded his rebuttal remarks by announcing that "We ask for a decision today. We don't want a continuance for a site visit or future study or whatever."
Da Rosa said it wasn't a plan made in secrecy. "A lot of this project is on transitional soils. It's not high-productive land. It's suitable for building houses." Regarding the presentation made by Hubbart from CNPS he said, "Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Well maybe not quite blah, blah, blah."
He continued his remarks with, "The lines of communication were left open and they never came to us. Now they bring it up. Negative, negative, negative. I'm sorry I'm a little defensive, but ... The vote should be very easy."
The commissioners offered the owners a motion to approve with conditions that included a 100-foot setback from the haul road and that only one single-family residence be built on each parcel, which the owners declined to accept.
Lipmanson said that since an "up or down vote" was requested by the applicant and he was compelled to vote "without a chance to see," he moved to deny the project, which was passed with a 6-1 vote, with Commissioner Moser dissenting.
Following the hearing, Strupp was reached by telephone and asked what his plans are now for the projects, He said, "To appeal to the Supes. That's already in progress."