The Clearlake City Council took comments from the public regarding the Provinsalia Project and then closed the public hearing and continued the item. The discussion will resume on Feb. 26 beginning with comments from the council.
The public hearing was held on Thursday in consideration of certification of the draft and final Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs); amending the General Plan land use designation from managed development-resource protection area to specific plan; adopting the draft Provinsalia specific plan; and rezoning the property from resource protection to specific plan.
Council chambers filled to near capacity with citizens eager to speak to the matter. More than a dozen people spoke in opposition of the project while three, including Clearlake Planning Commissioner Al Bernal, spoke in support. Overwhelming consensus of the public was to slow pace and conduct further study of potential impacts of the project or simply deny it altogether.
“My big concern is that we are trying to get ahead on something we don”t know is going to work,” Debra Sally said. Her feelings were shared by numerous people who expressed the same thought.
City staff and assisting consultants provided an overview of the project, detailing mitigation efforts, plan adjustments, project expectations and construction requirements. Many were in disagreement with city staff”s description of the project as being “infill” and said that it is more accurately a project of sprawl. “This is classic sprawl because there is nothing out there but rural beauty,” Glen Goodman said. He also shared information he said he collected through various research studies that concluded that while commercial sprawl does provide benefits to a local government, residential sprawl worsens it. He urged the council to inform its citizens of the cost they would actually endure as a result of the project.
Many disagreed with staff”s assessment regarding the potential for build-out and increase in tax revenues as a result. It was the majority”s opinion that optimism for maximum build-out or even partial build-out is unrealistic. “We are in serious economic downturn. These are being advertised as an upscale project but the size of the lots is not upscale,” Victoria Brandon, who spoke on behalf of the Lake County Sierra Club, said.
Shirley Howland agreed and offered comparison to the housing market in Hidden Valley Lake. “Fifty by 100 square foot lots, who would build on that with a $240,000 house when houses in Hidden Valley Lake on acreage are going for $150,000?” she asked.
Brandon offered a suggestion that was supported by the majority in attendance. She suggested that a sunset clause be included in the agreement with the developer, Lake County Resort Partners, that would automatically revert the property back to its Resource Protection zoning should a tentative map for the subdivision not be approved in three years. She also suggested a performance bond be tied to the agreement that would prohibit the physical alteration of the site without prior permit approval. This suggestion was also supported by members of the public.
Brandon also voiced her opinion that the final EIR does not adequately address a number of issues. “One that is important is how it addresses green house gases,” she said. “It does not seem fully adequate.”
Konocti Unified School District representatives, including Superintendent Dr. Bill MacDougall, offered insight into impacts that would affect local students. An increase in traffic along Dam Road and Lake Street, MacDougall said, causes him great concern for the safety of the students. He said that the roads would need to be widened and sidewalks installed in order to accommodate traffic and provide for the safety of children walking and riding their bicycles to school.
MacDougall also said that the district is currently facing a $500,000 to $1 million budget shortfall and that development of the Provinsalia Project could result in an additional $1 million expense that the district cannot satisfy as would be required in providing facilities and resources to serve the students that may reside in the project area. The district is currently evaluating possible school closures and grade re-alignment to address its current financial crisis.
“I am concerned about this project and I hope you take into consideration how it will affect our children,” MacDougall said.
School Board Trustee Herb Gura expressed similar concerns. He said there was no urgency in approving the project as “it has been around since the ”80s” and urged the council to deny the project “if it”s going to hurt the kids.”
Ed Robey, former First District Supervisor, questioned the fairness of the project”s impact on pipeline capacity citing that the system serves sewer needs of residents throughout the county. He said the pipeline does have a maximum capacity limit and questioned how fair it would be to people who may wish to hook-up to the pipeline in the future if Provinsalia consumes much of that capacity.
While the majority of those in attendance spoke in opposition of the project, there were three individuals who spoke as proponents.
Ron Rose, who resides in Lakeport but owns property in Clearlake, said he supports free enterprise as did another individual. Rose said he would like to see the project move forward. “From what I”ve seen, you”ve got the proper rules in place. I would like to see this because I believe it would help the whole city,” Rose said. “Every residence here would benefit over time. I believe we should work together and make this work.”
Planning Commission Al Bernal offered insight into the process in which the commission arrived at its recommendation to approve the aspects of the project that were up for consideration. He assured the public that the property is better-protected with regulations established through the specific plan. “Resource protection allows much more development than specific plan,” he said. “I believe it will be a much better fit with specific plan.”
The discussion will resume on Feb. 26 with comments from the council. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. in Council Chambers at Clearlake City Hall.
Documents regarding the project are available for public review at City Hall during regular business hours.
Contact Denise Rockenstein at drockenstein@clearlakeobserver.com or call her directly at 994-6444, ext. 11.
Don”t forget to write!
The Clear Lake Observer*American welcomes letters responding to articles and opinions that have appeared in this newspaper, as well as on topics of general interest. Letters can be sent to ObserverAmerican@gmail.com or mailed to PO Box 6200, Clearlake, CA 95422. Please include complete name, address and telephone number. Anonymous submissions will be discarded.
