The fate of the controversial Curtis Park Village development project will be reviewed by the Planning Commission Thursday.

The project has been billed by developer Paul Petrovich as a way to blend nearby housing styles into a new community, but neighbors disagree, arguing that it's a design stuck in the past.

“We hope everyone in this city is watching as the 72-acre parcel between Land Park, Sacramento City College and Curtis Park goes to the Planning Commission for review,” said Rosanna Herber, president of the Sierra Curtis Neighborhood Association (SCNA). “Designed the right way, the development could meet the growing need for housing and retail space near the heart of the city and usher in an era of urban core development that is environmentally friendly.”

In 2004, the Sacramento-based Petrovich proposed a plan to develop the site adjacent to the Union Pacific Railyards to become the Curtis Park Village, composed of 500 residences and approximately 250,000 square feet of commercial space for a grocery store, drugstore, restaurants and athletic club. Despite promises to knit the housing styles of the Curtis Park Village into those of its historic namesake, Petrovich has come up against lots of ardent and emotional opposition from members of the SCNA.

"At best, the current plan is a suburban strip mall that squanders an opportunity for smart infill development. At worst, the plan could be a toxic nightmare, with a park built on tons of contaminated soil and no trees,” Herber said. “To use a political analogy, the proposed Curtis Park Village is simply a pig with lipstick on it.”

Petrovich, who has threatened to walk away from the development plan in the face of continual resistance, insists that the project he has proposed is an improvement on the site’s current toxic condition.

According to the SCNA, that’s not good enough.

Community members appealed to Davis architect Michael Corbett to provide a pro-bono alternative project proposal for the space that reflects the public's calls for limited commercial space, walkable passages and reduced parking.

“We want the design to be a village, not suburbia” Herber said.

Corbett’s plan incorporates less visually prominent parking and reduces the amount of commercial square footage from Petrovich’s proposal.

“I came up with an alternative that embodies new urbanism – walkable communities, human scales, no seas of parking with blocks of shopping,” Corbett said. “Some of the concerns about Petrovich’s design were that it created more of a suburban shopping center that doesn’t match up with Land and Curtis Park. I know he’s a good developer, but his model is based on a 20th century auto-oriented development style, and its just not appropriate for this site.”

Herber said she hopes Mayor Kevin Johnson and the City Council will "show backbone” in standing up to Petrovich’s development.

According to Corbett, the outcome is hard to predict at this point.

“I know enough people in Curtis Park who this project was important to, so I drew up an alternative. Now it's up to the city to decide if they’re going to move forward and start dealing with global warming and walkable neighborhoods, and depart from urban sprawl.”

Thursday, Feb. 25th, marks the latest turn in the ongoing development saga with a Planning Commission hearing to discuss the environmental impact report of Petrovich's project proposal.

Multiple efforts to contact Petrovich were unsuccessful.