STORYLINE Central City Neighborhoods

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

City to Eliminate Design Commission

by William Burg, published on February 12, 2009 at 9:55 AM

1 of 2
close

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

1 of 2
Loading images
Slideshow image Slideshow image

This article was forwarded to me by Panama Bartholomy, a neighborhood activist. If you have a chance, come to City Hall tonight (915 I Street, New City Hall council chambers, 5:30 PM) and tell the Planning Commission that you don't want the city to shut its citizens out of the planning and design process.

-----

On Thursday the Sacramento Planning Commission will have a public hearing on a proposal (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/planning/2008/documents/DOC_letter.PDF) by the Development Oversight Commission (DOC), a City-appointed group comprised almost entirely of real estate developers, architects, and business consultants, to eliminate the City's Design Review Commission and change the development approval process in the City so that City staff will make most planning and design decisions administratively, leaving no opportunity for public input.

 

The reasons you and members of your association should come to the hearing at City Hall on Thursday February 12th at 5:30pm to testify against this proposal:

 

1. This attempt to reduce citizen and citizen-commission input and oversight of development in our community has undergone no public vetting from community groups that will be affected by such a fundamental shift in our City's development.

 

The proposal was developed and sent directly to the Mayor with no input from the Planning or Design Review Commissions. More importantly, the proposed ordinance was not brought to any neighborhood association or other community-based organization that normally comments on development in their communities.


 

This is not the kind of transparency and open government practices that should be an essential part of such a fundamental change in our community's development approval process.

 

2. The proposal will greatly reduce opportunities for Community input

 

The proposal will eliminate the City's Design Review Commission and fold its responsibilities into the Planning Commission and shift “…the majority of decisions to the staff level..”. The movement of “…the majority of decisions to staff level…” will likely reduce community involvement from the development review process. Communities have a right to be able to comment on projects that will be built in their neighborhood.

 

Even after moving most decisions to the staff level, by eliminating the Design Review Commission the public loses one of the two opportunities they have left to comment on development projects proposed in their neighborhood. The recommendation would squeeze all public input on a project into one meeting where every issue with design or planning will have to be settled. This will almost certainly create the types of extremely long meetings that discourage public involvement and will force complex decisions that have long-term impacts on communities into unreasonably short decision-making time frames.

 

Reducing opportunities for citizens to be involved in projects in their neighborhoods decreases transparency, will cause more projects to be appealed to the City Council and will increase the likelihood of lawsuits to block projects. This will decrease the effectiveness of the development review process.

 

Please come to the Planning Commission hearing and comment on this item and let the City know that you think the public should have a role in development decisions in our City. Please distribute this email to other residents who would come to testify in support of preserving the role of the citizen in our city's development.

 

The recommendation can be found here: (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/planning/2008/documents/DOC_letter.PDF) and the meeting is at the New City Hall, 915 I Street, 1st Floor- Council Chambers, February 12, 2009 at 5:30 P.M.
 

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

February 12, 2009 | 10:51 AM
This email has fortunately made it way around to many of the community's neighborhood activist. There will likely be a good turnout for tonight Planning Commission meeting speaking out in opposition to the proposed elimination of the Design Review Commission. But just in case you have any doubt as to whether this will affect your neighborhood, let me be the first to tell you that it most likely will. The process has already been streamlined to the point that most neighborhood projects are only required to be reviewed at the staff level, meaning a public hearing is not necessary. This includes 15,000 sq. ft. grocery store chains such as Fresh and Easy!

As a professional working the field of Architecture, I am speaking out against many of my colleagues who feel this is a good direction for the city, requiring only one review of the project and only one opportunity for the public to voice their concerns about a particular development, but as a neighborhood leader, I feel this is a detriment to the design process and to the citizen who will ultimately support a project...or not.
2 0
REPLY
February 13, 2009 | 10:12 PM
I'm curious as to why you think that projects must be needlessly delayed. Doesn't it make sense for neighborhood leaders like you to voice your concerns about project at one place rather than go thru the hassles of multiple agencies and multiple hearings?
0 0
REPLY
February 12, 2009 | 11:08 AM
Great to get this into the paper, William. Thanks.
0 0
REPLY
February 12, 2009 | 12:28 PM
How convenient; this meeting will only be off the ground before the Alkali Flat/Mansion Flat Neighborhood Association meeting, previously reported at http://sacramentopress.com/headline/3245/Alkali_FlatMansion_Flat_community_meeting

I hope the city's non-Flatters make up for my lack of attendance.
0 0
REPLY
February 12, 2009 | 1:59 PM
Well, the developers have done such a good job of managing area growth, perhaps they know best.
1 0
REPLY
edited on  February 12, 2009 | 2:53 PM
I for one didn't know that if you planted some 2x4s in that fertile Natomas farmland, added some water, and waited a few months, you'd have a beautiful row of $400,000 (erm, $300,000 (sorry, $250,000 (I mean, $190,000)) houses.
0 0
REPLY
February 13, 2009 | 9:56 PM
Those who were unable to make it to the Planning Commission have another opportunity to attend the Neighborhood Advisory Group on Monday February 23rd. It is on the agenda for 7:55 but come at 6:15 for pizza and stay for the whole meeting.
0 0
REPLY
edited on  February 13, 2009 | 10:13 PM
This proposal is about making government more efficient. Public input will only be reduced in that instead of going through the same hassles twice, you do it once. I love the criticism about no vetting followed by how it will be heard at least twice for public input!
0 0
REPLY
February 14, 2009 | 7:48 AM
I would love to read a follow-up about how this meeting went.
0 0
REPLY
February 14, 2009 | 8:18 AM
I figured you'd like this one, Steve--it has "strong mayor" fingerprints all over it. The Planning Commission was presented with a "done deal" Thursday night, with language that read like the end of a process, not the beginning. The City Clerk has already been instructed to draft an ordinance based on the DOC's recommendations. Kind of like a certain charter amendment that sprung up fully formed with no public discussion or participation...

The people going through the "hassles" are the people having projects reviewed, and the "hassles" are the only opportunities for public input. Under the proposals fewer projects would be heard in public, and projects that would be heard under the current system will have to be appealed to the Planning Commission at a cost of $500 per appeal.
0 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below.
Use commas to separate your tags.

Cancel Submit

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background