Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Stop Development on SR Golf Courses

STOP DEVELOPMENT ON OUR GOLF COURSES

Are you aware, the City of San Ramon is trying to change the zoning code of the San Ramon Golf Course and Canyon Lakes Golf Course to:
COMMERCIAL RECREATION – which will allow for 250% more building intensity, and allow for multiple uses for development on our golf course land.

PLEASE HELP STOP THIS, AND VOICE YOUR CONCERN

Last and Final Planning Commission Meeting
March 7, 2006, at 7:00 p.m.
Senior Center, 9300 Alcosta Blvd
Submit written opposition to the golf course rezoning in advance to:

Pat Edwards, City Clerk
2222 Camino Ramon, or Email: Cityclerk@sanramon.ca.gov
(Ask for a green, "Public Information Record" form; attach your written statements requesting that they be read during the meeting if you are unable to attend, or if you simply choose not to speak.)

Our website will continue to post information as we receive it at sanramontalk.blogspot.com

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

The City has no intention of changing the uses of the golf courses. Some of the zoning changes in the 2020 General Plan are intended to change usage. All of the big shopping centers are being changed from Community Commercial to Mixed Use, to allow affordable housing. The Crow Canyon Specific Plan requires a housing overlay, which will seriously affect business owners in that part of town. But changes to the golf course zoning are stictly to conform to actual use. Read my last commentary on Fixing the General Plan and Joe Miller's (a member of the GP Committee) reply in the Past Commentaries section of the San Ramon Observer, www.sanramonobserver.org.

I've been covering San Ramon politics and issues for four years. I know the Mayor and all the Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners. I know where they stand on most issues. They have absolutely no intention of changing the golf courses. I can guarantee that. They have intentions of changing other things, like the small auto repair businesses in the North end of town, and the vacant bank building on Southern end of Alcosta (rezoned to high density residential).

The rezoning issues were not covert. The Planning Commission held seven public workshops on the zoning ordinance in 2005. I wrote a commentary on "Zoning Zingers," about taking away RV storage, back in August of 2005. All of my past commentaries are on the Observer website.

As far as not providing proper public notice, San Ramon is a Charter City, and isn't required to follow State law. Section 65093 of the Government Code says:

"The failure of any person or entity to receive notice given pursuant to this title, or pursuant to the procedures established by a chartered city, shall not constitute grounds for any court to invalidate the actions of a local agency for which the notice was given."

In fact if you read the whole paragraph, you will see it's purpose isn't to make cities fess up. It's purpose is CYA. If proper notification is given, and a small ad in a local newspaper for a short period meets City Code, then you've been notified and have no legal recourse in court in the future. So you are better off if they are not filing proper notice. Then at least if you don't like what they do, you can sue. Now you can't.

I'm against using eminent domain for profitable purposes. I'm supporting the new orginization, limiteminentdomain.org. If you want to do something useful, contact them and get some petitions to put their measure on the ballot in November.

All you are doing here is whipping up unnecessary fears. The Staff recommendation of a Golf Course Overlay is a very good alternative. It isn't a bandaid. It is a fix. It will keep the FAR to .1, which it is. It will keep Parks ratio to 6.5, so developers will be required to build new parks. It will limit what can be put in the golf course areas and do away with most of the uses you found objectionable in the Commercial Recreation zoning.

Even after the Planning Commission finalizes their zoning recommendations on March 7, 2006, they will not vote to send it to City Council until their next meeting. Then the Council will hold three Public Hearings on it. You can all come out and scream your heads off, and all you will get is a sore throat. Nothing will change about the golf courses, because nothing was ever going to change.

Roz

Anonymous said...

Rosalind:

Some people seem to have FAR too much time on their hands other than making big stinks about nothing.

San Ramon Resident

Anonymous said...

Preaching the good intentions of others is just blowing smoke! The owner of the golf course has rights and his attorneys will make sure that they're fulfilled.

One old house per half acre (~density of SRGC houses including golf course) may not produce enough revenue as the City sees it; thus, by its actions, we have to assume that "in-filling" and eminent domain are slated as part of the City's solution.

Parks and Golf Courses must be protected to exist. An owner's land-use attorneys will argue that a golf course is not the "highest and best use" of the land.

The best keys to protecting the golf course are now under intense consideration, i.e., the General Plan and Zoning. Unfortunately, our representatives are giving these keys to the developers to expedite the approval process.

We need to slow down and get a GP amendment with a Special Purpose Zone for Golf Course.

Empty words of assurance about an easily removed overlay does not come close to giving us the confidence that a GP amendment would.

These same wordy officials will likely be gone in five years. What then? We'll still have the GP!

Anonymous said...

Do you work for the city of San Ramon, Rosalind?

Even if you do know this San Ramon Mayor and City Council, can you really guarantee that the next City Council, when the Mayor and two other City Council members' terms expire in 2007 and the other two terms expire in 2009, won't use these new zoning laws and eminent domain laws to change other things.

I think it is a little naive of you to presume that the Golf Course zoning changes and Eminent Domain are good for San Ramon. Many cities have done exactly what San Ramon Council is proposing, only to find that a couple of years down the road they start delving up the property with bulldozers, and developing it with the "affordable housing", or low income housing.

You say the city doesn't have to give proper notice or follow the state laws for public hearings and notifications. Come on, this is a cop out. Give me a break... Do our elected officials work for us or do they work for themselves?

The San Ramon citizens have a right to be concerned.

Signed,

Concerned San Ramon Citizen

Anonymous said...

Would like to recommend a very informative manual on redevelopment, called "Redevelopment: The Unknown Government, What It Is. What Can Be Done., A Report to the People of California," August, 2004, written by Chris Norby, Supervisor, County of Orange. Can be obtained by writing: Municipal Officials for Redevelopment Reform (MORR), 214 North Yale Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92831. Phone: 714-871-9756. e-mail: norby2002@aol.com /website:www.redevelopment.com. This also discusses how our schools, fire departments and police are expected to exist on the same budgets because redvelopment is taking so many of our tax dollars.Redevelopment Abuses were heard by a Joint Hearing of the CA Legislature on Nov 17, 05. Involved were Senate Local Government Committee, Senate Transportation & Housing Committee, Assembly Housing &Community DevelopmentCommittee, Assemby Local Government Committee, and Assembly Judiciary Committee. Name of report is "What Is To Be Done? Legislators Look at Redevelopment Reforms" I will loan a summary of the report from this joint hearing to anyone, call 925-939-3221 or e-mail: spchteach1@yahoo.com to borrow my copy. Thanks, Mary Phelps

Anonymous said...

Golf Course News Magazine » News »

Developers gobble up greens
By Alexa Capeloto and Christy Arboscel
1/5/2005





Source: Detroit Free Press

Good-bye, greenways. We'll miss you, wetlands. Farewell, farms.

Macomb County residents are no strangers to parting with open space as developers gobble up land in their backyards to construct homes and retail space.

Now it appears golf courses are the next frontier, with at least six projects under way.

"It's more than a trend," said Nancy Orewyler, who is fighting efforts to develop part of Salt River Golf Course in Chesterfield Township, where she lives. "Land has become so valuable that these people who own these golf courses can't say no to the amount of money they're being offered."

In 2003, a handful of developers bought Partridge Creek Golf Course in Clinton Township for about $38 million, planning to build homes. About 5 miles away in Macomb Township, Wolverine Golf Club was sold for residential development. In Washington Township, condominiums are replacing the 14-acre driving range at Johnny Appleseed Cider Mill/Fun Center.

Sycamore Hills, Hickory Hollow and Tee-J's, all Macomb Township courses, are slated to be developed, too.

"It used to be lots of farms and things like that," said Steve Sadowski, a Shelby Township resident who golfs at a few Macomb County courses.

"Now that farms are gone, the only place you can get open space is a golf course. Now those are going away," he said Monday. Salt River appears to be next.

Owners have asked to rezone part of the property from commercial to residential. The 13-acre parcel holds a bowling alley, bar and banquet hall. The golf course already is zoned residential.

"The golf course is not imminent for development, but that could happen down the line," said Janice Giese, Chesterfield Township planning administrator.

The township's planning board tabled the rezoning request until Jan. 25. An attorney for the owners did not return calls for comment.

The list of Macomb County golf courses, now at about 30, definitely is shrinking, said Stephen Cassin, executive director of Macomb County planning and economic development. But he said he's not too worried.

"I don't think it's anything to be overly concerned about," Cassin said last week. "We recognize that open space is leaving. That is a concern. But we've tried to create additional open spaces."

Cassin notes the Macomb Orchard Trail, a partially completed recreational trail that someday will snake through 23.5 miles of the county. He also said the county is drafting sample ordinances for communities that want to protect woodlands, wetlands and floodplains.

Preserving golf courses, he said, may be a losing battle as the demand for land keeps pace with Macomb County's growing population. "It doesn't make economic sense for owners of golf courses to hang on to their property," Cassin said.

The owners know that all too well.

Jack Oddo sold 14 of Johnny Appleseed's 18.5 acres for condos; he is planning a shopping center for the remaining land. Maintaining the recreation complex has become too costly.

"Do you sweat it out every day for peanuts, or do you flip it, make money and invest it elsewhere?" he asked. "People who want to stop it should buy the property."

So far, Tom Roehl has resisted selling his course. His great-grandfather opened Maple Lane Golf Club in Sterling Heights in 1926. Three generations later, the course belongs to him and his 10 brothers and sisters.

Roehl said developers approach them with offers once a month, if not more often. They want to keep the course in the family, but they also want to be prudent.

"Anything's for sale at the appropriate price," he said. "It's very enticing with the amount of money that real estate developers are throwing around."

Ironically, closing some golf courses has meant better business at remaining courses, like Maple Lane. Roehl said he's seen two years of profits after 20 years of losses.

But he's not sure it's enough.

"You've got to look at the total return," he said. "How much money can a golf course make as a golf course versus the return on the value of that land?"

Golfers like Sadowski of Shelby Township say they wonder about the future of their favorite spots. Sadowski and his buddies have hit Maple Lane for the past 15 New Year's Days for a round of golf, come snow or sleet. They were treated to warmer temperatures Saturday.

"It would be very sad to see Maple Lane close," said Sadowski, 38, a financial analyst for Visteon. "There are a lot of fond memories we've had there that would close with it. I'm sure a lot of people could say that."

The loss of recreational space isn't the only issue. Environmental experts warn that losing golf courses also means losing valuable green space that helps absorb storm water and potentially avert flooding.The Rochester-based Clinton River Watershed Council cautions that some developments have drained improperly treated water into the river and that "any kind of development creates storm water runoff," said Jessica Pitelka Opfer, the council's executive director. One problem, the council said, is storm water is not always handled properly before it is pumped into the river. That water can add to the river's pollution and endanger its inhabitants like coldwater trout.

The good news: City officials and developers are improving ways they handle storm water, Opfer said. "Our whole point is that we can have development and environmental quality at the same time," she said.

Kathleen Bolton, coordinator for a preservationist group called the Macomb Land Conservancy, said she believes "golf courses are the new farm."

Many Macomb County farms disappeared in the 1970s and 1980s as farmers sold land to developers who offered more money than crop profits could generate. While some farmers retired, others moved to the northern end of the county, where land was more abundant and often cheaper. Bolton said she predicts this may be the trend with golf courses as well. That would be a dilemma for the Romeo-based conservancy as it aims to achieve a balance between development and land preservation. Bolton engaged in a four-year battle against developing a 180-acre wetlands parcel into a golf course at 31 Mile and North Avenue in Ray Township. She said she lost the fight in 2004.

Communities need to map out and implement guidelines to preserve open space, she said. "You're not going to stop development, but you can guide it and I feel we're very ill-prepared for it. We don't have the ordinances to address it when it gets here," she said.

Golfers from across metro Detroit have putted at the family-owned Partridge course in Clinton Township for more than four decades.

But construction has begun on the 333-acre site for single-family houses, condominiums, town homes and a senior housing complex, said Clinton Township Planning Director Carlo Santia. A different company also is assessing the parcel for an outdoor mall, but has not submitted plans to the township, Santia said.

Clinton Township-based Trinity Land, a John Carlo Inc. division, is one of the developers working on the housing part of the project. "The issue is location, to use a cliche. You've got basically everything around it that's been developed. All the utilities are there," Trinity Vice President Richard Ives has said.

Course general manager Paul Duda said selling the property was a financial decision.

"What they can pay you an acre, you can never make that kind of money in the golf business," Duda said.

Orewyler and other preservationists see danger signs as one course after another is sold.

"People like green," Orewyler said Dec. 28, referring to grass, not cash. "That's why people like golf. It isn't just that they're whacking a little white ball around. They like green, and they can pretend for a while that the world is glorious and beautiful."


Wednesday, January 5, 2005