Barry
05-30-2012, 04:40 PM
There's been some question as to why The Barlow got a green light regarding traffic:
I can't help but notice that traffic is repeatedly cited as a large issue around this development. Yet the new Barlow center is of a magnitude beyond the CVS development and likely to draw significantly more traffic congestion. Even if CVS were never built the traffic amplifcation due to the Barlow (which I do not oppose) will be considerable. Why is it given a pass on this issue? IMO the political correctness hypocracy might be peeking its head out on this one aspect at least.
I checked with Kenyon Webster, Sebastopol's Planning Director about this. The bottom line is that strangely enough The Barlow development, except for one building, counts as a remodel of the huge building. The only additional square footage is for one building that will be housing the Kosta Browne winery. So only the traffic generated by that building was considered. That study can be found here (https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/default/files/rmansour/barlow_winery_initial_study_negative_declaration_8.5.11.pdf).
Zoning of the rest of the "remodeled" site has not changed. As Kenyon explains:
Zoning has not changed---M, Industrial. However, this zone allows a wide range of uses besides industrial---for example, besides industrial uses, markets, restaurants, auto repair, and artist studios are permitted uses under the M regulations. To sell alcohol, a market or restaurant needs an Alcohol Use Permit (the market got one). Also, industrial uses can have a retail component to sell their products without special approval---like a coffee warehouse can have a retail outlet, or a production bakery can have a retail counter (without requiring a Use Permit). A number of the uses in the Barlow development are expected to operate this way.
Pure retail is allowed in the M zone, but does require a Use Permit. For example, the Planning Commission has approved a small (around 1,000 sq. ft.) tasting room that is not associated with an on-site production winery. I think this has been the only purely retail use approved there so far (another one like it is pending.)
Also, with a Use Permit, mixed use residential development, or affordable housing can be allowed in the M zone; also exercise facilities. No residential has been approved as part of the Barlow; but if I am remembering correctly, two exercise uses (a yoga studio and a circus gym use) have gotten Use Permit approval.
I can't help but notice that traffic is repeatedly cited as a large issue around this development. Yet the new Barlow center is of a magnitude beyond the CVS development and likely to draw significantly more traffic congestion. Even if CVS were never built the traffic amplifcation due to the Barlow (which I do not oppose) will be considerable. Why is it given a pass on this issue? IMO the political correctness hypocracy might be peeking its head out on this one aspect at least.
I checked with Kenyon Webster, Sebastopol's Planning Director about this. The bottom line is that strangely enough The Barlow development, except for one building, counts as a remodel of the huge building. The only additional square footage is for one building that will be housing the Kosta Browne winery. So only the traffic generated by that building was considered. That study can be found here (https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/default/files/rmansour/barlow_winery_initial_study_negative_declaration_8.5.11.pdf).
Zoning of the rest of the "remodeled" site has not changed. As Kenyon explains:
Zoning has not changed---M, Industrial. However, this zone allows a wide range of uses besides industrial---for example, besides industrial uses, markets, restaurants, auto repair, and artist studios are permitted uses under the M regulations. To sell alcohol, a market or restaurant needs an Alcohol Use Permit (the market got one). Also, industrial uses can have a retail component to sell their products without special approval---like a coffee warehouse can have a retail outlet, or a production bakery can have a retail counter (without requiring a Use Permit). A number of the uses in the Barlow development are expected to operate this way.
Pure retail is allowed in the M zone, but does require a Use Permit. For example, the Planning Commission has approved a small (around 1,000 sq. ft.) tasting room that is not associated with an on-site production winery. I think this has been the only purely retail use approved there so far (another one like it is pending.)
Also, with a Use Permit, mixed use residential development, or affordable housing can be allowed in the M zone; also exercise facilities. No residential has been approved as part of the Barlow; but if I am remembering correctly, two exercise uses (a yoga studio and a circus gym use) have gotten Use Permit approval.