CVS/Chase development proposal

[scamperwillow]

IMPORTANT

Meeting Place Moved - Design Review Board meeting on CVS/Chase/Armstrong

Moved To Vets Hall Dining Room, 282 So. High St

Wednesday, Nov. 16, 4 pm

Please attend whether or not you intend to speak, your presence and support for the DRB is important and powerful.
To find the true current application go to the City of Sebastopol web site / City Services / Planning / Special Projects / CVS-Chase 11-16-11 / page 42-45

[1104GT]

Below is the text of an email that i sent to our design review board members. They need our support and to hear our voices at the upcoming meeting.

Mr. Schurch, Mr. Douch, Mr. Beauchamp, Mr. Deedler, and Ms. Massey:

I am writing again regarding design review of the proposed CVS/Chase project. As you know, my opinion is that the proposed design is suburban in nature and inappropriate for this downtown location. I understand your position and need to respond to the developer with specific quantifiable direction, so want to offer my thoughts on why I feel this way and offer conditions by which I think this project might be approved.

Suburban vs. Downtown
First, let's address why this project is suburban in nature. There is a fundamental difference in human behavior between downtown and suburban developments. In suburban developments and at this development, people arrive by car, park at or near the front door of their destination, enter, shop and then depart. They seldom interact with other stores in the center and almost never interact with the street or sidewalk. Suburban developments are designed to encourage and reward car-centric, anti social behavior that has eroded the community fabric of our society.

Human behavior in a downtown places a much higher value on social interaction. If this development was downtown in nature, shoppers would walk downtown or park behind the buildings or in remote locations and navigate on foot to sidewalks where they enter stores and interact with their neighbors. Downtowns consciously trade auto-centric convenience for social interaction. Understanding this difference is essential when evaluating any design proposed downtown.


Local Examples
You can see examples of both types of development right in our downtown today. You can also see how even one small lot developed in a suburban way can negatively affect or even kill the vibrancy of a street. Walk on the South side of Bodega Avenue from Main Street to the Pellini lot and notice how the pedestrian experience dies as soon as you pass Jasper O'Farrell's and cross the driveways in front of the WestAmerica bank drive-thru. The same is true of Rite Aid, Safeway and the Whole Foods center. The sidewalks in front of all are dead relative to Main Street. The three three conditions that will destroy a sidewalk experience are:

1. Driveways and drive-throughs - they are dangerous to pedestrians and break up the sidewalk experience
2. Parking lots fronting streets - When walking or shopping, I will cross a street to avoid them
3. Lack of windows - The South side of Westamerica Bank and the North side of Silk moon are both unpleasant examples.


Essential Design Elements to Decide Which Type You Have
Downtowns:
- Parking behind buildings or in City lots
- Storefronts are accessed off the sidewalk
- Windows offer views into businesses
- Buildings are oriented to the street and do not have gaps between them
- Access uses the City street grid, not driveways

Suburban developments:
- Parking along streets
- Parking directly in front of store entries
- Stores are oriented toward the parking lot
- Mid block driveways
- Pad developments (gaps between buildings)
- Drive-thoughs
- Buffers, "treatments", public artwork, trellises, elaborate landscaping and other "mitigating measures" to try to make us feel better about them.

It's pretty easy to see which type this is.


Our General Plan Mandates Downtown Solutions
By describing parking lots hidden behind buildings, pedestrian passages to the sidewalk, storefronts on the street etc., our General Plan is very specifically describing a downtown type of human behavior that our citizens want in the core of our town. Describing the character of our town is the essential but often overlooked purpose of our General Plan.


Getting down to nuts-and-bolts, I offer the following conditions of approval:

Site Plan Design Conditions of Approval
- Eliminate the mid-block driveway
- Do not allow parking fronting Petaluma. Move parking behind building and either move the buildings together or introduce a plaza between.
- Reduce sidewalk size
- Eliminate the canopy covering the sidewalk
- Remove the trellis

Building Architecture Conditions of Approval
- Demand real windows fronting the street. You wouldn't allow solid stucco walls, so why are opaque glass walls Ok?
- Do not allow advertising or promotional graphics or "skins" in glass.
- Mandate an architectural feature/landmark design element on the corner of Petaluma and Bodega
- Reduce the scale of the entry and drive-thru porticos. Monumental superficial entry architecture is only appropriate in big-box developments when storefronts are viewed across vast parking lots.

Finally, I urge you to be demanding on our behalf and don't be tempted by tricks and gimmicks like trellises, large sidewalks, buffers, landscape features and misleading renderings. These are there for the single purpose of distracting you and us from the fact that they are proposing a development that does not belong downtown. Do not be swayed by threats from the developer either. Just because they have worked hard doesn't mean the result is an acceptable project. Make it clear that it is not the use that doesn't fit. CVS operates in downtown environments all over the country. It is the suburban design that we object to.

[Helen Shane]

Dear Thinking People:


The traffic study submitted by Armstrong Development for the CVS/Chase project reached to the west only up to North and South High Streets on Bodega.

They say they need go no further west because their Project would serve mostly neighborhood trips expected to disperse to local roads such as Florence Avenue before reaching Washington Avenue, Nelson Way and Virginia Avenue.

But the Staff report states that the project’s parking lot is designed to serve residents of Sebastopol and unincorporated West Sonoma County, comprising a population of approximately 50,000 persons with little access to transit, for whom travel by individual auto is by far the necessary mode of transportation.

And, we assume that the same people who now drive in from the west on 116 and 12 to go to the CVS and Chase at their present northwest location near Redwood Market Place would have to chase downtown to get to their pharmacy and bank.

And now suppose that you did make it to the downtown core location. Can you picture a left turn, into the parking lot, when traveling west from Santa Rosa on Hwy 12? Or how about a left out of the parking lot to go west on Hwy 12 to the Coast? Similar confusing tangles would exist for Hwy 116 drivers.

Here’s a February 2, 2011 story out of Sonoma West:

“SEBASTOPOL — The California Highway Patrol has offered to assist local police with traffic enforcement on state routes inside the city limits, in response to an alarmingly high number of collisions occurring in Sebastopol.”

Or how about the page one story in Sonoma West last June that quoted a California Highway Patrol report based on statewide data:

“Sebastopol ranked second highest of 70 jurisdictions of similar size in the number of pedestrians killed or injured” .

Do we want more of this kind of headline in Sebastopol?

Helen Shane

P.S. Attend the meeting this Wednesday at the Vets and show your support for the DRB.

[scamperwillow]

And if you can't get there by 4, PLEASE come at 5 - it will still be going on!

IMPORTANT

Meeting Place Moved - Design Review Board meeting on CVS/Chase/Armstrong

Moved To Vets Hall Dining Room, 282 So. High St

Wednesday, Nov. 16, 4 pm

Please attend whether or not you intend to speak, your presence and support for the DRB is important and powerful.
To find the true current application go to the City of Sebastopol web site / City Services / Planning / Special Projects / CVS-Chase 11-16-11 / page 42-45

[scamperwillow]

Please- those that were there, give us an update. I had to leave at 5:15. What a great turnout - glad to see people finally showed up!

[scamperwillow]

Great turnout last night - they had to keep bringing in more chairs.

[John Eder]

Please- those that were there, give us an update. I had to leave at 5:15. What a great turnout - glad to see people finally showed up!

The meeting ended around 8 P.M. Three of the DRB members strongly and eloquently voiced their opposition to the current proposal, on a variety of good, solid grounds. They essentially indicated that a quantum leap was required- a new start from scratch on a more urban design. A fourth member expressed moderate opposition, but was okay with most of it as long as some changes were made. The final member voiced tepid opposition/support, and vacillated back and forth until their position and views were completely obscured. I will let you assign names to these roles. The applicant's new "no more Mr. Nice Guy" representative spoke and said, basically, that they had bent over backwards, had complied with all requests, and that the project was in full compliance with all city codes, regulations, etc. They were very proud of what they had produced, and while they were willing to tweak small aspects, it was their final offering. The driveway on Petaluma was non-negotiable, the buildings weren't moving, the architecture was fairly final, etc.

A motion to deny was made but not seconded, so further discussion ensued. Wisely, the DRB asked the Planning Director to craft actual findings upon which to deny, in order to avoid the ambush that the Planning Commission walked into with the City Council. These were going to be brought back to the next DRB meeting for final denial of the project. A suggestion was made to continue the matter, giving the applicant one more opportunity to re-think their position before the project is denied. Thus, it will be back again at the next DRB meeting, although I don't hold out much hope, given the applicant's entrenched position, that it will have a positive outcome.

So, what's next? The applicant will appeal the denial by the Design Review Board to the City Council, just like they did with the Planning Commission's denial (and we all know how that turned out...).

A MOTION, A SECOND AND THREE "YES" VOTES BY OUR CITY COUNCIL WILL RESULT IN THE PROJECT BEING APPROVED.

Sorry for the all caps, but it is that simple. It could all be over in a flash at one meeting. All of our angst, passion, opinions, perceptions of what "Sebastopol" means- all of it will be rendered meaningless.

What is your job at this point? All of us need to start communicating with our council members now (today). We need to get out in front of this issue before it comes up for a vote at the City Council. Many people in town know one or more members of the council. They may even be a good friend of yours. Remind them that they represent the citizens- not CVS, not the Chamber of Commerce, not the property owners, etc. Many of you may have donated money to their campaigns or worked hard to get them elected, and they owe many of you a political favor- it is now "payback" time (let's all pretend that we are in Washington, D.C.). They will be under enormous pressure to approve this project. "How can you look a gift horse in the mouth?" "They are willing to do so much for our town." "Free sidewalks and street improvements (which any developer of that site can be required to provide)", "We need the sales tax revenue (which we are already getting from their existing store)." and on and on. They will be made to feel like fools if they don't approve it, and our city staff will be fully supporting the rush to approval. If warranted, we can point out to our council members that we will work just as diligently to get them "unelected" if they approve the project, possibly prior to the end of their current terms. Also let them know that you plan to actively join a boycott of these businesses if the current plans are approved and the project is built (not nearly as much of a threat as threatening to end to their political careers, however).

Some citizens don't want any project at this location. This is the least likely of the outcomes of this process. Others think that a different project should be built on this site. This is more likely than no project, but it would be amazing if the current applicant capitulated or relented significantly after the investment that they have made to date. Still others think that what has been proposed is great and the process should move on towards approval. This is a highly likely, and may be the view held by enough of our council members to assure approval. Finally, there are those who, recognizing the high likelihood that this project (or something similar) will eventually be built, are pushing to have our city hold out for a stellar project- a complimentary enhancement to our downtown. Something that we are all proud of, are drawn to and that celebrates the uniqueness of our town that we hold so dear. I am among this last group. This project, as currently proposed, does not meet my personal vision for what should be at that location. I am fearful that, given small town politics, economic pressures and egos, it will get built despite our protests- I've seen it before.

Now is the critical time to speak up- call or email our council members, send them a letter c/o City Hall, tell all of your friends to do the same, write a letter to the editor of the Press Democrat, Sonoma West Times and News, the Bohemian- let your views be known. The citizens of Sebastopol need to have their voices heard as often and in as many places as possible.

Use these resources:

City Council Members:
Mayor Guy Wilson [email protected]
Vice Mayor Michael Kyes [email protected]
Kathleen Shaffer [email protected]
Sarah Glade Gurney [email protected]
Patrick Slayter [email protected]

Address letters to:

Councilmember/Mayor ____________
City of Sebastopol
P.O. Box 1776
Sebastopol, CA 95472

Letters to the Press Democrat (Maximum 200 words, include your name, address and phone number. Only your name and city will be shown in the paper): [email protected]

Letters to Sonoma West Times: Fill out online form at https://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_we..._news/opinion/
or mail them a letter at 137 S. Main Sebastopol, CA 95472

Letters to the Bohemian: [email protected]

Contact the applicant, Armstrong Development Properties, Inc.(William McDermott) at: [email protected]

Contact the Sebastopol-based designer of the project, Kevin Kellogg, at: [email protected]

If you need more addresses, phone numbers, etc., indicate so in a post on this forum, and I will provide them.

Finally, our council members need legally-defensible grounds upon which to deny this project or cause it to be radically altered from its current configuration. Although it may be true, letters stating "big companies suck", "banks are evil", "I hate big boxes (this does not qualify as a big box project)", "build a park there", etc. will likely have little impact on them, and are not grounds to be cited by them to deny or alter the project. Sorry- that's how the real world works, especially when lawyers get involved.

This is where you come in. Get up to speed on what is going on with this project- your knowledge, passion and your voice is your power. The project developers are relying on your silence and that of your friends- don't be their tool.

If you have questions, see the city's website at https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/page/special-projects. All documents are listed under "CVS/Chase Project, 6877 Sebastopol Avenue" in the middle of the page. The latest plans, etc. can be found at https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/de...ase_111611.pdf

If you have additional questions, post them here. Or call the Sebastopol Planning Department at (707) 823-6167, or email the Planning Director, Kenyon Webster, at [email protected]

The eleventh hour is here now, and the CVS/Chase developers know it. They have played this game in over one hundred other cities and towns, per their own admission, and they are counting on our failure to act in an effective manner. This is likely our last chance to affect change here, folks. If it matters to you, spread the word far and wide and get to work now.

[scamperwillow]

Excellent post, John - thanks for all the detail. At the risk of getting stoned from all directions, I have to say I am a little mixed here. I think the project has improved greatly and could be improved more. What specifically does DRB not like? What do YOU not like? Can this project still be changed enough to be acceptable? I sure am not crazy about having CVS in the center of town - AT ALL. I think it is fine right where it is and they should spend their money improving the current location. But I do acknowledge the property owners right to sell and develop, and legal ways to stop it might not exist if it fits the zoning and so forth.

I would love to see a better, locally owned project on that site. Where is that project? Where is the money to build it? It's not going to be a park - the city can't buy it. Being a deserted deteriorating set of bldgs is not helping our downtown. I frankly do not see traffic as a big issue - I know, Blasphemy!! Traffic is going to be bad there no matter what happens. Did you see how many people raised their hands that they had walked or biked to the meeting? That is our long term traffic solution. And buses and trains.

I see two options that are doable here:
1) Continue working with DRB until the project gets "good enough." I didn't hear anything about solar panels or charging stations - both no-brainers. A huge flat roof like that! And maybe making enough demands will make the developer withdraw.
2) Find someone to offer the Pellini's a better price for the property that will build a better project or donate it to the City for an art center or something.

This is all off the top of my head.....so I might change my mind listening to more arguments.

[John Eder]

Here is another document that you should review- the City of Sebastopol Design Review Guidelines. These are concrete, defensible grounds upon which to deny the CVS/Chase project or cause it to undergo major revision prior to approval. See it at: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/de...lines_2010.pdf

Section I, Site Planning, Item A1. under Neighborhood context, states "Infill development should be sensitively designed to respect existing patterns, and reinforce the character and context of existing neighborhoods.... . Does this project layout appear to be consistent with the balance of our downtown core?

Section I, Site Planning, Item C3. Circulation and parking- Pedestrian, read 3 a, f and g.

Section II, Architecture, Item A, Relationship to surrounding architecture. Read A1 regarding compatibility. Read B1 through B8 regarding Massing.

Section II, Architecture, Item C, Elements, Item 1p states "The architectural style and exterior materials of each proposed structure shall be designed based upon the architectural traditions of Sebastopol and Sonoma County, the architectural styles prevalent in the site vicinity, and the characters of the site, as determined by the Design Review Board." Do you think that this project blends into our downtown core?

Read all of Section IV. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES, Item A, Downtown and Pedestrian-Oriented Commercial Frontages and Facades.

Ironically, we have stringent standards for fast food drive thrus that don't apply to drug store drive thrus. Under Section IV. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES, Item C, Fast Food Restaurants, it states: "Drive through elements should generally be discouraged. Where drive though elements are appropriate, they should be architecturally integrated into the building, rather than appearing to be applied or "stuck-on" to the building. Drive through elements should not be located on the street side of the building or should be heavily screened from view."

These are the existing standards, among others, that can be used to contest this project's current configuration.

[leela8]

Traffic is going to be bad there no matter what happens. Did you see how many people raised their hands that they had walked or biked to the meeting? That is our long term traffic solution. And buses and trains.

Just a quick sidebar to this aspect of the issue:

For those of us who are disabled (and this doesn't just mean loss of leg use--cardiac problems, mitochondrial disease, disautonomia and orthostatic intolerance are just a few "invisible" disabilites) the options you mention are not actually options. Those of us who are disabled and/or live in outlying areas have no other option than to use our cars.

Also, a large majority of people crossing that intersection appear to be going to SR or points further than walking/cycling/existing public transport can allow.

Having two drive-through-based businesses at the major point of traffic confluence in our little town is a BIG issue, IMO, and one that merits serious (re)consideration since, as I've mentioned before, the developer gets to walk away with their bundle of cash while the townspeople get, well, stuck in traffic...

And I don't think we have to throw up our hands and presume traffic will always be bad there. I have seen Sebastopol spend a lot of money on strangely cosmetic-looking street works--surely some brains and dollars can come together to reroute the traffic through town?

I came here after the decision to make Main Street go one-way exactly at the point of intersection of the two highways--has there ever been talk of rethinking that? I feel confident there are enough smart minds here to make our little town more easily navigable.

[John Eder]

IMPORTANT:

It was brought to my attention that all email correspondence to individual city council members should also be copied to the Sebastopol Planning Director, Kenyon Webster, at [email protected] to insure that your comments are entered into the official public record for the project that is maintained by the city.

All correspondence sent by mail to individual city council members should also be copied to the Planning Director, Kenyon Webster, at:

City of Sebastopol
Planning Department
714 Johnson Street
Sebastopol, CA 95472
Attn: Kenyon Webster

[1104GT]

CVS/Chase Back at Design Review - PLEASE SHOW UP AND SUPPORT THE DRB IN DEMANDING BETTER DESIGN! If we don't support our appointed officials, we get what we get.

(copied from another forum) ... The Sebastopol Design Review Board (DRB) will meet Wednesday, 12/7/2011 at 4 P.M. in the lunch room at the Sebastopol Veterans Memorial Building for final design review of the proposed CVS/Chase project on the site of the former Pellini Chevrolet dealership.

See the agenda at: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/def...drb_agenda.pdf

and the Staff Report: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/def...hase_12711.pdf

This is a continuation of this subject from the last meeting, where it was fairly obvious that at least three of the five DRB members would have voted to deny the project's application. At that meeting, it was determined to give the applicant one more time to reconsider desired changes to the current proposal. One of those three members may not be present for this meeting, so how the voting will go is up in the air. The staff report contains both conditions for approval and the conditions for denial crafted by the city staff, and then come back before the DRB one additional time for final, official denial. The denial will then very likely be appealed to the Sebastopol City Council by the developer.

PLEASE show up and support your Design Review Board members who are attempting to hold the line against this project as it is currently configured. Also, start contacting our council members to let them know how you feel. Their contact information can be found under the "CVS/Chase" thread on this forum.

[The Owl]

CVS/Chase Back at Design Review - PLEASE SHOW UP AND SUPPORT THE DRB IN DEMANDING BETTER DESIGN! If we don't support our appointed officials, we get what we get.

(copied from another forum) ... The Sebastopol Design Review Board (DRB) will meet Wednesday, 12/7/2011 at 4 P.M. in the lunch room at the Sebastopol Veterans Memorial Building for final design review of the proposed CVS/Chase project on the site of the former Pellini Chevrolet dealership.

See the agenda at: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/def...drb_agenda.pdf

and the Staff Report: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/def...hase_12711.pdf

This is a continuation of this subject from the last meeting, where it was fairly obvious that at least three of the five DRB members would have voted to deny the project's application. At that meeting, it was determined to give the applicant one more time to reconsider desired changes to the current proposal. One of those three members may not be present for this meeting, so how the voting will go is up in the air. The staff report contains both conditions for approval and the conditions for denial crafted by the city staff, and then come back before the DRB one additional time for final, official denial. The denial will then very likely be appealed to the Sebastopol City Council by the developer.

PLEASE show up and support your Design Review Board members who are attempting to hold the line against this project as it is currently configured. Also, start contacting our council members to let them know how you feel. Their contact information can be found under the "CVS/Chase" thread on this forum.

Sorry - I didn't get this until now at nearly 6 after I'm already home in Bodega. I hate that whole idea for that area... so not Sebastopol, so strip mall city mentality, I'm surprised it has gotten as far as it has.

[scamperwillow]

The whole project was denied in short order by the DRB. It will surely be appealed to the City Council soon - so stay tuned!!

[Helen Shane]

Today, after a hearing of less than an hour and a half, the DRB voted 3 to 1 to deny approval of the Project at 6877 Sebastopol Road (formerly Pellini Chevrolet). The applicant had made a request, citing the Brown Act, to disallow public comment at this meeting. Helen Shane of the Committee for Small Town Sebastopol, Sebastopol Council Vice Chair Michael Kyes and Thomas Morabito of Occupy Sebastopol spoke in favor of the public's right to comment at the meeting. It appeared that would be the case. However, it became evident early in the proceedings that at least three of the DRB members, not including Chair Zachary Douch, were prepared to deny approval of the application. A motion to deny the application made by DRB member Peter Schurch, and seconded by DRB member Bob Beauchamp passed on a three to one vote. Voting Aye were Schurch, Beauchamp and Lynn Deedler. Voting nay was Chair Zachary Douch. DRB Alternate Lindsay Massey was not present.

The attached document was given to each DRB member via email prior to the meeting, delivered to their desk at the meeting place, and was widely distributed to the approximately 100 people in attendance at the meeting. DRB members Beauchamp, Deedler and Schurch gave their reasons (findings) for denial.

The applicant made it plain they will appeal to the Sebastopol City Council the decision of the DRB. They must do so within five business days. Given the long weekend closing of Sebastopol City offices, that lands the deadline for appeal on Thursday, December 15. The next City Council meeting is set for December 20. It is not known on when the expected appeal will be agendized for action by the Council.

[nicofrog]

Chase IS the Evil overlord

Chase/City/BofA ugly !% greed driven usurers...
Count me in to picket the site!

Nico

I would love to be part of a large turn-out of people representing the desire for downtown Sebastopol to grow with more local stores, not corporate chain retail.
To help get as many people there on Wed. as possible, can someone please post the address where the design review will be held. I don't know where to go, but I want to be there!
Thank you, thank you...

[Barry]

The Design Review Board's denial of the CVS/Chase project has been appealed to the City Council. A special session has been scheduled for a Public Hearing on the appeal on Monday, January 23 at 6pm at the Sebastopol Community Center. Written comments may also be submitted to the City Clerk. The notice of appeal is attached.

[scamperwillow]

Barry - you beat me to the punch! I was just going to post the same thing.

The Design Review Board's denial of the CVS/Chase project has been appealed to the City Council. A special session has been scheduled for a Public Hearing on the appeal on Monday, January 23 at 6pm at the Sebastopol Community Center. Written comments may also be submitted to the City Clerk. The notice of appeal is attached.

[Helen Shane]

Update Sebastopol City Council

To support (or not?)

the appeal of the denial by the

Design Review Board on the

CVS/Chase/Armstrong application.

Tell the Council to vote to support their DRB and their Planning Commission
and deny the CVS/Chase appeal to prevent their move to
“the core of the core of town”at the junction of Hwys 12 and 116,
Sebastopol Road and Petaluma Avenue.

The Council meets
Monday January 23rd
at 6 p.m.
Main Hall at the
Sebastopol Community Center

390 Morris Street.

Send your comments to each City Council member and to

the City Clerk by January 16, 2012 for inclusion in the official record.

Mayor Guy Wilson [email protected]

Vice Mayor Michael Kyes [email protected]

Council members:

Sarah Glade Gurney [email protected]

Kathleen Shaffer [email protected]

Patrick Slayter [email protected]

City Clerk Mary Gourley [email protected]

For the city legal notice go to:


https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/sites/default/files/events-and-meetings/cvs_legal_hearing_appeal_january_23_2012_cc_meeting_notice.pdf

Envision what our town really needs at "Pete's Corner".

[Barry]

Give 'em hell, Helen!
- Barry



Sebastopol project faces opposition
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...p=all&tc=pgall
By BOB NORBERG
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Sunday, December 18, 2011 at 8:40 p.m.

The controversy swirling around the proposed CVS Pharmacy in Sebastopol continues, with the city Design Review Board to meet this week and formally adopt the reasons it has rejected the project design.

“The design is modern, trendy and out of character with the surrounding buildings, out of character with mainstream Sebastopol, and the community loves the feel of the classic, old downtown,” said Lynn Deedler, vice chairman of the design board. “This project doesn't fit in with that at all.”

The board voted to reject the development's design on Dec. 7 and will vote on adopting the findings Wednesday. The rejection is being appealed to the City Council by the developer, Armstrong Development Properties of Sacramento.

The developer contends the design of the $10 million project conforms to city guidelines.

Planning Director Kenyon Webster said the project is at a standstill until a design is approved by the Design Review Board or the City Council. The council plans a public hearing Jan. 23 on the appeal. [See more info about the meeting here]

Armstrong Development Properties is proposing to build a 14,576-square-foot CVS Pharmacy and 4,327-square-foot Chase Bank branch at the site of the vacant Pellini Chevrolet dealership.

The plan for the prominent 2.4-acre site, is being challenged by the Committee for Small Town Sebastopol. The group contends the project will create additional traffic and emissions and is out of character with Sebastopol's small-town feeling.

The group has sued the city, contending it should require the developer to conduct a complete environmental impact report. The City Council in July ruled a full impact report was not necessary, reversing the Planning Commission.

Opposition leader Helen Shane said she doesn't believe that CVS Pharmacy and Chase Bank belong at that highly visible location, which should instead be pedestrian-oriented development of shops facing the streets with apartments on the second floor.

“I don't think that those two franchises and their designs for the project can be made acceptable,” Shane said. “I want to see something else entirely.”

A spokesman for Armstrong Development did not return a call seeking comment.

[prana]

This is a compilation of older posts on the topic...trying to provide a way for people to get out a quick letter to the city council before the Jan. meeting...there's a link to a great draft letter, and more talking points can be found in the wacco forum online...thanks everyone for all your efforts

GREAT DRAFT LETTER and petition: https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/sebastopolcvs/

The Council meets
Monday January 23rd
at 6 p.m.
Main Hall at the
Sebastopol Community Center
390 Morris Street.

Send your comments to each City Council member and to
the City Clerk by January 16, 2012 for inclusion in the official record.

Mayor Guy Wilson [email protected]
Vice Mayor Michael Kyes [email protected]
City Council Members:
Kathleen Shaffer [email protected]
Sarah Glade Gurney [email protected]
Patrick Slayter [email protected]
City Clerk Mary Gourley [email protected]

Address letters to:

Councilmember/Mayor ____________
City of Sebastopol
P.O. Box 1776
Sebastopol, CA 95472

Letters to the Press Democrat (Maximum 200 words, include your name, address and phone number. Only your name and city will be shown in the paper): [email protected]

Letters to Sonoma West Times: Fill out online form at https://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_wes..._news/opinion/
or mail them a letter at 137 S. Main Sebastopol, CA 95472

Letters to the Bohemian: [email protected]

Contact the applicant, Armstrong Development Properties, Inc.(William McDermott) at: [email protected]

Contact the Sebastopol-based designer of the project, Kevin Kellogg, at: [email protected]

[Barry]

Thanks for posting this! Note that the Draft Letter/petition is addressed to the Planning Commission, where as the next/final action will be taken by the City Council. Any letters that are sent should be addressed to the City Council.

Barry

This is a compilation of older posts on the topic...trying to provide a way for people to get out a quick letter to the city council before the Jan. meeting...there's a link to a great draft letter, and more talking points can be found in the wacco forum online...thanks everyone for all your efforts

GREAT DRAFT LETTER and petition: https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/sebastopolcvs/

[Barry]

The CVS/Chase project is being appealed to the City Council on Monday, January 23rd at 6pm.
More info here.

[Barry]

There's a new thread called "Trying to get support for the Pellini's Corner Development for Monday's Council Meeting" started by Taishon, who supports the project, and wants to "Debate all reasonable objections".

Perhaps some of you would like to raise your issues there and see what happens... It would be good if this project got a thorough re-assessment before Monday's Public hearing.

Please post your objections there.

[scamperwillow]

Barry - tried to go to that page but got a dead link.... : (
Would love to see it if you can fix. Thx.

There's a new thread called "Trying to get support for the Pellini's Corner Development for Monday's Council Meeting" started by Taishon, who supports the project, and wants to "Debate all reasonable objections".

Perhaps some of you would like to raise your issues there and see what happens... It would be good if this project got a thorough re-assessment before Monday's Public hearing.

Please post your objections there.

[scamperwillow]

Tonight is the meeting at the City council in the large room at the Community Center - 6:00 p.m. Remember the issue they are addressing is the Design Review Board's denial of the design. So speakers should be familiar with the findings of the DRB and speak to those issues - rather than "it's not appropriate for Sebastopol". They can't deny the project based on that. They need factual findings. See you there!

[1104GT]

This is not over. The appeal of the DRB decision is being heard next Tuesday night at 6. Write or call the City Council members. Here's my letter to the Council:

Dear City Council Members,

Thank you for your time and dedication to our town. I truly appreciate your efforts and the efforts of the Design Review Board. I also want to commend you in maintaining a civil atmosphere at the last meeting. Nicely done!


I am writing regarding the upcoming review and decision to approve or deny the CVS/Chase developer's appeal of our Design Review Board's (DRB) decision. I support the DRB's denial of the application and hope you will do the same. Our DRB made a wide and informed decision on behalf of our town. I am a firm supporter of good development in our town, but believe that Sebastopol should be very demanding of projects in our downtown.


I attended most, if not all of the DRB meetings reviewing this project. The core issue with this project lies in the suburban nature of the site plan which results in a building turning it's back on the sidewalk and the most important corner of our town to focus on the parking lot. This issue came up at the very first design review meetings and continued throughout the process but was never resolved or even addressed by the developer. Being a suburban developer, I don't think the applicant comprehends the differences between suburban and downtown site planning. Being unable to figure out how to respond, they turned their attention to adding things with friendly names like "trellises", "boulder gardens", "rain gardens" and "window skins" to screen the inadequate design. These only exist to distract us (and you) from the core problems with the site plan. Our DRB was correct in recognizing this fundamental problem and denying the project on those grounds alone. Without recognizing downtown/urban differences, our downtown will be doomed to dwindling vibrancy.


There is a fundamental difference in human behavior between downtown and suburban developments. In suburban developments and at this development, people arrive by car, park at or near the front door of their destination, enter, shop and then depart. They seldom interact with other stores in the center and almost never interact with the street or sidewalk. Suburban developments are designed to encourage and reward car-centric, anti social behavior that has eroded the community fabric of our society.


Human behavior in a downtown places a much higher value on social interaction. If this development was downtown in nature, shoppers would walk downtown or park behind the buildings or in remote peripheral locations and navigate on foot to sidewalks where they enter stores and interact with their neighbors. Downtowns consciously trade auto-centric convenience for social interaction. Understanding this difference is essential when evaluating any design proposed downtown.


Local Examples or Downtown and Urban
You can see examples of both types of development right in our downtown today. You can also see how even one small lot developed in a suburban way can negatively affect or even kill the vibrancy of a street. Walk on the South side of Bodega Avenue from Main Street to the Pellini lot and notice how the pedestrian experience dies as soon as you pass Jasper O'Farrell's and cross the driveways in front of the WestAmerica bank drive-thru. The same is true of Rite Aid, Safeway and the Whole Foods center. The sidewalks in front of all are dead relative to Main Street. The three three conditions that will destroy a sidewalk experience are:


1. Driveways and drive-throughs - they are dangerous to pedestrians and break up the sidewalk experience
2. Parking lots fronting streets - When walking or shopping, I will cross a street to avoid them
3. Lack of windows - The South side of Westamerica Bank and the North side of Silk moon are both unpleasant examples.




Questionable Comments from the Last Meeting
The following statements were made at the last meeting that I disagree with:


1. This is a "transitional" property linking downtown and the industrial areas of town. That may be what it is now, but not what it should become. It is at the very center of our town and should be the epicenter of downtown redevelopment.


2. This project agrees with the General Plan goal to provide parking at the periphery of downtown. This property should not be viewed as in the periphery. It's in the dead-center of town. Excessive parking is inappropriate.


3. This project fits in with the immediate context. - While I agree that it does, I think most of the existing neighboring buildings are almost all inappropriate for a downtown and should almost all be candidates for higher quality redevelopment. Can't we do better that what's there now?


4. The existing property is blighted, so anything is better than what's there now - I have live here for twenty years. The Pellini building has not been painted, remodeled or even had the windows cleaned in that time. I'm guessing most of the weeds people love to mention have been here for almost that long. If it's blight now, it's been blight for the last twenty years. Besides, is "better then weeds" a good reason to approve a development?


In summary, I think the design Review Board's findings related to the site plan are correct, within their jurisdiction and more than substantial enough to deny the project. The other findings and most of the positive items in the staff report are just peripheral and inconsequential compared to the suburban nature of this development. As I said during my 3 minutes, you can't make a "suburban" project "downtown" just by shoving it up to the street. It takes a City that expects it and a developer or designer who understands it.


City Governance Issues
The other issue that concerns me is one of City governance. The Planning Commission (appointed by the Council) denied the application but did not articulate their reasoning. Rather than insisting that they render findings appropriate to their position, you overturned their decision. Now you are considering overturning the decision of another of your appointed boards. If you overturn the DBR, you will be admitting that the Council has made inappropriate appointments to our trusted boards and commissions. I would think you would then disband both boards, since you will have deemed them ineffective. If that occurs, we the voters then need to reconsider the judgement and trust we have placed in the Council. Do we want our City to run on the decisions of only five people? I do not elect City Council members to be Planning Commissioners and Design Review Committee members. I elect them trusting in their good judgement in making appointments. These are challenging issues that should be taken very seriously by all of us.


Again, I thank you for you time and trust you will chose the path that makes our City better, not just "better than weeds".

[dominus]

In the book "The Geography of Nowhere: the Rise and Decline of America's Man-made Landscape" written by James Howard Kunstler is the idea that the extreme cult of individualism and personal property is at the basis of the American nightmare. American individualism "degrades the notion that the private individual has a responsibility to the public realm thus creating cities where public spaces are indeed devalued and trivialized."

Beautiful and meaningful architecture can move our spirits, it can also facilitate community and a deeper connection with one another. To trivialize that is to strike at the very heart of what it means to be human.

The simple truth is that no one, not one single person, can own the land, or own the water, or own the air. It's not possible. Any land which we preside over is a form of stewardship. Therein rests the crux of the problem because it's short-sighted and egocentric to think that the land is ours to do as we please with. Our moral responsibility can not rest only on economics. It must be rooted in something deeper and more human. And what could be more human than to look deep into the future through our grandchildren's eyes and know that we found the strength and vision to make the right choices for them and subsequent generations?

[Magick]

THANK YOU SO MUCH! The realization of this simple truth is essential if we are to make the evolutionary leap that will bring us into reunion with all life and provide a thriving future for our grandchildren. As Tracy Chapman said,

"Don't be tempted by the shiny apple
Don't you eat of a bitter fruit
Hunger only for a taste of justice
Hunger only for a world of truth
'Cause all that you have is your soul

I thought, thought I could find a way
Beat the system;
Make a deal and have no debts to pay
Take it all, I’d take it all, I'd run away
For me myself first class and first rate
But all that you have is your soul..

May we find our way back to the communion of community and gather in the common spaces once again. In peace, Magick

In the book "The Geography of Nowhere: the Rise and Decline of America's Man-made Landscape" written by James Howard Kunstler is the idea that the extreme cult of individualism and personal property is at the basis of the American nightmare. American individualism "degrades the notion that the private individual has a responsibility to the public realm thus creating cities where public spaces are indeed devalued and trivialized."

Beautiful and meaningful architecture can move our spirits, it can also facilitate community and a deeper connection with one another. To trivialize that is to strike at the very heart of what it means to be human.

The simple truth is that no one, not one single person, can own the land, or own the water, or own the air. It's not possible. Any land which we preside over is a form of stewardship. Therein rests the crux of the problem because it's short-sighted and egocentric to think that the land is ours to do as we please with. Our moral responsibility can not rest only on economics. It must be rooted in something deeper and more human. And what could be more human than to look deep into the future through our grandchildren's eyes and know that we found the strength and vision to make the right choices for them and subsequent generations?

[Helen Shane]

Dominus' mention of James Howard Kunstler is so apt for this situation. Thanks to D for submitting, and to Magick for her comment on it, and all the people in the Sebastopol community who have come together over this. Helen Shane.

P.S. See you at the Farm Market Sunday....

and Tuesday night at 6 at the Community Center