The point of gathering this data is to try and capture some of the rage and passion of a decade of response to the grinding wheels of bureaucracy, development pressure and (therefore) money. Because gathering this information required sifting through stacks of papers in numerous locations, all of the data is not included. Anyone interested in a more detailed overview is strongly urged to check the public records.
Read it as one person's view: a resident's view, an ordinary view of people fighting to save something they know is special and valuable and rare. Read it and know that it is only one person's story, out of how many others. Read it and understand that, even in the face of tremendous opposition, opposition that continued over the years, with new people picking up and carrying the torch, people who stayed the course for a decade, and even a local government which heard these people and responded to them, understand that even with all of this we still it looks unpromising that we will be able to save the entire ecosystem from the most current proposal.
Between 1976 and 1988, four separate studies of the Laguna were made, including a report by the Laguna Technical Advisory Committee appointed by former Congressman Bosco. That committee recommended the establishment a National Wildlife Refuge in the Laguna.
July: Palm Terrace proposed project; 35 lots plus commercial submitted. Revised to 31 lots plus commercial.
March 22: Planning Commission directs that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (approval with conditions) be prepared.
April 26: Public hearing on Negative Declaration by Planning Commission
May 10: Planning Commission recommends adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves application for a Use Permit and Major Subdivision.
June 6: City Council adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves Use Permit and Tentative Map, giving the project a green light.
August 8: Citizen's lawsuit filed by 'Laguna Today and Tomorrow' against the city and the applicant stating that a new EIR is required.
October 23: Superior Court Judge Lawrence Sawyer grants the petitioners' claim requesting the city to set aside their decision.
December 6: City Council sets aside approvals for Palm Terrace.
January 4: City sends out Request for Proposals for a new EIR.
July 1989: EIR is amended to include a full assessment of the impacts of Palm Terrace and Saddleburr, an adjacent property the applicant also wishes to develop.
August 29: Applicant amended and expanded the project by proposing to annex and subdivide the adjacent 32 acre property (Saddleburr).
November 4: Housing cap on five areas (including unincorporated Sebastopol) in the county is recommended.
April 13: 'Laguna Is For Everyone' (L.I.F.E.) forms to fight Palm Terrace and preserve the Laguna.
April 24: Public hearing of new draft EIR in which 20 speakers and all seven member s of the Planning Commission ripped the report and its authors for oversights, omissions, and deficiencies. Nevertheless, draft EIR is accepted on a 321 vote.
May 3: A Press Democrat poll found that 74.6% of the county's voters call the rate of growth 'too fast', an increase of 6% over the 68.3% in a similar poll taken in 1988.
May 10: "Sonoma Earth Action" representatives from Sonoma State University send statement of position strongly opposing Palm Terrace/ Saddleburr.
June 6: "Citizens to Ensure Comprehensive Planning' files 'Notice of Intent" to circulate the Sebastopol Planning Initiative (Measure H on the ballot) , a planned growth ballot measure which arose in response largely to Palm Terrace (and Canada Vista , a proposed development on Atascadero Creek). Measure H calls for a moratorium on major development while Sebastopol's new General Plan is updated.
August 28: Public hearing on draft EIR for Palm Terrace and Saddleburr. Nearly every resident of Hutchins Avenue turns out to express dismay and anguish about the proposed developments. EIR approved by City Council, 31, with only Anne Magnie dissenting.
Following Measure H's not-so-enormous defeat in the November election, the City Council forms an'Interim Growth Management Committee' to create policy for development projects proposed to take place during the General Plan's update. The two ballot authors are on the committee. No real guidelines emerge.
February 7: Revised application filed combining Palm Terrace and Saddleburr into single development, calling for 47 single family lots, 24 multifamily units and one office lot.
March 26: Public hearing Petitions 'To Save the Laguna from Massive Development' bearing many local signatures are presented.
April 23: Public hearing
April 30, May 14, May 28: Planning Commission receives 'considerable' public comment and testimony.
May: Letter from Terri Shorb, L.I.F.E. activist, to the Sebastopol Planning Commission, citing ". . more than 1,200 residents of Sebastopol and environs have affixed their signatures to a strong statement of opposition to the project".
June 11: Planning Commission recommends denial of the project.
October 13: City receives letter from applicants requesting 'conditional exceptions to the Subdivision ordinance'.
October 6: City planners review project which now has been scaled down from 29 to 19 units.
January 25: Sebastopol Tomorrow issues a 'call to action' to citizens to attend the public hearing on Palm Terrace. A well attended hearing produces many reasoned, well researched, thoughtful and moving audience comments opposing Palm Terrace for many reasons. The Planning Commission recommends denial of the project to the cheers of the audience.
February 8: Sebastopol Planning Commission votes 43 to recommend denial of a Use Permit and Major Subdivision with exceptions for Palm Terrace.
March 15: Following public hearing on Palm Terrace, the City Council votes 41 to deny the project.
May 27: C.G.Y. Investments files lawsuit against city of Sebastopol stating that the city did not identify adequate findings to support denial of the project.
July 6: Palm Terrace owners said they are willing to go to mediation to settle their $2 million lawsuit against the city. Because of the Orchard Park lawsuit and the firestorm of negative, inaccurate publicity that accompanied it, Sebastopol finds itself in a weakened position to defend itself against another developer.
November 1: Sebastopol City staff recommends filing an application for Open Space District's matching grant program. This is a program where the Open Space district and cities share the cost of purchasing open space that falls within city boundaries.
November 15: Staff recommends that the city also apply for Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program grant for the Palm Terrace and Saddleburr properties.
August 8: City Council approves 'Stipulated Settlement in Order', or settlement of the lawsuit. Requirements for including affordable housing have been eliminated, and some development fees waived. As part of the settlement, the City Council must reconsider the Palm Terrace proposal. If the City does not approve a total of 18 units for development by September 19, the lawsuit will resume.
September 5: City Council discussed how to proceed with the Palm Terrace lawsuit settlement, which they have already signed. Public testimony at this meeting is not part of the official record.
September 19: City Council will reconsider the Palm Terrace proposal.
All Rights Reserved.
Contact rights@monitor.net for permission to reproduce.