One of our five guiding principles is: “If it can be seen from the Parkway, it shouldn’t be built along the Parkway.”
We support all efforts to restrict such building as it compromises the sanctuary aspects of the Parkway, one of the signature hallmarks of its existence and a benchmark of its priceless values to the community of which it is the natural heart.
Expecting the county, which financially benefits from development within its boundaries, to work against its own interests given ambiguity in the documents governing the Parkway, is probably doomed to failure.
However, if the emerging discussion about establishing a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) of the governing entities of Parkway communities, and the JPA then contracting with a nonprofit organization to provide daily management and fund development for the Parkway becomes implemented, there will then exist a relatively independent entity contracted to advocate for protecting the Parkway’s viewshed as most agree it should be protected, rather than being compelled to argue (and too often doing so in court) about report analysis.
Bill Dillinger: Protect river bluff: No exceptions
By Bill Dillinger - Special To The Bee
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, September 16, 2007
What's happening to our resolve to preserve and protect the American River Parkway? We seem to be chipping away at it, piece by piece.
The latest incursion is the Markis-Lien proposal to build two large houses overlooking the parkway on the bluffs in the Riverwood community in Carmichael. The Sacramento County Project Planning Commission is scheduled to hear testimony about the proposal at 5:30 p.m. Monday at 700 H St.
It will be Round 2 for the project.
The county's zoning requires a minimum 70-foot setback from the edge of the steep bluffs in the area. In 2004, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, over the objections of the Save the American River Association and many others, was prevented only by a court order from granting a sizable exception to the setback.
Not bothering with an environmental impact report, the supervisors voted to cut the setback to 35 feet to oblige the developers, who had wanted to build even closer to the edge -- a mere 20 feet.
Save the American River sued, and a judge ordered the county to complete the environmental impact report.
The county has since complied but not in a satisfactory manner.
The county hired the developers' former engineering firm to prepare the report, which causes me concern about conflict of interest. Needless to say, the report makes no conclusions that would hinder the developers' revised plan.
Yet Save the American River and others find the report badly flawed. It brushes off the impact of the two huge structures on the viewshed with a notion of "Screen 'em with a few trees, and no one will notice."
