Testing Petaluma's limits

The first major political test of a Sonoma County growth boundary may be shaping up in Petaluma where a residential developer is eyeing 342 acres just outside the city limits.

As many as 2,100 homes could be built, making it Petaluma's largest subdivision in recent years.

But a voter-approved growth boundary prohibits development of the Lakeville Highway-area land until at least 2018, and City Council members are discussing a proposal to extend the moratorium until 2025.

An exception to the urban growth boundary would require voter approval. It would be the first in any of the eight Sonoma County cities that have adopted growth boundaries since 1990.

"This is really the first attempt we have seen where there has been a calculated and deliberate attempt by developers to break urban growth boundaries and undermine voters," said Daisy Pistey-Lyhne, Sonoma-Marin field representative for Greenbelt Alliance.

About a third of the land at issue belongs to real estate investors Clem Carinelli and Dennis Hunter, but the potential developer is Delco Builders & Developers.

The Pleasant Hill company, which is building 245 homes at the southeast edge of Petaluma, confirmed its interest in the property.

Company officials declined to provide details of their vision for the property, and the city said it has yet to receive any information from Delco.

But a former Petaluma councilman said he was questioned by pollsters and asked whether a $40 million gift to the city would persuade him to support an expansion of the boundary.

The telephone poll suggested that local businesses would put up the money for civic projects, potentially including athletic fields or building a crosstown connector on Rainier Avenue, in exchange for annexation of the land on Lakeville Highway, according to former City Councilman David Keller.

Keller, a supporter of the growth boundary, said the poll also asked for reactions to developing market-rate housing, senior housing and work force housing on the site.

"Is it illegal? No," Keller said. "Is it outrageous? Yes. It's an affront to voters."

Petaluma Mayor Pam Torliatt said she was approached recently about the proposal by a broker who told her developers wanted to build 210 houses a year on the property over 10 years. In exchange, the broker offered to come up with $40 million for public use, Torliatt said.

"I don't believe Petaluma is for sale," Torliatt said. "The residents of this community have spoken. I will do everything I can to ensure that boundary is maintained."

Santa Rosa political consultant Herb Williams, representing Delco President and CEO Doyle Heaton, confirmed the company is interested in the property and is polling.

Williams would not discuss the potential project or confirm that the city might be offered $40 million to annex the land.

But, he said: "You don't go into a project like this without testing the feasibility."

Pistey-Lyhne said an offer of a multimillion-dollar gift to the city is reminiscent of what happened in Livermore in 2005 when a developer promised more than $10 million for the city to allow a 2,400-unit subdivision outside a voter-approved boundary.

Pardee Homes sponsored a costly ballot initiative that was defeated by a wide margin.

Petaluma voters overwhelmingly voted in 1998 to adopt a boundary for new development around the city that will remain in place until 2018.

On Oct. 1, the City Council is scheduled to discuss a proposal to extend the date to 2025.

Petaluma is one of eight Sonoma County cities to adopt such limits, beginning in 1990 with Cotati and Santa Rosa. Only Cloverdale has not set a development boundary.

The boundaries preserve agricultural lands, encourage eco-friendly in-fill development and reduce suburban sprawl, supporters said.

Petaluma, like most other cities, allows certain exceptions, typically for affordable housing. Santa Rosa allowed the Bellevue School District to build a school outside its boundary, and Windsor crafted its boundary to accommodate plans for a car dealer and shopping center. But no exceptions have been submitted to voters in Sonoma County.

In Petaluma, the land that Delco is believed to be interested in is adjacent to its 245-home Southgate subdivision at Lakeville Highway and Frates Road.

The land is just outside Petaluma's urban growth boundary and would not be eligible for annexation without voter approval, said Mike Moore, the city's community development director.

The acreage also hasn't been addressed in the city's ongoing update of its land-use plan.

"The homes are unaccounted for in our general plan analysis so you have issues in terms of the availability of utilities and water and sewer capacity," Moore said.

News Researcher Michele Van Hoeck contributed to this report. You can reach Staff Writer Paul Payne at 762-7297 or paul.payne@pressdemocrat.com.