dev.citrusheightssentinel.com

Tag: preserve our civic center

Settlement reached in lawsuit against new city hall & MOB project
This initial computer rendering of the new three-story medical office building on Greenback Lane shows the building with a 20-foot setback, which will increase to a 30-foot setback, according to terms of a settlement agreement reached. // Image courtesy, City of Citrus Heights.

A settlement agreement has been reached in a lawsuit between a resident group and the City of Citrus Heights, nearly a year after council members unanimously approved a controversial plan to move city hall and construct a three-story medical office building (MOB) in its place on Greenback Lane.

The lawsuit, filed last April by a resident group known as Preserve Our Civic Center (POCC), alleged the project did not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and sought to put a halt on both the new city hall and MOB until alleged violations were addressed.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, POCC agreed to drop its lawsuit against the City, in exchange for several modifications to the original plan. POCC will also receive payment of $67,500 to cover its attorney fees and costs involved in the lawsuit.

Modifications listed in the settlement primarily address issues raised by residents during the debate over the project last year, including concerns about screening and setback for the 68,727-square-foot medical building, increased traffic, and a desire to preserve the old rose garden at city hall.

A statement issued by POCC spokesman Norman Hill summarized key aspects of the settlement agreement and stated the group was “pleased” to announce the settlement had been reached. Previously, Hill told The Sentinel he was hopeful “some kind of compromise settlement” could be reached with the City through the legal process, and he appears to have accomplished that.

[For more on the lawsuit, see story: “Lawsuit filed against Citrus Heights over MOB, new hall”]

The city manager’s office confirmed Thursday that a settlement had been reached, but referred all requests for comment to City Attorney Ruthann Ziegler. Messages left by phone and email for Ziegler on Thursday were not returned by 4 p.m. Friday.

[follow text=”Get local news:”]

Five key modifications listed in the settlement include:
- Setback from Greenback Lane: In an effort to reduce the visual impact of the building from travelers on Greenback, the new Dignity Health medical building will be set back an additional 10 feet, for a total setback of 30 feet from Greenback Lane.
- Screening: To help provide screening for the adjacent neighborhood, a row of Redwood trees will be planted along the western border of the new medical building.
- Traffic: The left turn lane from eastbound Greenback Lane onto Fountain Square Drive will be extended by four car lengths. Hill previously told The Sentinel he believed this modification would help alleviate a traffic backup he anticipates with the new MOB.
- Access: Larger vehicles exiting a soon-to-be-built utility yard next to the new city hall will be required to exit only from the northern driveway. According to POCC, this will help reduce the impact on local traffic passing by on Fountain Square Drive.
- Rose garden. A public meeting will be held by the City to discuss development of a replacement rose garden at another location, although the ultimate decision is left to the City whether to expend public funds on the garden or not.
The settlement announcement comes less than a month prior to a scheduled Sacramento Superior Court hearing on the lawsuit, originally set for April 1, 2016. What's next It is unclear whether the lawsuit had an effect on construction progress of the new medical building, as neither POCC nor the City said work had been halted on the project. However, the lot has laid dormant since demolition of the former hall was completed in November of last year. According to a statement from the city manager's office in January, Panattoni Development had submitted plans for the new medical building, with construction estimated to begin in spring of this year -- although a specific start date was unknown. [Related: "Citrus Heights city hall ‘on target’ for completion by September" ] Construction work on the new city hall began last summer, with an expected completion date of September of this year. Save Save
March 12, 2016
Judge denies motion to halt Citrus Heights city hall demolition

A computer rendering of the new three-story medical office building on Greenback Lane, approved by Citrus Heights council members on March 26, 2015.

A Sacramento Superior Court judge denied a motion Friday that sought to temporarily bar the City of Citrus Heights from proceeding with plans to demolish its existing city hall and allow Dignity Health to construct a three-story medical office building (MOB) in its place, according to court documents.

Norman Hill, who heads up the group suing the City over the MOB and city hall project, said his “Preserve Our Civic Center” group sought a temporary restraining order after learning the City had planned a July 18 “Cash & Carry” day to liquidate various items and decor from the existing hall’s property. He said Judge Timothy Frawley ultimately rejected the group’s motion for a 10-day restraining order, after finding “the balance of the equities came out in favor of the City” and determining such an order would present a “great hardship for the City.”

City representatives were unavailable for comment by phone and email over the weekend.

The POCC lawsuit, initially filed in April, asks the court to declare the city council’s March 26 approval of the new hall and MOB project to be “invalid and void,” and that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the project “fails to satisfy the requirements of [the California Environmental Quality Act].” It also asks the court to order a “new legally adequate” EIR for the project, and require suspension of all contracts related to construction on the project until alleged violations of CEQA are addressed, according to court filings.

[Learn more: Lawsuit filed against Citrus Heights over MOB, new hall]

Although unsuccessful in temporarily halting progress on the city hall demolition, Hill said his group plans to continue with the lawsuit against the project, estimating it could take until early 2016 to get a final decision from a judge. The retired environmental attorney and Citrus Heights resident said he’s currently awaiting a “big pile” of documents to be released by the City in response to a Public Records Act request.

Note: this story will be updated Monday to include comments from the City, if reached.
[follow text=”Follow local news:”]

July 19, 2015
Lawsuit filed against Citrus Heights over MOB, new hall

A lawsuit was filed against the City of Citrus Heights last week by a group alleging “noncompliance” with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) on a recently approved new city hall and three-story medical office building (MOB) project.

The lawsuit, initiated by the nonprofit group “Preserve Our Civic Center,” asks the Sacramento County Superior Court to declare the City’s approval of the new hall and MOB project to be “invalid and void,” and that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the project “fails to satisfy the requirements of CEQA.” It also asks the court to order a “new legally adequate” EIR for the project, and require suspension of all contracts related to construction on the project until alleged violations of CEQA are addressed.

The $53 million project was unanimously approved by the city council on March 26, authorizing the aging city hall to be torn down and replaced with a 68,000 square feet Dignity Health medical building. A new $22 million city hall would then be built next to the Post Office down the street on the 10.9-acre Stock Property, paid for in part by a 15-year lease agreement with Dignity Health.

In legal filings, Preserve Our Civic Center identifies itself as a group “composed of persons whose economic, personal, aesthetic, health, and property interests will be severely injured if the adoption of the Project is not set aside pending full compliance with CEQA and all other environmental laws.”

The lawsuit alleges “deficiencies” in the City’s several-hundred page EIR, including “an inadequate project description, and an inadequate analysis regarding impacts to transportation and circulation, air quality, biological resources, land use, and noise.” The lawsuit alleges that such deficiencies will result in “significant environmental impacts.”

The CEQA-required EIR is a detailed analysis of potential environmental effects for certain projects, with “significant” effects being required to be adequately mitigated, reducing the effect to “less than significant.” The Report must also include an analysis of alternatives to the project, assessing if other options may create less effect on the environment.

Citrus Heights resident Norman Hill, who heads up the group filing the lawsuit, said the EIR “seemed to be designed to understate the effects, so that the City would not have to deal with mitigation.”

[Read the final version of the EIR and traffic study here: http://www.citrusheights.net/836/Environmental-Impact-Report]

Citing the legal complaint filed by Hill’s group, Monica Alejandrez with the city manager’s office referred comments to City Attorney Ruthann Ziegler, who was unable to be reached by phone or email on Friday.

City council members were aware of the likelihood of a lawsuit prior to their vote to approve the final EIR and authorize the project to go forward, as Hill had threatened litigation previously.

“Mr. Hill, I’m sorry that you feel the way you feel,” Councilman Jeff Slowey told Hill during the March 26 council meeting. “But threats, they don’t bother me in the least bit. If you wanna go to court I say bring it on — but bring your checkbook.”

[Prior story: Council votes 5-0 for new city hall & MOB; lawsuit threatened]

Hill said the council “just blew off anything that called for a reduction of the impacts,” and should have done more to address issues like aesthetics, traffic, and glare, highlighting concern for neighbors who would see “this three-story monstrosity” from their homes and neighborhoods. He acknowledged the City made an improvement by switching the new hall location away from a previously proposed site on Antelope Road, but said it “unfortunately” seems that lawsuits are “what people have to do to be heard by this City.”

[Related: New City Hall Site Option Draws Support, While Medical Building Criticized]

Hill, a retired environmental attorney, said he looks forward to a CEQA-required settlement conference between his group and the City, hoping City officials will be “willing to talk.”

“Ideally we’d like to see the MOB back on the Stock Property, but I’m not sure how much success we’d have with that,” said Hill, who has also proposed an alternative two-story MOB design. “I think there may have to be some give-and-take between us and the City.”

*Editor’s note: this story will be updated with comments from the city attorney, if reached. For more context on this story, see: Council votes 5-0 for new city hall & MOB; lawsuit threatened

[follow text=”Get local news updates:”]

May 3, 2015
Planning Commission votes 5-1 for new hall & MOB; lawsuit threatened

Updated Mar. 12, 3:48 p.m.–
Despite the threat of litigation from a resident group Wednesday night, the Citrus Heights Planning Commission voted 5-1 in favor of recommending the city council approve a proposal to tear down the existing city hall, replace it with a 68,000 square feet medical office building (MOB), and build a new $22 million hall just north of the Post Office.

Norman Hill, with the resident group Preserve Our Civic Center, addresses planning commissioners Wednesday night.

“None of us will ever, ever be able to make all of the people happy all of the time,” Planning Commission Chairman Rick Doyle said just prior to the vote, adding his fellow commissioners should not make their decision based on “threats or innuendos.”

Doyle was joined by Commissioner Russell Blair in a yes vote, citing belief of a recent positive shift in public support for the proposal. Blair held up a stack of documents that included a record of over 100 public comments received, stating a majority of recent comments were in support of the proposal, following the city council dropping plans to move city hall to a site on Antelope Road last year.

[From last year: “New City Hall Site Option Draws Support, While Medical Building Criticized“]

Doyle and Blair were also joined in support votes by Commissioners Christy DeCelle, Albert Fox and Michael Lagomarsino, with Trish Dawson supporting an alternative that would rehabilitate the existing city hall and allow Dignity Health to develop its medical building on the 10.9-acre “Stock Property” next to the Post Office instead. Commissioner Leah Cox was absent.

Although several building alternatives were considered during the preparation of a several hundred page Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the study found the current proposal would create “no significant effects” to the environment, after mitigation measures. According to a staff report delivered to commissioners Wednesday night, under the California Environmental Quality Act, an alternative is only required if “significant and unavoidable impacts” are found.

[Related: GALLERY: Artistic Images of Proposed New City Hall]

Compared to controversial, crowded meetings last year, public comment was noticeably lower, with just eight speakers making their voice heard on Wednesday.

Two City staff members gave comment in support for the proposal, citing aging and inefficient existing city hall facilities, while business leaders from the Chamber of Commerce and Sunrise Marketplace said the deal would bring an economic boost and “help draw new tenants to our retail corridor.”

Beryl Turner-Weeks, who lives “across the street” from the proposed new hall, reiterated comments residents have had in the past about project cost in light of a shrinking $26 million city reserve, as well as increased construction noise and traffic — although a traffic study report by Fehr and Peers found the proposal would not create a significant increase to traffic in the area.

[Read the final version of the EIR and traffic study here: http://www.citrusheights.net/836/Environmental-Impact-Report]

Resident and retired environmental attorney Norman Hill told commissioners that his group, Preserve Our Civic Center, was “ready and willing to pursue litigation,” but proposed an acceptable compromise that would lessen the visibility impacts of the MOB by lowering it from three stories down to two, and increasing the setback away from Greenback Lane. Hill’s “olive branch” compromise, was rejected by Dignity Health’s Sigrid Owyang, who said the current three-story design maximizes parking spaces, is more “comfortable” for patients, and has been tested elsewhere.

Preserve Our Civic Center previously threatened litigation over the Antelope Road location for city hall, causing council members to vote 3-2 to put a hold on the plans in July last year, adopting the new 10.9-acre Stock Property as the “preferred site” several months later. Hill said POCC is hopeful a compromise can be met that would likewise avoid litigation in this case as well.

[From July: “Council Postpones Vote on New City Hall Deal, After Lawsuit Threat”]

Discussion of the proposal came about last year when City officials said Dignity Health proposed a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” for Citrus Heights to get a new hall for a net cost of about $5 million, after 15 years. Due to changes in the new hall’s proposed location, that net cost is now estimated at $8.9 million, according to Monica Alejandrez, assistant to the city manager.

Cost benefits to the City would come primarily from income brought in by the proposed Dignity Health lease, as well as from projected energy and repair savings coming from a more efficient new city hall building, according to City Manager Henry Tingle.

While the planning commission’s vote only sends a recommendation on to the city council, a final vote on the proposal has been set for a city council meeting on March 26, where opponents pledge to pack the meeting out.

“I don’t pull out the big guns for every meeting,” said Tim Schaefer, who heads the resident group Save City Hall. “But I can guarantee you that this room will be packed for the council meeting.”

Computer rendering of Dignity Health’s proposed new three-story medical office building on Greenback Lane.

March 12, 2015