Public process done right
When development occurs in Sonoma it generally happens one of two ways: opaque or transparent. Opaque is the result of a project being so out-of-step with community sentiment that public objection is loud and frequent, sometimes to the level of ballot initiatives or lawsuits. The community gets rocked, the developer gets savaged, and city staff’s time is eaten up by the public clamor.
To avoid the fallout, some developers go the route of public relations and manipulative techniques to sway public opinion. These can include paid “grass-roots” canvassing, non-binding surveys to make neighbors feel involved in the process, intense lobbying of public officials and commission members, the creation of thick, detailed presentations claiming multiple community benefits, and stories in friendly local media about how great a project will be to our children and the city overall while ignoring the issue of private financial gain entirely.
Sometimes it works, sometimes not. Often, such techniques backfire and simply stimulate increased public discontent.
Other developers are more transparent, sincerely soliciting public input and participation, being honest about intentions and plans, revealing the economic realities of profit, and crafting plans that reflect true community needs. A common result of this approach is acceptance by all parties of the value of a project and commensurate approval during the permitting process.
A good example of the transparent approach is the recent housing project being developed by SAHA on Broadway. Affordable housing projects, historically, have always been controversial. The whole idea of a project devoted to affordable housing only remains contentious to those who feel it is not government’s proper role to participate in housing development at all. Setting that issue aside, matters of density, population served, location and design always draw public opinion and emotions often run high.
Recognizing this, SAHA decided early on to approach their project with neighbors and the community in mind. A committee was formed to review the preliminary plans and make recommendations. That committee, made up of neighbors and members of the community concerned about housing, met repeatedly to work over any design issues the neighbors and public might have.
Matters of traffic safety, ingress and egress, building height and neighbor impacts, parking location, type of fence, trash pick-up, and overall appearance all were reconfigured multiple times by the architect before the project was deemed suitable for submission to the city for processing. Nothing in this approach limits or changes the public process; the Planning Commission and the public-at-large will have ample opportunity to weigh-in on the project at public hearings, and more changes may be in store as a result.
Overall, however, the approach used by SAHA should and most likely will result in a higher level of acceptance and support for its project, and we support this “community outreach” model as not only appropriate for Sonoma, but positive overall. There will still be those who do not like the idea of this project or its final design, but the “team” approach will, we expect, satisfy many of the neighbors who initially were aghast at the potential changes in their neighborhood.
The public knows when it is being “spun” and when it is being treated honestly with respect. We support an open and honest approach, and hope other developers will learn from its example.
— Sun Editorial Board
