By Jon Wiener
Soon after Toll Brothers stepped forward in early 2004 with a plan to buy the Mayfield Mall site and build hundreds of townhouses there, neighbors tried everything they could to scuttle the deal.
A public hearing designed to solicit neighborhood input degenerated into shouting matches. Lawn signs sprung up, followed by petitions and stickers. Some residents even hinted at lawsuits accusing the city of taking bribes.
None of it worked. Last year, the city council approved a “gatekeeper” for the site, allowing staff to process the developer’s application for permission to build 578 units on the 27-acre site, which is now occupied only by vacant Hewlett Packard offices and hundreds of trees.
“They were protesting in what I consider was an ineffective way,” said Elna Tymes, who became vice president of the Monta Loma Neighborhood Association in an election that hinged largely on the Mayfield proposal and how best to respond.
Accordingly, neighbors have switched tactics. A new coalition of residents from Monta Loma and other adjacent neighborhoods arrived at last week’s environmental planning commission meeting; rather than shouting or opposing the very idea of housing on the site, the two-dozen speakers offered a thorough analysis of the draft environmental impact report.
Tymes said a working group of 30 people had spent “hundreds and hundreds of hours” combing through the document to make sure that it accurately captures the impact the project will have on the surrounding neighborhoods.
“We’re not against the project per se,” said one member of the group, Wouter Souverkrupp. “We just want appropriate mitigations.”
Souverkrupp lives on Aldean Avenue, along the edge of the proposed project. At the planning commission meeting, he asked that construction activity be limited to weekdays after 8 a.m., using data from the census bureau to make his case.
Other speakers focused on different sections of the EIR, conducting their own traffic counts, mapping other planned developments in the area, and making computerized images of what the project will do to views from their homes.
The presentation gave the impression of a report riddled with inaccuracies, errors and omissions. But city staff and a firm that wrote the EIR reminded the commission that a number of discrepancies — such as residents’ contention that the project will generate nearly twice the 3,000 daily car trips outlined in the report — are due to the set of standards that state law requires the city to use in evaluating the project.
Toll Brothers project manager Kelly Snider said it was clear that the neighbors had done their homework, but that nothing they said would be reason to abandon the project in favor of a lower-density alternative.
“We expected a lot of concerns about traffic and about trees and that’s what we heard,” said Snider.
The commissioners, though, were clearly impressed. Each took the opportunity to thank and compliment the neighbors, seconding their comments.
“This is the best-prepared group and has done the most work of any group I’ve ever seen,” said Jac Siegel, a four-year veteran of the commission.
It was a friendly scene compared to earlier public hearings — potentially leading to greater influence by the neighbors over what the development looks like.
The final version of the EIR will include a response to all the comments received from commissioners and members of the public. The planning commission will schedule a public hearing on the final EIR and another on the proposed new zoning regulations for the development. The city council will have to approve it before construction.
Representatives from HP and Toll Brothers have indicated that the sale of the property is dependent on approval of the project. The two parties are keeping the terms of the deal a secret while the project remains unapproved, but appraisers have estimated the site will cost Toll Brothers up to $80 million.
E-mail Jon Wiener at jwiener
