Objections made to hillside development

Residents worried that earthquakes or rain could send homes careening down the San Mateo Highlands hillside told San Mateo County planning officials last night to conduct better geotechnical studies before considering a proposal for 11 new homes.

Ticonderoga Partners wants to develop 11 homes — three more than previously proposed — on 99-acres of land in the neighborhood west of San Mateo proper. Last night, more than 200 residents said they were unhappy with the draft environmental report and demanded more time be spent analyzing the notoriously slide-prone ground on which the homes could be built. An attorney for the developer said his client is willing to do the geotechnical studies necessary to ensure safe homes.

In what one planning commissioner called the best organized neighborhood effort he’s seen, residents pooled their time and allowed speakers to represent the crowd. Approximately six people spoke on behalf on the crowd, while additional speakers were later limited to two minutes.

Baywood Estates resident Catherine Palter criticized the county’s adherence to the California Environmental Quality Act. Palter accused the county of lessening requirements — like the number of soil borings required on the area — for the developer. The complete survey of the area, potential for landslides and how it may affect neighboring homes must be fully analyzed and presented to the public before the county can vote on the project, Palter said. "Have we forgotten Polhemus?” Palter asked. More than 10 years ago, homes built above Polhemus Road, just east of the proposed site, caused part of the hill to slide into the road below. It resulted in a costly fix and months of road closures. Similar slides have since been reported in the hills of Daly City and Millbrae.

Residents were also concerned that the county is considering changing zoning in the area to allow for the development and that the new homes may not match the existing one-story Eichler neighborhood.

"If it’s designed in harmony with the neighborhood, people will be more likely to stand behind it,” said resident Chris Misener.

The residential group invited Tad Sayre of Cotton, Shires and Associates to explain the potential for sliding on the proposed development site. Residents asked that the county and the developer meet with Cotton Shires. The developer agreed to do so at last night’s meeting.

"My client’s not interested in building unsafe houses. My client’s not interested in hurting those in the neighborhood,” said attorney David Byers.

However, Byers said he wanted to make sure his client was allowed to build something.

"We’ve cut down the development considerably ... and we’re prepared to do all the studies to ensure this property is safe,” Byers said.

The developer has consistently reduced the development size over the last 20 years.

The first development proposal in 1988 called for 199 single-family and apartment residences. The current development — Highlands Estate — was decreased to just nine homes in a 2007 proposal. However, last week’s report indicates three more houses in the works — for a total of 11 homes on a total of 4.53 acres.

Meanwhile, the Highlands Community Association is worried the county is allowing the project to bypass County Resource Management provisions and development review guidelines. Earlier this year, the county changed zoning in the area to "resource management,” which requires lower density and a portion of the property to be turned over to open space if it is subdivided. The rules are supposed to apply to the Chamberlain development proposal for the open space parcel in the Highlands area between Bunker Hill and Ticonderoga Drive along Polhemus Road, according to a recent newsletter distributed to residents.

The developers most recently battled with residents for four years just to bring a withdrawn project to a vote by the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors in 2004. The proposal included 26 houses and one 40-unit condominium project near Polhemus Road and Ticonderoga Drive. The board turned it down.

In 1998, a proposal to build 18 single-family units and 74 townhouses was abandoned and the developer spent four years negotiating with neighbors. It resulted in 2004’s supervisor vote and a lengthy discussion last year of zoning changes in the area.