Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to protect Rosel–Glow pasture, question whether rezoning meets state standards
Summary
Multiple residents told the Riverbank City Council they oppose a recent planning commission decision to rezone a pasture at Rosel and Glow for high‑density housing, citing traffic, loss of neighborhood character, an outdated environmental analysis and questions about whether the parcel is “realistically available and suitable” under state rules.
At the April Riverbank City Council meeting, several residents pressed the council to reconsider or omit a corner pasture at Rosel and Glow from a recent planning‑commission rezoning that would convert the site from civic use to high‑density housing.
Jordan Davidson, a resident who lives directly adjacent to the pasture, told the council the parcel ‘‘is expected to remain in agricultural use with no defined timeline for sale or development’’ and questioned whether it meets the state standard of being ‘‘realistically available and suitable’’ for development during the current planning period. He said the parcel is constrained by right‑of‑way and utility corridors, and that city planning materials rely on an environmental analysis from 1997 prepared for a different land use.
‘‘Without a clear timeline, it is difficult to see how the site can be considered realistically available during this current planning period,’’ Davidson said, adding that the community petition reflects hundreds of residents opposed to rezoning the site.
Michael Christie, speaking for a group of about 20–25 neighbors, asked council to leave that corner parcel out of any rezoning, saying families enjoy visiting the pasture to see horses and cattle and that putting 50–60 houses there would worsen traffic and alter neighborhood character. Christie said an online petition opposing the change had gathered over 400 signatures.
Molly Hoy, a Riverbank kindergarten teacher whose family lives six houses away, emphasized the pasture’s value to children and local agricultural education. ‘‘If you take this away, they’re no longer going to be able to see those beautiful animals,’’ she said, urging the council to consider the pasture’s role in maintaining the city’s small‑town character.
Other speakers, including longtime resident Roosevelt Brown, expressed broader concern about the pace of development and pressure on city services such as sewer and water if growth proceeds too rapidly.
Council did not take an immediate vote on the rezoning during the meeting. The comments were made during the public comment period; no councilmember made a formal motion to reverse or change the planning commission action that evening. Several council members later reminded residents of upcoming informational sessions and a ‘‘Housing 101’’ presentation scheduled to explain local housing processes and timelines.
Next steps: residents who spoke asked the council to examine whether the parcel meets state requirements for availability and suitability and to consider alternative locations for the proposed housing. The rezoning itself remains a planning‑commission action pending potential council review at future hearings.
