When the dust settled and the 56 minutes worth of emotionally charged public comments were heard, a decision was made regarding the hotly contested Matheson project.
During the March 18 standing-room-only Healdsburg City Council meeting, council members voted 5-0 to deny the appeal on the planning commission’s approval of the Matheson mixed-use project.
The project includes The Matheson restaurant with casual rooftop deck dining and a more formal first floor restaurant, retail space and two penthouse units and was approved by the planning commission in a 4-2-1 vote at a Feb. 12 meeting.
After an extensive review of the application, the city’s Plaza Retail (PR) district policies and guidelines, land use guidelines and General Plan Provisions among numerous other guidelines, city staff found that the appellant’s eight-statement appeal is without merit.
“No new issues were raised in the field that were not raised in the discussion of the planning commission Dec. 11 workshop and at the Feb. 12 public hearing. All issues raised and discussed by the planning commission and all issues raised and discussed the planning commission and the public were sufficiently addressed and were approved by the planning commission on Feb. 12,” explained Healdsburg Planning and Building Director Maya DeRosa.
Former Healdsburg Mayor and city councilmember Brigette Mansell filed the appeal and 14 other residents signed onto it: Warren Watkins, Ken Buchignani, Janis Watkins, Merrilyn Joyce, Denise Hunt, John Biniakos, Joan Berler, Richard Clar, Bruce Ambramson, Margaret Medeiros, H. Sgervois, J. Chris Herrod, Heidi Marino and Robert Nuese.
The appeleates, along with several other residents that spoke during public comment, believe the 231-seat downtown restaurant is too large-scale and does not fit within the small-scale guidelines set forth by the PR policies and guidelines despite city staff’s findings that it does fit in. They also believe there is no working definition of “small-scale.”
During public comment those who wished to see the project undergo another size reduction sported, “Save the Plaza” stickers while one audience member held a “What is small scale?” poster. Those in support of the project as is wore “I support the Matheson” buttons and held up “repeal the appeal” signs.
In a letter to the editor Mansell also said that the restaurant is out of scale.
“I cannot support a restaurant of unprecedented scale on the Plaza,” Mansell wrote. She added that while she supports the idea of the restaurant, 231 seats are too large.
Resident Joan Berler echoed Mansell’s thoughts, saying the restaurant doesn’t need 231 seats.
Another resident, Merrilyn Joyce, said the main concern with the project was its intensity of use.
“If you project yourself to the future, what will it mean to have all these extra people? Imagine them on the sidewalk, on the Plaza and going around the roundabout, looking for a place to park…” Joyce said.
At the Feb. 12 planning commission meeting city planner Scott Duiven said city staff found that The Matheson adequately fits within the city’s guidelines and is “small-scale in nature.”
“We found that it is consistent with the small scale nature of other store fronts around the Plaza. While the proposed restaurant uses a larger size than other restaurant currently located around the Plaza, it is not without precedent for the area or for the building which at one point had similar square footage for a restaurant,” he said.
And despite several design revisions and a downsize in seating from 318 to 231, the project has been met with community concern from the start.
Overarching concerns with the project centered on its scale, noise-level, the restaurant’s menu price-point and the effects it could pose on traffic.
Elements redesigned to address concerns included an overhaul of the seating capacity, alterations to the rooftop trellis and paint/wood colors, an addition of a glass partition noise buffer to the rooftop deck and alterations to the trash enclosure. Valette also agreed to adding language to the project application that would provide more protection to the trees lining the 80-foot stretch of the building and would allow for the replacement of trees if any are damaged during construction.
Not everyone in the city council chambers was worried about scale.
Healdsburg residents and business owners Susan Graf and Michelle McConnell offered their support of the project and said, “We’re really excited about this.”
Eric Ziedrich, president of the Healdsburg Lumber Company and a former Healdsburg city councilmember, voice his opinion on the appeal.
“The appeal wasn’t compelling. I beg you to support this project,” he said.
While Vice Mayor Leah Gold said she is sympathetic to the voices that are concerned about overdevelopment, visitors and residents alike need a place to eat.
Councilmember Joe Naujokas said he too couldn’t accept the appeal, yet he was concerned about potential traffic from Uber and Lyft drop-offs at the site.
Councilmember Evelyn Mitchell also supported denying the appeal. She said she did not want to try and micromanage a restaurant.
In the end councilmembers agreed that the revisions made to the project to address concerns and reduce size were adequate, however, Mayor David Hagele and Councilmember Shaun McCaffery did not like the bushes that were added to the edge of the balcony and instead wanted seats to take the planter boxes place.
The planning commission added the bushes in an attempt to curb resident concerns that balcony edge seats would create too much noise and may be a nuisance.
In addition to denying the appeal, city council added a provision that would allow for the bushes to be replaced with tables, granted the seat count does not exceed 231.
