The Mystery of the New Piazza Hotel’s Approval

 

How did the hotel being built at 400 Healdsburg Avenue get approved? We have heard this question a lot lately. Didn’t we pass a zoning ordinance that was supposed to stop developments like this from happening downtown?

I was part of the citizen’s group that pushed for this ordinance. It was approved in December 2018 with a 4-1 vote of the City Council. We had a lot of support. Our views, that hotel development downtown was out of hand and was threatening the character of our town, were strongly supported by the results of a city survey conducted in the Spring of 2018.  We also made compelling arguments that these limits were supported by the town’s General Plan.

Piazza Hospitality has built two hotels downtown and also owns Hotel Healdsburg. When they presented drawings recently for this new project, many in town felt blindsided.   

Several citizens asked the city for a timeline, and I took it a step further and did a formal public record request for communications leading up to and during the approval process. What follows is the result of this research, though unfortunately, little of it is conclusive. Now please keep in mind, that “approval” at the earliest stage means simply that the general concepts for the project are not in opposition to the zoning laws. A project is “deemed complete” by the city’s Planning Department staff -not the Planning Commission which reviews specific design elements in a public setting later on in the process.

That the property at 400 Healdsburg Ave. (presently a private parking lot) is owned by Piazza was common knowledge back in 2018, but apparently, there was no official communication between the city and Piazza about Piazza’s plans.

On the night of the City Council’s discussion of the zoning ordinance (12/3/2018), city staff presented a carefully prepared and detailed presentation that included details of all the hotels open then, those coming (Hotel Trio and Montage were not open yet), and one project that was beginning its application process, an expansion to Duchamp hotel. There was no mention of a new Piazza hotel. It would have been of paramount interest.  

Despite this omission, there was an email from a Piazza representative that was sent to city planners one day after the hotel limit ordinance was passed which said, “I'm writing to see if we can schedule a meeting with the two of you to further discuss our project on the corner of Healdsburg Ave. and North St." The inclusion of the word ‘further’ indicates that some communication had already begun, but there is no other evidence of the City’s knowledge of the project in the public records report.

If city planners were in communication with Piazza about their plan, why wasn’t it included in the presentation? When I asked City Manager Jeff Kay about this he said, “We hear about potential ideas for properties incessantly, but it’s not clear to me if this project was at a noteworthy stage or not.” Note that Kay was not our City Manager at the time, but he has reviewed the records report and the video from the 12/3/18 Council meeting.

In the email sent on 12/4/2018 Piazza requested to meet with city planners to submit their application knowing that a 30-day grace period was included in the ordinance and that the city had a legal obligation to process the application expeditiously. It might appear to the uninitiated (even to the Council members at the time) that a grace period is standard in this kind of legislation, but it is not.  Presumably, the grace period was included just for the Duchamp project, but that is not clear.

Piazza knew they had just enough time to get their project in. The city, despite all the discussion around hotel limits, had no obligation to “report” the application to Council (or to the public). The public records report presents an email from our City Manager at the time, David Michaelian, sent 1/19/19. In it, he tells the Council that the Piazza project was deemed complete. He refers to a previous email he sent about it, but I have not seen evidence of this previous email in the public records report or elsewhere.

Piazza’s plan was deemed complete just one day before the ordinance went into effect -after which it would have been too late.

We don’t know why the project didn’t appear in the Council’s presentation. And wouldn’t it have been a conscientious gesture for city staff to make mention of the application to the council (and to the public) when it first arrived, especially given their vote and all the public attention on this issue? There is nothing the City Council could have done at this point, it would have been too late to strike the grace period, but it would have been nice to know!

What’s missing is a statement from Piazza justifying their desire to build a project that stands in opposition to a city ordinance (even if done so legally) and more importantly, that simply disregards public opinion. Some developers may rationalize that this kind of growth is good for the town and that the residents that oppose it are naïve and don’t know what’s good for them.  But arguments like this are disrespectful. How does Piazza characterize the tension between their vision and that of those who seek greater balance downtown?

The arguments for curtailing hotel development are well-known and I will not repeat them here. In the end, we have a community that largely feels blindsided by a project that slithered through with what appears to be surreptitious, hurried, and aggressive (yet legal) tactics.

What can prevent this from happening again? A commitment from the city to improve transparency is essential. With Jeff Kay now serving as City Manager, I am hopeful that this is at hand. The city should move to notify the public of any major project applications in town before they are ‘deemed complete’ by the planning department.

Piazza (who I should add is a generous giver to local causes) and other developers should respect both residents’ desires and the City’s General Plan. Piazza should understand that many feel that their plans are moving in opposition to both of these. It is my opinion that this episode has damaged whatever trust that Healdsburg residents had in them. Moving forward, we must remain vigilant.

Realistically, a firm and unequivocal “no more hotels at all” measure would pass easily if it were on the ballot, and there are many poised to put it there. In the past, I have advocated against such drastic measures, but in light of this event, I can see why many believe they are warranted.