Resources

Proposal overview

Take a look at the proposal as it was submitted. It’s a hot mess.

Vista Ridge proposed development

Our initial response had a lot of ideas, but the key points were as follows:

• The proposal is so bad that it should be denied outright.
• There are no houses proposed – only a clearcut.
• There was no effort to engage with the community – just a steamroll of the neighbors.
• This is a cut and run and leave Seaside with the undeveloped lots.
• The investors are looking to get a quick permit, sell the lots, and pocket the profit.
• This does nothing to alleviate the affordable housing shortage, will mean lower property values for the existing homes, and leave the community with a lifeless plot of land.
• This will destroy the kind of forest wonderland that we all love having here in the PNW.

why is this bad?

• The proposal will destroy the habitat by clearcutting the land.
• Construction activity on the property will contaminate the streams and wetlands that flow into the Neawanna Estuary.
• All the wildlife and salmon will almost certainly vanish with it.
• Tree removal will accelerate erosion and create a risk for all the existing adjacent houses.
• Thousands of trucks and heavy equipment will create daily disruptions and noise on Broadway and Wahanna and in the surrounding residential neighborhoods for a decade.
• The land is shown to be mostly unbuildable on the city’s comprehensive plan.
• Wetlands noted by state maps are not shown on the proposal.
• Seaside’s Planning Staff did not provide an approval. 
• The proposal requests many exceptions to city codes and ordinances which will devalue existing property.
• No professional geotechnical, geology, hydrology, or geohazard reports were submitted with the original application.
• AND MANY MORE ….

Published articles

The Seaside Signal published an article about the project as part of a Planning Commission hearing article in September.  There was heavy attendance at the meeting and a lot feedback submitted.

The meeting ran long and the Commission decided to postpone the discussion until the October session.  The video is online here.

In October, the Signal published a follow-up and more detailed article.  That meeting was also heavily attended, but the developer asked for an extension until November so that they could provide more details on their project. This was an alternative way of saying that their proposal was so bad that they needed time to update it. The video is online here.

We anticipate more to come as we continue to oppose this effort.