Category Archives: Seeno property

Brentwood CA, North Study Area, Rose Estates, Seeno, Seeno property

Warning re: Benicia’s “Rose Estates” proposal for Seeno property

Seeno’s proposed Benicia project, “Rose Estates.” (Click on image to enlarge…)

BenIndy – The breaking news story below highlights yet another ominous reminder for Benicia City staff and electeds to be extremely wary of any Seeno proposal to develop here. Which is to say, the “Rose Estates” proposal, which is currently under review. For more info on the “Rose Estates” proposal see the City’s brief description and map (at right)  or dive in deep on the City of Benicia website, either the current proposal page or the long listing of individual documents.

In today’s news, from nearby Brentwood…

Brentwood planning commission denies plan to build 272 homes

CBS News Bay Area, July 18, 2024

The Brentwood Planning Commission on Tuesday denied a controversial housing development project that has unsuccessfully made the rounds through the approval process since the early 2000s.

However, the Brindle Gate project by Albert Seeno-owned West Coast Home Builders and Discovery Builders is not necessarily dead in the water.

Should Seeno appeal the Tuesday decision, Bridle Gate could come before the Brentwood City Council, which could ignore the Planning Commission’s recommendation and approve the application.

The most current version of the project proposes to develop 272 homes on 135 acres in west Brentwood bounded by Old Sand Creek Road to the north, state Highway 4 to the east, the Brentwood Hills residential development to the south, and the edge of the Brentwood Planning Area and Antioch’s city limits to the west.

Location of Bridle Gate project in Brentwood, where 272 homes are being proposed. CITY OF BRENTWOOD

This particular project has drawn the ire of residents over the years for its previous lack of any designated affordable housing, plans to build a school that later disappeared, potential environmental and traffic impacts, and Seeno’s lawsuit against the city for previous project denials, among other reasons.

The latest version of the application included 27 affordable units, along with suggestions for addressing potential traffic issues.

Still, the commissioners this week unanimously agreed that the Bridle Gate project is inconsistent with the city’s general plan, which calls to protect Brentwood’s ridgelines and discourage cut-through traffic.

“We do a great job of designing for future residents, and we have to do a great job designing for current residents,” said Vice Chair David Sparling, who acknowledged many residents are worried about the Brentwood hills turning into a speedway in the proposed development area.

Bridle Gate’s history has spanned the last two decades and entailed multiple versions of the project.

The City Council first approved a modified land-use designation and rezoning request for the Bridle Gate project in 2006. But the Tentative Subdivision Map was never finalized and then expired, along with the associated development agreement.

In 2020, the applicant submitted an application, which was denied. Bridle Gate returned again in 2021 with the newest—and current—application. The Planning Commission was set to decide on it in September 2023 but continued the item, which didn’t resurface until this week.

Prior to the Planning Commission’s decision, Doug Chen, corporate engineer with West Coast Home Builders, spoke on behalf of the applicant, alleging that the project was consistent with the general plan. He said the maximum density would have allowed for 408 units, instead of the 272 proposed.

“So we have gone to the path that we want to have good-sized lots,” Chen said. “We think this will give us a good, solid project, decent-sized lots, good-sized homes and still providing for affordable units that meet the city’s affordable housing requirements.”

The public then weighed in with concerns about increased traffic near an area already congested with cars from Heritage High and Adams Middle schools, small parks proposed for the development, environmental impacts, and an increase of homes in a fire-risk area.

Speaker Dirk Ziegler—also a former Brentwood Planning Commissioner and licensed insurance broker—noted there was not enough defensible space for the future homeowners to secure insurance.

“We are witnessing firsthand rate increases between 20 and 40 percent, and non-renewals of many of the largest insurance companies right here in Brentwood, including areas like Shadow Lakes, Deer Ridge and Trilogy,” Ziegler said. “The west side of Brentwood is now considered a high fire area. Prospective homeowners will face significant challenges in obtaining new insurance.”

MORE ABOUT SEENO

BENICIA BACKGROUND:
CITIZEN BACKGROUND:
CONCORD/CONTRA COSTA BACKGROUND:
CITY OF BENICIA
City of Benicia North Study Area (Seeno property)

For current information from the City of Benicia, check out their North Study Area web page, https://www.ci.benicia.ca.us/northstudyarea:

North Study Area, Seeno, Seeno property

Benicia’s Housing Element has been approved, throwing Seeno’s ‘builders remedy’ threat into question

By BenIndy Contributors, April 12, 2024

The City of Benicia affirmed that it has received notification of its “substantial compliance” with State Housing Element Law as of April 4, 2024, undermining Seeno’s threat to deploy the dreaded “builders remedy” on the town of 28,300.

The proposed Rose Estates project, shared by the City of Benicia in the Facebook post pictured below and on an official City webpage, would transform 527 acres of the former Benicia Business Park into a new community with 1,080 new homes and 250,000 square feet of new commercial space.

First submitted to the City in September 2023, the Rose Estates proposal from Seeno-owned West Coast Home Builders, LLC (hereafter referred to simply as”Seeno”) took an aggressive turn on March 12 when Seeno submitted an updated application under the provisions of the builder’s remedy.

The builder’s remedy is a legal mechanism that allows developers to bypass local planning regulations for housing projects if a city fails to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets or pass a state-certified “housing element” that abides by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)’s allocation requirements.

In its March 12, 2024 application, Seeno claimed that “Per HCD website [sic], the City did not meet its housing allocation […]. Consequently, the City is subject to the most stringent provisions of various housing laws […] [that] greatly limits local control over housing.”

But the April 4 certification letter from the HCD implies that the City of Benicia is now fully compliant with housing laws and has regained full control over its zoning and planning decisions, diminishing any leverage to override local zoning laws that Seeno might have had under the builder’s remedy.

And it’s clear the City wants to be calling the shots moving forward.

Seeno applications still incomplete

Letters issued from Benicia’s Community and Development Department in response to the September 15 and March 12 applications indicated that Seeno failed to complete either application, preventing Benicia from lawfully deeming them submitted.

In particular, the City claimed it was unable to verify who currently owns the Seeno empire and the land in Benicia to be developed due to active litigation stemming from a family dispute over the Seeno construction and development empire.

Click the image to be redirected to the letter on the City’s website.

In his most recent correspondence to Seeno, Benicia Community Development Department Planning Manager Jason Hade affirmed that Seeno’s March application is still deemed incomplete, but provided greater detail regarding additional requirements required to consider it legally complete:

  • Payment of outstanding fees totaling $27,873.40;
  • Amendments to align with Benicia’s General Plan and Zoning requirements;
  • A detailed written statement and supporting maps for the proposed amendments;
  • Clarification of the usage of government funds, which may trigger additional ADA and CBC requirements;
  • Descriptions of previous land use, expected traffic types, delivery schedules, environmental nuisances (e.g., odors, noise), temporary structures, hazardous materials, and all relevant permit requirements;
  • Current and proposed zoning and land use designations;
  • A Master Plan detailing large property developments;
  • Necessary identification and project details like the title block, site address, and legal compliance;
  • Comprehensive plans showing existing conditions, proposed changes, and structural details, including trees, natural features, and utilities;
  • A “more detailed” subdivision map, including legal descriptions, natural features, and existing structures;
  • A detailed topographic survey and grading plans to meet city specifications;
  • Specific plans for grading, including volume estimates and impact analyses;
  • Detailed feasibility studies for water and sewer services, including capacity and compliance with city standards;
  • Utility plans with necessary details for connection points and compliance;
  • A comprehensive environmental impact report (EIR) as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
  • A detailed traffic, photometric, and landscaping plan that addresses both aesthetic and functional requirements of the project;
  • Detailed architectural plans including elevations, floor plans, and roof plans;
  • Specific details on landscaping, lighting, parking, and circulation; and
  • A plan for public and safety-related improvements.

Until these items are provided, the City may not process the application as complete.

MORE ABOUT SEENO

BENICIA BACKGROUND:
CITIZEN BACKGROUND:
CONCORD/CONTRA COSTA BACKGROUND:
CITY OF BENICIA
City of Benicia North Study Area (Seeno property)

For current information from the City of Benicia, check out their North Study Area web page, https://www.ci.benicia.ca.us/northstudyarea:

North Study Area, Seeno, Seeno property

Seeno invokes ‘builder’s remedy’ to force Benicia’s hand on major housing project, but the city is pushing back

March 20, 2024

The battle over urban development and housing policy has escalated in Benicia, exposing tensions between developers, local governance, community sentiment, and the state as Sacramento works to increase California’s housing stock.

The proposed Rose Estates project, shared by the City of Benicia in the Facebook post pictured above and an official City webpage, could turn more than 527 acres of the former Benicia Business Park into a new community. With 1,080 new homes, 20 percent of which could be allocated for lower-income families, and 250,000 square feet of new commercial space, the company proposing the development touted it as Benicia’s most “expeditious” path to meeting its housing obligations.

But before the City deemed that application complete, the Seeno-owned West Coast Home Builders, LLC (WCHB; hereafter referred to simply as”Seeno”), raised the stakes on March 12 by submitting an updated application under the provisions of the “builder’s remedy,” drawing scrutiny from Benicia city officials and residents alike.

Seeno in Benicia

The genesis for the proposed development in Benicia’s former business park, also known as the North Study Area, reaches back many years. After City staff and leadership held several “visioning” sessions on the area’s future in 2023, Seeno representatives submitted a preliminary housing application for the space on September 15, 2023.

Since then, talks between Benicia and Seeno appear to have soured, culminating in the developer’s apparent decision to submit its “complete” application on March 12 under the provisions of the builder’s remedy, according to the City of Benicia.

The builder’s remedy is a legal mechanism under state housing law that allows developers to bypass local planning regulations for housing projects if a city fails to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets or pass a state-certified “housing element” that abides by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)’s allocation requirements. In its March 12, application, Seeno claimed that “Per HCD website [sic], the City did not meet its housing allocation […]. Consequently, the City is subject to the most stringent provisions of various housing laws […] [that] greatly limits local control over housing.”

Benicia City Council Member Kari Birdseye addressed Seeno’s assertion that Benicia was vulnerable to the builder’s remedy in the City’s Facebook post’s comments section, writing that “Our Housing Element has been certified and was before [Seeno’s] latest plan was submitted. The City is now evaluating the application and will be keeping our community updated as public hearings and other milestones happen.”

It is unclear why the City is listed as negligent in fulfilling its obligations on the HCD website when City officials state otherwise. (Benicia’s City Attorney did not respond to requests for clarification at publication time; this post will be updated to include comment if/when it is provided.)

But whether or not Benicia is truly vulnerable to the builder’s remedy, opponents of the project insist that Seeno’s invocation of it represents the developer’s cynical intention to abandon its first application, for a project that would have to abide by Benicia’s zoning and planning rules, to advance a nearly identical project, one that could be unencumbered by those rules.

Other issues

The threat of having to face the builder’s remedy wasn’t the only issue the City took with Seeno’s applications. According to letters issued from Benicia’s Community and Development Department , Seeno failed to complete both its September 15 and March 12 applications, preventing Benicia from lawfully deeming them submitted.

Most glaringly, the City claims that it has been unable to verify who currently owns the Seeno empire and the land in Benicia to be developed due to active litigation. A family dispute over the control and leadership of the Seeno construction and development empire is making its way through the court system, and until the matter of who exactly Seeno belongs to is fully resolved, any application submitted by a Seeno company cannot be considered complete. (Albert Jr. and Thomas Seeno asserted principal ownership of the company in Rose Estates applications.)

A list of the application’s other critical omissions included the absence of a site plan with the project’s proposed heights for residences and square footage for commercial buildings, information about “bonus units and any incentives,” and proof that a portion of the property does not qualify as Wetlands, which would be subject to certain environmental protections.

The City’s has so far issued two responses to the September 15 application. The first was a December 13 letter from Jason Hade, Planning Manager for Benicia’s Community Development Department, that noted the omissions but included a a friendly offer for assistance. After a January 9, 2024 meeting where a Seeno representative apparently asserted the application was, despite the noted omissions, actually complete, Hade responded in a February 29 letter that the omissions were a nonstarter.  He also downgraded his offer of support to advise that Seeno could complete its application through the City’s online permit center.

It is currently unclear what additional impacts to the City’s relationship with Seeno may emerge as a result of the developer’s invocation of the builder’s remedy in its March 19 application. Regardless, as the City considers the threat the builder’s remedy poses in terms of allowing Seeno to bypass local zoning, the Rose Estates project has started to appear as less of a miracle solution to Benicia’s housing allocation issues, and more of a threat to the norms, policies and procedures that have, until now, allowed the city to govern development in its own jurisdiction.

MORE ABOUT SEENO

CONCORD/CONTRA COSTA BACKGROUND:
BENICIA BACKGROUND:
CITIZEN BACKGROUND:
CITY OF BENICIA
City of Benicia North Study Area (Seeno property)

For current information from the City of Benicia, check out their North Study Area web page, https://www.ci.benicia.ca.us/northstudyarea:

Housing, Seeno, Seeno property, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero PAC

Ashton Lyle: Benicia can balance Big Oil (and our budget)

[Note from BenIndy Contributor Nathalie Christian: This is a complicated subject for a lot of Benicia residents. If you scroll past Ashton’s editorial, you can see alternative opinions. Reach out to us at benindy@beniciaindependent.com if you would like to add your opinion to our growing body of commentary on the topic.]

Opinion: To check Valero’s influence and beat a budget meltdown, Benicia leaders must walk a fine line

Although this is a tremendous oversimplification, Benicia’s fight for its future can feel like a choice between the frying-pan and the fire. | Canva image by N. Christian.

By Ashton Lyle, June 7, 2023

Portrait of Ashton Lyle
Ashton Lyle, BenIndy contributor.

Benicia will not always be a sleepy town on the edge of the Bay. Like Walnut Creek, Vallejo, and other neighboring cities before us, change is on the horizon. Today, I’m considering what would make the town more livable for its current and future residents.

First among the forces impeding a successful future is the city’s long-term budget crisis, as evidenced by a recent debate in the Benicia Herald. The city council approved its last two budgets with a substantial deficit, an obviously unsustainable situation over the long term. Bret Prebula, the Assistant City Manager, believes that the budget can be balanced. However, if the town wants to maintain the standard of services Benicia residents have come to expect, “new tax revenue is a must.” 

Equally concerning to me is the role that Texas-based Valero Energy Corporation continues to play in our politics. Over the past 55 years, the Valero-owned Benicia refinery has been the dominant economic force in the city. Founded in 1968 by Humble Oil before passing to Exxon and Valero, it has grown to become the town’s largest employer. Its revenue is essential to the city’s finances, as property taxes paid by the refinery have allowed Benicia to develop its services that in turn, attract new residents. In 2014, Valero was responsible for 40% of Benicia’s revenue, and while that number has dived to less than 20% today, the economic weight of Valero has inspired support for pro-refinery politicians in city and mayoral elections. In 2022 Valero funded PAC spent nearly a quarter of a million dollars on the city council race and printed misleading mailers while its Benicia refinery’s toxic emissions exceeded legal limits for more than 20 years, raising questions about whether vital information was being withheld from residents and regulators. All with relative impunity, a recent $1.2 million fine for recent toxic flares aside (an amount which represented a mere 0.01% of Valero’s profits in 2022.)

Meanwhile, the budget is in need of serious balancing. If Benicia is to throw off the weight of oil town politics, development in either residential or commercial sectors is needed if we wish to maintain our beloved services (such as an independent police force, library, and parks) over the long term. One only has to look at the ongoing rehabilitation of Vallejo’s city finances in the past decade to see the potential of a growing residential tax base. Additionally, if we want to finally free Benicia from reliance on a corporate giant, the town needs a larger slice of the growth from the Bay Area’s professional economy to increase property tax revenue and reduce the city’s dependence on income from Valero. In the age of remote work, accessible housing is essential to competing with local towns and bring knowledge workers to Benicia. If we want to ensure that Benicia’s future is not bound by corporate interests, the long-term answer is embracing new neighbors.

Equitable growth of the town’s housing stock is equally necessary to welcome more of Benicia’s workers to join our community full-time. The employees working in the city’s restaurants, shops, and industrial park have earned the option to settle down in the town they work in, but serious work is needed to ensure this possibility. Even after a recent decline in housing prices, Benicia’s median home is priced at $746,000. This means that, under aggressive calculations, a new resident looking to purchase a home would require no less than $175,000 in annual income. How will the workers who make Benicia and its downtown so special afford to live and work here if we do not build more homes?

These problems, undue industrial influence, a budget crunch, and a lack of affordable housing have a simple, but not easy answer. The housing crisis which extends far beyond Benicia’s borders necessitates new construction in our city. Considering where new housing can be built at scale in Benicia leaves residents with limited options. Due to the restrictions of the democratically decided Urban Growth Boundary, which prevents construction north of Lake Herman Road, there is simply not much remaining developable land within city limits. Unfortunately, the area which provides the greatest opportunity for essential housing will lead the city into a complicated alliance. 

Seeno Developers own a large portion of Benicia’s undeveloped land and is now partnering with the city in a “Community-Led Visioning Process” process which aims to develop a Specific Plan for their land, in effect rezoning the currently undeveloped property from industrial to mixed commercial and residential use. As detailed by former Mayor Elizabeth Patterson this process is a reduced version of the coalition of community and experts who wrote Benicia’s last Master Plan. However, it is worth noting that this is only the first step in a multi-year process that will require approval by the expert-led Planning Commission and publicly elected City Council, with multiple opportunities for public comment which began in November of 2022 and will continue until approval, likely several years from now. This “Community-Led Visioning Process” is the beginning of a public and extremely rigorous process.

The seriousness of the approval process is especially important to note because Seeno is considered by many community members to be a bad actor, both in Benicia and the broader Bay Area. In addition to their record of alleged environmental destruction, associations with organized crime, mortgage fraud, and murder threats, they also have a reputation for taking advantage of communities and local governments. In an ideal world, the city would choose to work with a different developer, and any association with the company necessitates an awareness of the risks they pose.

Unfortunately, Seeno has owned the land that is the subject of the North Study Area for over 35 years, and they do not appear interested in selling. The mortgage is likely paid off meaning Seeno is investing very few resources to maintain ownership, and it’s plausible that the value of the land has grown considerably since its purchase. It’s also worth considering the potential for Seeno to invoke California’s builder’s remedy if the city chooses not to engage in good-faith discussion, as Benicia’s housing element is not yet approved by the Department of Housing and Community Development. Even if the goal is to remove Seeno from our city, creating a Specific Plan for the land is the most likely path to success, as attaching a Specific Plan to a property can raise its value to potential buyers, especially if it changes the property from industrial to mixed-use. This increase in valuation could drive Seeno to sell portions if not the entirety of the property to other developers, which has occurred in other Bay Area developments.

These conditions place Benicia residents in a particularly difficult position, in effect forcing a choice between desperately needed housing constructed with an undesirable partner, or the continued risk to Benicia’s services and future budget, not to mention the unmitigated economic and political influence of Valero. Given the revelations of recent years, it is clear that Valero has proven to be one of the worst actors in Benicia community life. Proactively implementing a mixed-used Specific Plan for the North Study Area will create the best opportunity for a sustainable and equitable Benicia. By working to develop the North Study Area in a controlled, sustainable manner, we can increase our tax base, make our housing market more accessible to new families, and reduce corporate influence over Benicia’s politics.

This process should be watched carefully by community members and media outlets to ensure City Council and Planning Commission members are held accountable for the results, especially because Seeno is known to be a difficult partner. Equally important is that Seeno needs to be made responsible for covering the cost of expanding the city’s essential services to the area, as they will be rewarded with millions in additional profit due to the zoning change. Benicia residents must take advantage of their ability to participate in the planning process via public comment at community, planning commission, and city council meetings. Any development is an investment in the future of our town, and the process of writing a Specific Plan deserves extensive thought, public debate, and democratic accountability to effectively plan for the growth of Benicia in the next decade. 

Statewide forces, from the affordability crises to the housing element requirement mean that change is coming to Benicia and to some of its undeveloped land. Failing to act proactively puts the city in danger of Valero’s continued influence, fiscal crisis, or a reduction in city services. Let’s make sure our council members come into any Seeno partnership with eyes open, while also allowing for viable growth that will bring new families to Benicia.

Author’s Note: In the spirit of full transparency, I am related to the recently appointed Planning Commissioner for the City of Benicia. That said, the opinions expressed in this piece are fully my own, they were not unduly influenced by our relationship, and should not be taken to represent his or anyone else’s opinion.

RECENTLY ON THE BENINDY:
CONCORD/CONTRA COSTA BACKGROUND:
BENICIA BACKGROUND:
CITIZEN BACKGROUND:
CITY OF BENICIA
City of Benicia North Study Area (Seeno property)

For current information from the City of Benicia, check out their North Study Area web page, https://www.ci.benicia.ca.us/northstudyarea: