Environmental groups ask Sacramento County to halt Upper Westside annexation; builders say the plan is key to easing housing crunch
"This proposal is just about developers making a profit.”
On the eve of a pivotal Sacramento County Planning Commission hearing set for Monday, June 23, three of the region’s most prominent environmental organizations formally urged commissioners to reject the proposed Upper Westside Specific Plan, a 2,066-acre annexation and master-planned community north of Interstate 80.
In a 17-count indictment-style press release issued late Thursday, the Sierra Club, Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS) and Friends of the Swainson’s Hawk called the development “unnecessary and contrary to the public interest,” arguing it would pave over productive farmland, undermine a federally approved habitat plan and snarl traffic on two-lane Garden Highway.
“This specific plan is not about meeting housing needs,” ECOS president and former Sacramento mayor Heather Fargo said. “The County’s General Plan already designates enough land for housing that won’t be built out until after 2100… This proposal is just about developers making a profit.”
Sean Wirth of the Sierra Club’s Mother Lode Chapter added that approving the project would “gut the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan,” which protects threatened Swainson’s hawks and giant garter snakes. Judith Lamare of Friends of the Swainson’s Hawk warned the loss of agricultural foraging ground “would be effectively decimated” if Upper Westside moves forward.
Developers, business leaders tout infill and climate benefits
Upper Westside LLC, a partnership of long-time Natomas landowners represented by attorney Nick Avdis, counters that the project’s town-center design, greenbelt network and all-electric buildings make it the county’s most sustainable new-growth proposal. Project outreach materials describe the site as “the last major plan area within five miles of downtown Sacramento,” emphasizing that 64 percent of its boundary already touches existing neighborhoods.
A public-facing website launched by the applicant frames the annexation as a remedy to the region’s “urgent need for new housing – especially homes that working families can afford.” It promises 9,356 housing units, more than half of them multifamily, three million square feet of employment space and the county’s first carbon-neutral, all-electric community designed around walking, biking and future transit.
The North State Building Industry Association, which represents more than 500 builders and suppliers, also backs the plan. “We are facing crises on several fronts,” CEO Tim Murphy told Comstock’s magazine last fall. “We have a housing crisis. We also have a climate crisis… The industry is responding responsibly to these challenges,” adding that additional greenfield projects such as Upper Westside can help “ease the region’s housing shortage” and moderate prices over time.
Advisory council already split; commission vote is next step
In December the Natomas Community Planning Advisory Council recommended the Board of Supervisors approve Upper Westside on a 4-2 vote after hours of testimony. Monday’s Planning Commission hearing will serve as the first countywide test of the project’s 9,000-page environmental impact report. Commissioners may forward a recommendation to supervisors, who will make the final decision later this year.
If endorsed, the annexation would move the county’s Urban Policy Area westward for the first time since 2011 and allow construction to begin as early as 2027, according to applicant projections. Project critics say they will press the city of Sacramento—which must supply water and sewer service—to block those hookups if county leaders give the green light.
Regardless of the outcome, both sides agree the stakes extend well beyond the “boot”-shaped swath of farmland at issue.
“This is a referendum on how and where Sacramento grows for the next half-century,” Murphy said. “We believe Upper Westside shows it can be done responsibly; our friends in the environmental community disagree. Now it’s up to the county to decide.”
