Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBates 09015-09080 April 5, 2016 SLOCC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL MEETING 9 APRIL 5, 2016 10 AGENDA ITEM 8 11 REVIEW OF REQUEST TO INITIATE PREPARATION OF THE PROPOSED 12 MADONNA ON LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD (LOVR) SPECIFIC PLAN, WHICH 13 INCLUDED MIX OF RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, SENIOR HOUSING, PARK, 14 AND OPEN SPACE USES (12165 AND 12393 LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ADAMSKI, MOROSKI, MADDEN, CUMBERLAND & GREEN 24 6633 BAY LAUREL PLACE 25 AVILA BEACH CA 93424 26 PHONE (805) 543-0990 27 FAX (805) 543-0980 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 DATE OF TRANSCRIPT: JANUARY 6, 2021 41 TRANSCRIBER: MEGAN BOCHUM 42 MCDANIEL REPORTING 43 1302 OSOS STREET 44 SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93401 45 PHONE (805) 544-3363 46 FAX (805) 544-7427 47 48 49 09015 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 2 1 APPEARANCES 2 3 MS. JAN MARX, MAYOR 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 6 MS. CARLYN CHRISTIANSON, COUNCILMEMBER 7 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 9 MR. JOHN ASHBAUGH, COUNCILMEMBER 10 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 12 MR. DAN CARPENTER, VICE MAYOR 13 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 15 MR. DAN RIVOIRE, COUNCILMEMBER 16 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 17 18 MR. JOHN PAUL MAIER, ASSISTANT CITY CLERK 19 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 21 MS. SHAWNA SCOTT, CONTRACT PLANNER 22 SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 23 24 MR. MICHAEL CODRON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 25 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 26 27 MR. JOHN MADONNA, APPLICANT 28 29 MR. VIC MONTGOMERY, PROJECT MANAGER 30 RRM DESIGN GROUP 31 32 MS. LESLIE HALLS, RESIDENT 33 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 34 35 MR. ELLIOTT MARSHALL, RESIDENT 36 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 37 38 MR. ROB ROSSI, RESIDENT 39 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 40 41 MR. DAVE ROMERO, RESIDENT 42 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 43 44 MS. JUDIE REINER, RESIDENT 45 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 46 47 48 09016 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 3 1 APPEARANCES (CONT’D) 2 3 MR. CARL DUDLEY, RESIDENT 4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 6 MR. KEN REINER, RESIDENT 7 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 9 MR. BRIAN ACKERMAN, RESIDENT 10 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 12 MS. CORDELIA PERRY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 13 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY BUILDERS EXCHANGE 14 15 MR. RAY WALTERS, PRINCIPAL 16 VILLAGGIO COMMUNITIES 17 18 MS. CHARLENE ROSALES, DIRECTOR FOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 19 SAN LUIS OBISPO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 20 21 MR. NEIL HAVLIK, MEMBER 22 CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY 23 24 MS. MILA VUJOVICH-LABARRE, RESIDENT 25 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 26 27 MR. WILLIAM WAYCOTT, PRESIDENT 28 CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY 29 30 MS. CARRIE MATTINGLY, UTILITIES DIRECTOR 31 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 09017 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 4 MAYOR MARX: I’D LIKE TO ASK MICHAEL CODRON, OUR COMMUNITY 1 DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, TO PLEASE, UM, KICK OFF THE REPORT. 2 MR. CODRON: THANK YOU MAYOR MARX. I’LL START OFF BY 3 INTRODUCING SHAWNA SCOTT, WHO IS A CONTRACT PLANNER WITH THE 4 CITY AND SHE’S BEEN DOING GREAT WORK FOR US, PARTICULARLY ON THIS 5 COMPLICATED PROJECT WORKING IT THROUGH THE REVIEW TO THIS POINT, 6 WHICH IS INCLUDED A PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION. 7 AND I WILL HAVE SOME COMMENTS DURING THE 8 PRESENTATION, BUT I’M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO SHAWNA TO KICK IT OFF. 9 MS. SCOTT: GOOD EVENING, MADAME MAYOR AND THE CITY 10 COUNCIL. SHAWNA SCOTT, SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS. AS 11 MICHAEL MENTIONED, I’M A CONTRACT PLANNER WITH THE CITY. 12 TODAY BEFORE YOU IS A REVIEW OF A REQUEST TO INITIATE 13 THE PREPARATION OF THE MADONNA ON LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD SPECIFIC 14 PLAN AND ASSOCIATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS. 15 THE PROJECT SITE IS ABOUT 111 ACRES. IT’S CURRENTLY 16 LOCATED WITHIN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO. THE CURRENT COUNTY 17 ZONING IS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AGRICULTURE AND RURAL LANDS. IN THE 18 CITY’S LAND USE ELEMENT, IT IS IDENTIFIED AS SPECIFIC PLAN AREA THREE, 19 AS MENTIONED, MADONNA ON LOVR SPECIFIC PLAN. 20 THE PROJECT SITE IS SURROUNDED BY EXISTING USES 21 INCLUDING THE COSTCO, HOME DEPOT DEVELOPMENT; PERFUMO COMMONS, 22 ACROSS LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD; AND AUTO PARK -- AUTO DEALERSHIPS; 23 HOTELS AND MOTELS ALONG CALLE JOAQUIN; AND THE MOUNTAINBROOK 24 CHURCH. 25 09018 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 5 EXISTING USES ON THE SITE INCLUDE THE IRISH HILLS AND 1 HOME DEPOT STORM WATER BASINS; THE JOHN MADONNA CONSTRUCTION 2 COMPANY OFFICES LOCATED NEAR THE FROOM RANCH HISTORIC COMPLEX. 3 I HAVE A FEW PHOTOS OF THE SITE. I HAVE ADDITIONAL PHOTOS 4 IF YOU’D LIKE, BUT I JUST HAVE A FEW FOR YOU TODAY. 5 THIS LOCATION IS LOCATED NEAR THE FROOM RANCH HISTORIC 6 COMPLEX. CAN – PART OF IT CAN BE SEEN IN THE PICTURE IN ADDITION TO 7 SOME OF THE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CURRENTLY ON SITE. THIS IS IN 8 THE APPROXIMATE AREA OF THE SINGLE FAMILY LOCATION IDENTIFIED IN 9 THE LAND USE EXHIBIT, LOOKING TOWARD LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD. 10 THIS NEXT PHOTO’S A LITTLE BIT UP THE HILL, LOOKING 11 TOWARDS LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD AND CALLE JOAQUIN AREA. YOU CAN 12 SEE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SITUATED FROM AN – AN ELEVATED KNOLL AND 13 YOU CAN SEE THE FLAT LANDS AND THE STORMWATER BASINS IN THE 14 CENTER OF THE PHOTO. 15 AND THIS IS A PHOTO, AGAIN, IN THE UPPER ELEVATIONS OF THE 16 SITE, SHOWING THE KIND OF FLATTENED TERRACE AREA NEAR THE 17 MOUNTAINBROOK CHURCH, WHICH CAN BE SEEN IN THE CENTER OF THE 18 PHOTO. 19 THE APPLICANT’S CONCEPTUAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION 20 INCLUDES SEVERAL LAND USE COMPONENTS, INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL 21 HOUSING. CONCEPTUALLY PROPOSED ARE 200 MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS 22 AND 75 ATTACHED OR DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS; A SENIOR 23 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERED A CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT 24 COMMUNITY, WHICH – WHICH I’LL GO INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL SHORTLY; 25 09019 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 6 ABOUT 25,000 TO 45,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL; A 1 NEIGHBORHOOD PARK TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE FROOM RANCH 2 HISTORIC COMPLEX; AND 50 PERCENT OF THE SITE WOULD BE DESIGNATED 3 OPEN SPACE AS REQUIRED BY THE GENERAL PLAN. 4 AND ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN INCLUDE 5 INTERNAL CIRCULATION AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. AND ANOTHER 6 COMPONENT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED IS THE REALIGNMENT 7 AND RESTORATION OF FROOM CREEK WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES. 8 MR. CODRON: THANK YOU, SHAWNA. MAYOR MARX AND MEMBERS 9 OF THE COUNCIL, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO USE 10 THIS SLIDE TO HELP FRAME THE ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT. 11 SO YOU’VE RECEIVED JUST A BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND 12 ORIENTATION TO THIS SITE. BUT WHAT’S IMPORTANT TO KNOW IS THAT THE 13 COUNCIL’S BEING ASKED TO INITIATE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS TO 14 ENABLE PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT THAT DIFFER FROM THE VISION 15 ESTABLISHED BY THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THIS SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. 16 AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE PLAN DOES INCLUDE HOUSING AND 17 COMMERCIAL, ALONG WITH NEIGHBORHOOD AMENITIES SUCH AS THE PARK 18 AND OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN’S 19 DESCRIPTION FOR SP3. 20 WHERE THE PROPOSAL DIFFERS IS WITH THE CONCEPT OF ALSO 21 PROVIDING THE CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, MUCH OF 22 WHICH WOULD BE LOCATED ABOVE THE 150 FOOT ELEVATION. 23 THIS WAS AN ISSUE DISCUSSED IN DETAIL BY THE PLANNING 24 COMMISSION AND ULTIMATELY THE COMMISSION ENCOURAGED THE 25 09020 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 7 APPLICANT TO CONSIDER A DESIGN THAT MINIMIZES DEVELOPMENT ABOVE 1 THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION BY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF EXISTING 2 TOPOGRAPHY TO MINIMIZE THE VISIBILITY OF NEW BUILDINGS AND TO 3 AVOID SENSITIVE HABITAT AND OTHER RESOURCE AREAS. 4 SO THIS IS REALLY THE KEY ISSUE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL 5 TONIGHT. HAD A SPECIFIC PLAN PROPOSAL BEEN SUBMITTED TO STAFF THAT 6 SIMPLY FOLLOWED THE GENERAL PLAN GUIDANCE PROVIDED WITH SP3, WE 7 WOULD NOT HAVE TO COME TO THE COUNCIL UNTIL MAYBE IT WAS TIME TO 8 AUTHORIZE OR INITIATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. 9 IN THIS CASE, SINCE IT – A DIFFERENT TYPE OF GENERAL PLAN 10 AMENDMENT IS PROPOSED, WE ARE SEEKING COUNCIL’S EARLY DIRECTION. 11 SO THE POLICY IN QUESTION IS LISTED ON THIS SLIDE, 6.4.7H. 12 AND WE’LL RETURN TO THAT A LITTLE LATER IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT 13 WHAT SHOULD BE HIGHLIGHTED IS THAT THE URBAN RESERVE LINE WAS – 14 WAS NOT ACTUALLY AMENDED WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE LAND USE 15 ELEMENT FOR SP3. SO THE URBAN RESERVE LINE REMAINS THE WAY IT’S – 16 ESSENTIALLY WAS WITH THE 1994 LAND USE ELEMENT, AND YET THE 17 COUNCIL ENVISIONED MUCH MORE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARTICULAR SITE. 18 THEREFORE, IT’S THE SPECIFIC PLAN PREPARATION PROCESS 19 THAT WE WOULD USE TO GUIDE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE. IT WOULD 20 PROVIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO CAREFULLY EVALUATE SITE FEATURES, 21 RESOURCE AREAS, TOPOGRAPHY, GEOGRAPHY AND OTHER, YOU KNOW, ON 22 THE GROUND FACTORS TO COME UP WITH THE BEST OUTCOME FOR 23 PRESERVATION OF VIEWS AND BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES WHILE ALSO 24 ACCOMPLISHING COUNCIL’S OBJECTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE. 25 09021 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 8 SO SHOULD THE COUNCIL DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD AS 1 RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THAT ANALYSIS OF 2 DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL ABOVE THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION, STAFF WILL 3 LOOK VERY CAREFULLY AT THE PLACEMENT OF THE URBAN RESERVE LINE 4 AND – AND MAKE THE BEST RECOMMENDATION POSSIBLE TO COUNCIL 5 AND I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT CONTEXT -- THAT FRAME 6 FOR THE DISCUSSION AND THEN TURN IT BACK TO SHAWNA TO WORK 7 THROUGH THE APPLICATION. 8 MS. SCOTT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. 9 SO AS MICHAEL MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE KEY 10 ISSUES BEFORE YOU TODAY IS THE MIX OF LAND USES THAT’S INCLUDED IN 11 THE APPLICANT’S CONCEPTUAL PLAN. THE COMPONENTS THAT ARE 12 CLEARLY COMPLIANT WITH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA THREE, AS IDENTIFIED IN 13 THE LAND USE ELEMENT, INCLUDES THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA; 14 THE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA NEAR LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD; 15 COMMERCIAL RETAIL -- ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING LESS 16 SQUARE FOOTAGE THAN IS IDENTIFIED IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT; A PARK 17 AND OPEN SPACE AREAS. 18 THE COMPONENTS THAT WERE NOT PREVIOUSLY ENVISIONED IN 19 THE LAND USE ELEMENT INCLUDE DEVELOPMENT ABOVE THE 150-FOOT 20 CONTOUR LINE, INCLUDING A COMPONENT OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY 21 RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND THE SENIOR—THE SENIOR HOUSING CONTINUING 22 CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY. 23 THE SENIOR HOUSING COMPONENT IS APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES 24 AS CONCEPTUALLY ENVISIONED BY THE APPLICANT. IT WOULD INCLUDE 276 25 09022 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 9 INDEPENDENT LIVING APARTMENTS, 66 INDEPENDENT LIVING VILLAS, 122-1 BED ASSISTED LIVING MEMORY CARE AND LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY, AND 2 A VARIETY OF COMMON AREA FACILITIES, OUTDOOR RECREATION, AND 3 ACTIVITY – OUTDOOR RECREATION AND ACTIVITY AREAS, SUPPORT AND 4 MAINTENANCE FACILITIES, CONTROLLED ACCESS, AND A GATEHOUSE. 5 AS NOTED, A MAJORITY OF THE SENIOR HOUSING COMPONENT IS 6 CURRENTLY LOCATED ABOVE THE 150-FOOT CONTOUR LINE. 7 AND REGARDING THIS POLICY, IT SPECIFICALLY STATES, “THE 8 IRISH HILLS AREA SHOULD SECURE PERMANENT OPEN SPACE WITH NO 9 BUILDING SITES ABOVE THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH 10 ANY SUBDIVISION OR DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOWER AREAS.” 11 THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPMENT LIMITS IS IDENTIFIED IN THE 12 LAND USE ELEMENT ARE TO AVOID SENSITIVE HABITATS OR UNIQUE 13 RESOURCES AND TO AVOID PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PROBLEMS. IN 14 ADDITION, THE LAND USE ELEMENT DID CALL FOR A COMPACT MIXED-USE 15 PROJECT. 16 THE LAND USE ELEMENT CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE 17 ELEMENT IN CIRCULATION ELEMENT ALL INCLUDE VIEWSHED AND HILLSIDE 18 PROTECTION POLICIES THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. 19 THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT EIR IDENTIFIED 20 SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGABLE (SIC) VISUAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF 21 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN, INCLUDING THIS SPECIFIC AREA. 22 THIS SPECIFIC PLAN IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL 23 CONSTRAINTS, RESOURCE PROTECTION, HILLSIDE AND OPEN SPACE 24 PROTECTION, VIEWSHEDS AND VIEWS FROM OFFSITE LOCATIONS. 25 09023 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 10 IT IS ALSO REQUIRED TO CONSIDER VIEWSHEDS, HILLSIDE – 1 HILLSIDE AND OPEN SPACE PROTECTION, HEIGHT LIMITS, WETLAND 2 PROTECTION, ACCESS TO OTHER CONNECTIONS, HISTORIC FARM BUILDINGS, 3 MIXED USE TO ACCOMMODATE WORKFORCE HOUSING, AND NEIGHBORHOOD 4 COMMERCIAL TYPE USES. 5 THIS ITEM WAS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT TWO 6 HEARINGS. THE FIRST HEARING ON DECEMBER 9TH, 2015, THE PLANNING 7 COMMISSION PROVIDED SOME DIRECTIONAL ITEMS TO THE APPLICANT, 8 WHICH THE APPLICANT RESPONDED TO AND PRESENTED AT THE JANUARY 9 2016 HEARING. 10 THE PLANNING COMMISSION REQUESTED THAT CONSTRAINTS 11 WARRANTING THE DEVELOPMENT ABOVE THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION BE – BE 12 EXPLAINED. THEY REQUESTED SOME FURTHER JUSTIFICATION WHY 13 DEVELOPMENT WAS PROPOSED ABOVE THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION, 14 REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO 15 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AS A RESULT OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 16 ABOVE THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION, AND REQUESTED SOME AMENDED VISUAL 17 SIMULATIONS, TOO, SO THAT THEY COULD VISUALIZE WHAT THE PROJECT 18 MIGHT LOOK LIKE. 19 THE APPLICANT RESPONDED TO THESE REQUESTS BY PROVIDING 20 SOME AMENDED EXHIBITS, QUANTIFYING THE DEVELOPABLE AND 21 CONSTRAINED ACREAGE BELOW THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION, COMPARED THAT 22 TO THE ACREAGE THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT THE SPECIFIC 23 PLAN, IN ADDITION TO THE CCRC, AND ALSO PROVIDED VISUAL SIMULATIONS 24 AND OTHER QUANTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT ARE EXPLAINED 25 09024 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 11 IN THE STAFF REPORT. AND I’D BE GLAD TO GO THROUGH THOSE AT YOUR 1 REQUEST. 2 AT THE JANUARY HEARING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID 3 AUTHORIZE INITIATION – THEY AUTHORIZED A RECOMMENDATION TO THE 4 COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE INITIATION OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN AND GENERAL 5 PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PROCESS. THEY ALSO PROVIDED 6 APPLICANT -- DIRECTION TO THE APPLICANT REGARDING THE APPLICATION 7 PACKAGE. AND THE RESOLUTION DOES INCLUDE THAT LANGUAGE TO 8 INCLUDE ALL NECESSARY INFORMATION TO FULLY EVALUATE THE 9 POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF DEVELOPMENT ON NATURAL AND SCENIC 10 RESOURCES. 11 THE NEXT STEPS, IF YOUR COUNCIL DECIDES TO AUTHORIZE 12 INITIATION, WOULD BE FOR THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT A FORMAL 13 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW. THIS WOULD INCLUDE GENERAL PLAN 14 AMENDMENTS AND PRE-ZONING, THE SPECIFIC PLAN ITSELF, A 15 DEVELOPMENT PLAN, MODIFICATION OF THE URBAN RESERVE LINE, AN 16 ADDITIONAL REVIEW BY THE ARCHITECTURAL, CULTURAL HERITAGE 17 COMMITTEE AND AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION. 18 THIS WOULD ALSO START OFF THE CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL 19 REVIEW PROCESS ,AND THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GO 20 THROUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REVIEW PROCESS, WHICH 21 WOULD FURTHER MORE COMPREHENSIVELY EVALUATE, YOU KNOW, MANY 22 OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED. 23 THEN THE -- WE CAN MOVE ON TO CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT 24 APPROVAL FOLLOWED BY ANNEXATION INTO THE CITY. 25 09025 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 12 SO IN SUMMARY, THE SCOPE OF THIS INITIATION ONLY PROVIDES 1 AUTHORIZATION FOR THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT A FORMAL APPLICATION. 2 THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WOULD BE EVALUATED UPON FORMAL SUBMITTAL 3 INCLUDE FROOM CREEK REALIGNMENT AND RESTORATION AND CREEK 4 SETBACKS; TREATMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE FROOM RANCH HISTORIC 5 COMPLEX; TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT THE 50 PERCENT OPEN SPACE 6 REQUIREMENT AND HOW THAT WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE PLAN; 7 SPECIAL STATUS PLANT AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION; DETERMINATION OF 8 APPROPRIATE BUILDING HEIGHTS; CONSISTENCY WITH THE FULL GENERAL 9 PLAN; AND ALL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES PURSUANT TO CEQA. 10 SO TODAY WE REQUEST THAT YOU CONSIDER THE INFORMATION 11 PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT IN THE AGENDA PACKAGE, INCLUDING THE 12 CONSTRAINTS AND DEVELOPMENT – AND DEVELOPABLE LAND ACREAGE; 13 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROJECT, INCLUDING THE COMPONENTS ENVISIONED 14 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN THREE IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND THE CCRC 15 COMPONENT; POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT ABOVE THE 150-FOOT 16 ELEVATION IS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE FORMAL APPLICATION; AND THE 17 CONCEPTUAL VISUAL SIMULATIONS THAT ARE PROVIDED IN YOUR – IN YOUR 18 INFORMATION PACKET. 19 STAFF REQUESTS THAT DIRECTION BE PROVIDED TO US AND THE 20 APPLICANT REGARDING THE MIX OF LAND USES BEFORE YOU TODAY, 21 AMENDMENT OF THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION DEVELOPMENT LINE POLICY, AND 22 ANY OTHER DIRECTIONAL ITEMS. 23 IT IS STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU ADOPT A 24 RESOLUTION THAT AUTHORIZES INITIATION OF THIS SPECIFIC PLAN AND 25 09026 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 13 ALLOWS FORMAL SUBMITTAL OF THE APPLICATION, AND ALSO THE 1 RESOLUTION, SECTION 3.1 AND 3.2 INCLUDES SOME DIRECTIONAL ITEMS TO 2 THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR EVALUATION BY 3 STAFF. 4 THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO THIS RECOMMENDATION -- I 5 WON’T READ THESE IN FULL. THESE ARE ALL INCLUDED IN THE STAFF 6 REPORT, BUT, YOU KNOW, VARIATIONS OF WHAT YOU MAY CONSIDER IN 7 ADDITION TO ANOTHER MOTION THAT YOU MAY DECIDE TO MAKE. 8 I’LL GO AHEAD AND LEAVE THIS SLIDE UP AND THIS CONCLUDES 9 MY PRESENTATION. 10 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF 11 AT THIS POINT? I DON’T SEE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF, SO WITH THAT, I’D 12 LIKE TO INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD AND – I DON’T KNOW IF 13 YOU FILLED OUT A LITTLE YELLOW SLIP, NO? 14 MR. MADONNA: A YELLOW SLIP? I – I GUESS 15 MAYOR MARX: YOU CAN DO IT AFTERWARDS. 16 MR. MADONNA: (INAUDIBLE) IT’S BEEN (INAUDIBLE) TONIGHT. 17 MAYOR MARX: YES, PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF. 18 MR. MADONNA: HI. I’M JOHN MADONNA. I’M HERE REPRESENTING MY 19 FAMILY TONIGHT. 20 AND I’M GOING TO MAKE A BRIEF COMMENT AND THEN TURN 21 THE PRESENTATION OVER TO VICTOR. THE SUCCESSFUL CCRC REQUIRES AT 22 LEAST 20 ACRES TO 30 ACRES, AND THE MINIMUM ACREAGE MUST BE OF A 23 CERTAIN SIZE AND SHAPE AND – AND CONTINUITY. 24 WE BELIEVE WE CAN DO AN ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE 25 09027 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 14 DEVELOPMENT, ONE THAT WILL NOT SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGE THE IRISH 1 HILLS VIEWSHED. AND WITH THAT, I’D LIKE TO SURRENDER TO VIC. 2 MR. MONTGOMERY: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, MY 3 NAME IS VICTOR MONTGOMERY. I’M THE APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE. 4 I’M A PRINCIPAL WITH RRM DESIGN GROUP. 5 WE SUBMITTED A NUMBER OF THINGS TO THE COUNCIL THAT 6 SHOULD’VE BEEN IN YOUR READING FILE. MY PRESENTATION IS FAIRLY 7 BRIEF. IT’S GONNA TAKE ABOUT NINE MINUTES ACCORDING TO MY LAST 8 PRACTICE RUN ON THIS. 9 SO WITH THAT, I’D LIKE TO FIRST INTRODUCE SOME OTHER 10 MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM THAT ARE HERE. KEVIN MERCK, WHO DID ALL THE 11 WORK ON BIOLOGY AND WETLANDS, IS PRESENT THIS EVENING. TIM 12 WALTERS, WHO’S BEEN OUR GUIDING LIGHT ON CIVIL ENGINEERING AND 13 HYDROLOGY. AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, DEBBIE JEWEL, WHO DID ALL THE 14 GRAPHICS YOU’RE GOING TO BE SEEING THIS EVENING. 15 WHAT I WANT TO GO THROUGH TONIGHT IS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT 16 WHAT WE’VE BEEN DOING FOR THE LAST 18 MONTHS. WE DIDN’T JUST START 17 ON THIS LAST WEEK AND SUDDENLY SHOW UP HERE. LOOK AT HOW WE 18 COMPARE TO WHAT THE LUCE VISION FOR THE PROPERTY WAS. I HAVE SOME 19 BRIEF COMMENTS ABOUT TRAFFIC, PRECEDENTS, HEIGHT, AND THAT SORT OF 20 THING. 21 SO THE FIRST SLIDE IF I CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THESE 22 THINGS GO FORWARD. PROJECT BACKGROUND. THIS TOOK ABOUT A YEAR 23 TO ACCOM – ACCOMPLISH: MAPPING, WETLANDS STUDIES, BIOLOGICAL 24 STUDIES, TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, HISTORIC, ET CETERA -- CAPPED OFF BY 25 09028 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 15 SOMETHING THAT WAS UNUSUAL FOR THIS STAGE WE’RE AT, BUT WE 1 WANTED TO DO. 2 AND THAT WAS WE HAD THE IDEA OF MOVING AND IMPROVING 3 FROOM CREEK FROM ITS CURRENT CONDITIONS, AND YOU’VE BEEN OUT IN 4 THE FIELD AND SEEN IT. AND WE SAID THIS IS AN IDEA. AND WE WANT TO 5 KNOW AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE IF ALL OF THE REGULATORY AGENCIES WHO 6 HAVE PURVIEW OF THE CREEK THINK IT’S A BAD IDEA, WE’RE GONNA 7 FORGET ABOUT IT. 8 SO WE HELD A MULTI-AGENCY CONFERENCE CALL WITH THE 9 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 10 NOAA FISHERIES, CALIFORNIA FISH AND WILDLIFE, GAVE THEM OUR 11 INFORMATION IN ADVANCE AND SAID, “WE WANT TO DO THIS. WE THINK WE 12 CAN AFFORD TO DO IT, BUT IF IT’S A BAD IDEA, TELL US NOW.” NOBODY 13 SAID, “NO WAY, STOP, FULL HALT.” SO IT IS STILL A PROPOSAL WE’RE 14 CONSIDERING. EXCUSE ME. 15 BACKGROUND ON THE SITE. THERE’S A MAP OF IT. BLUE LINES 16 ARE THE CITY – CITY LIMITS. WHITE LINES ARE THE 150-ELEVATION. IN THE 17 LUCE UPDATE, THEY IDENTIFIED THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, THERE WAS SOME 18 VOTING THAT WENT ON. THE VOTE WAS TO BRING IT INTO THE CITY AS ONE 19 OF THE EXPANSION AREAS. AND IT IDENTIFIED THE ENTIRE PROPERTY. 20 I’M NOT GONNA REPEAT THESE. SHAWNA SHOWED THEM TO 21 YOU WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FROM THE 22 LUCE. AND YOU’LL NOTE THIS – THIS SPECIFIC PLAN SHALL. THERE WAS A 23 LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 24 THAT WE MUST MEET THE LUCE REQUIREMENTS. 25 09029 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 16 SO THERE THEY ARE AGAIN, MINIMUM FOR RESIDENTIAL, 1 COMMERCIAL AND OPEN SPACE. SO IF YOU LOOKED AT THE LUCE MINIMUM, 2 AS A PERCENTAGE OR A PIE CHART OF WHAT WOULD BE WHAT, ORANGE 3 WOULD BE COMMERCIAL, YELLOW WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL. IT WOULD 4 TAKE ABOUT 20 ACRES. 5 OUR PROJECT MIX LOOKS SOMETHING LIKE THIS, PRETTY 6 SIMILAR TO THE LUCE MINIMUM. ORANGE IS COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL IS 7 YELLOW INCLUDING THE CCRC. 8 THE LUCE MAXIMUM ON THE OTHER HAND IS QUITE DIFFERENT, 9 BECAUSE OF THE NOTION OF HAVING 350,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL 10 ON THIS SITE, WHICH IS LARGER THAN COSTCO AND HOME DEPOT COMBINED. 11 AND IT WON’T FIT, IN OUR OPINION, ON THIS SITE. 12 WHY GO ABOVE 150? THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE SITE ARE FAIRLY 13 WELL IDENTIFIED HERE. BELOW THE GREEN LINE, OFF TO THE RIGHT, THE 14 WHITE AREA IS WHAT’S AVAILABLE TO DEVELOP AFTER YOU TAKE INTO 15 CONSIDERATION THE CONSTRAINTS WERE IN THE -- WHICH ARE IN THE RED 16 HASHED AREA. AND THE RED HASHED AREA IS THE WETLANDS, THE 17 REQUIRED CIRCULATION TO GET VEHICLES IN AND OUT OF THE SITE, THE 18 RANCH COMPLEX FOR HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. 19 TRAFFIC MIX. WE HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW WOULD 20 YOU COMPARE TRAFFIC? AND WE HAD A TRAFFIC ENGINEER AS A PART OF 21 THIS PROJECT AND WE ASKED HIM TO PROJECT THE TRAFFIC FROM OUR 22 PROPOSED PROJECT, ABOUT 7,272 TRIPS, AND TO LOOK AT THE LUCE 23 MAXIMUM. AND WE HAD A SPECIFIC REASON FOR THIS WAS TO LOOK AT 24 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON LOVR OF THE LUCE MAXIMUM -- 19,000 TRIPS A DAY. 25 09030 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 17 SO THERE’S A CONSIDERABLE DIFFERENCE. 1 ALSO I WOULD NOTE THAT MANY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 2 TRIPS ARE OFF-PEAK HOUR BECAUSE THE CCRC DOES NOT HAVE AN 8:00 TO 3 5:00 COMMUTE THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT. 4 GOING ABOVE 150, WE HAD THE BIOLOGY DONE. WE’VE TALKED 5 WITH KEVIN. WE KNOW WHAT’S UP THERE. ANY WE, AT THIS EARLY STAGE 6 OF THE GAME, DON’T HAVE SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES IF WE’RE 7 GONNA DO THIS FOR THAT, BUT WE HAVE STRATEGIES FOR THEM. 8 CHORRO CREEK BOG THISTLE, WHICH IS A LISTED PLANT, AVOID 9 IT. ARCHEOLOGICAL AREAS, THERE ARE SOME. AVOID THEM. IT’S NOT 10 WORTH THE FIGHT. AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION ONSITE. AVOIDANCE AND 11 MITIGATION, ON AND OFFSITE, DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE 12 CONSTRAINT OR RESOURCE WE’RE DEALING WITH. 13 WILL GOING ABOVE 150 SET A PRECEDENT? WE DON’T BELIEVE 14 SO. THERE’S EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ABOVE 150 ON THE RANCH TODAY. 15 MUCH OF THE HISTORIC BUILDING COMPLEX IS ABOVE 150, TWO OF THE 16 BARNS, THE OUTBUILDINGS, AND – AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURE ON THE 17 LEFT, WHAT LOOKS LIKE A WATER TOWER – CELLPHONE TOWER, ABOVE 150. 18 THAT’S WHAT’S INSIDE THAT BARRELL. 19 AGAIN, GOING ABOVE 150, AND IS IT PRECEDENT-SETTING? TWO 20 RED CIRCLES ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER, MOUNTAINBROOK CHURCH, 21 THE FLOOR ELEVATION IS AT 238, THE MAXIMUM ROOF – I’M SORRY, THE 22 FLOOR ELEVATION IS 203, THE ROOF ELEVATION IS 238. KSBY IS AT 206. SO 23 THERE IS PRECEDENT ON THE PROPERTIES BOTH NEXT DOOR TO THIS SITE 24 FOR GOING ABOVE 150. 25 09031 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 18 AND ON SORT OF A MUCH LARGER VIEW OF THINGS, IF YOU 1 WERE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE IRISH HILLS, THAT WESTERN PORTION OF THE 2 CITY, ALL THE AREAS THAT ARE COLORED, EVERYTHING THAT’S IN THE RED, 3 OR THE YELLOW AND PURPLE AND BLUE, THAT’S ALL ABOVE 150. 4 INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THE 150 PROVISION OF THE GENERAL 5 PLAN APPLIES TO ONLY 900 FEET OF THAT WHOLE AREA. ONLY THE 6 MADONNA PROPERTY. EVERYTHING ELSE DOESN’T APPLY, SO WE THINK IT’S 7 A LITTLE BIT ARBITRARY AND IS NOT PRECEDENT-SETTING FOR US TO GO 8 ABOVE 150. 9 VIEW IMPACTS. WE KNOW THESE ARE A CONCERN WITH GOING 10 ABOVE 150. WE DIDN’T WANT TO GET INTO AN ARGUMENT ABOUT HOW 11 MANY STORIES BUILDINGS SHOULD BE, WHETHER MY STORY IS NINE FEET 12 AND YOUR STORY IS 12 OR 16. WE’RE PROPOSED – WE WILL PROPOSE TO PUT 13 ABSOLUTE FIXED MAXIMUM ROOF HEIGHTS ON EACH OF THE AREAS THAT’S 14 PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED ABOVE 150. AND WE THINK THEY SHOULD STEP 15 DOWN THE HILL AS YOU GO FROM WEST TO EAST. 16 THIS IS A BUBBLE DIAGRAM OF WHAT WE’RE PROPOSING. 17 SHAWNA HAD IT ON ONE OF HER DIAGRAMS. IT SHOWS THE USES AND THE 18 POTENTIAL LOCATIONS FOR THEM, INCLUDING POTENTIAL LINKS TO THE 19 OPEN SPACE THAT WAS PURCHASED FROM THE MADONNA FAMILY IN THE 20 IRISH HILLS AREA BECAUSE THOSE EXISTING TRAILS ARE RIGHT NEXT TO 21 THIS PROPERTY. WE WOULD MEET THE MINIMUM LUCE REQUIREMENTS, 22 CONNECT TO THE TRAILS, BIKE PATHS, PROVIDE A VARIETY OF HOUSING. I’M 23 NOT GONNA READ ALL OF THOSE TO YOU. 24 SO WHY GO ABOVE 150? THERE’S NOT ENOUGH UNCONSTRAINED 25 09032 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 19 LAND BELOW 150 TO DO THE MINIMUM FOR THE LUCE AND THE CCRC. WE 1 NEED TO GO ABOVE 150. 2 ALLOWING 150 GIVES US SOME WRIGGLE ROOM. WE’RE AWARE 3 OF THE WETLAND IN THE RIGHTHAND CORNER OF THE SIDE WHERE IT SAYS 4 CALLE JOAQUIN. AND THERE’S AN EXISTING EASEMENT THERE FOR THE 5 WETLAND. GOING ABOVE 150 GIVE US THE ROOM TO PLAN SOMETHING AND 6 PLAN AROUND THOSE FEATURES. 7 IT PROVIDES THE SITE AREA FOR THE CREEK ENHANCEMENT, 8 REALIGNING FROOM CREEK, WHICH WE WANT TO DO AS AN 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND AN AMENITY OF THE PROJECT, 10 REQUIRES ADDITIONAL LAND. GOING ABOVE 150 ALLOWS THAT TO HAPPEN 11 AND WE DON’T BELIEVE IT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECTS THE VIEWS. 12 SO I’VE GOT A SERIES OF VISUAL SIMULATIONS. I’LL GO 13 THROUGH THOSE VERY QUICKLY. LOOKS LIKE I’M GETTING CLOSE. THESE 14 ARE BEFORE AND AFTERS. AND SO THIS IS NORTHBOUND 101 BY THE FILIPONI 15 RANCH. EXISTING, PROPOSED. NOT MUCH CHANGED. 16 THIS IS TAKEN FROM DALIDIO DRIVE LOOKING ACROSS THE 17 DALIDIO PROPERTY, WHICH PARENTHETICALLY, I’LL ADD WILL BE 18 DEVELOPED AT SOME POINT IN TIME IN THE FUTURE PROBABLY. BUT THIS IS 19 WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE EXISTING. THAT LITTLE WHITE LINE IS THE 150 20 ELEVATION AND SORRY – 21 MAYOR MARX: YOU CAN CONTINUE TO FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION. 22 MR. MONTGOMERY: OKAY. THANK YOU. 23 THAT’S THE 150 ELEVATION AT THAT WHITE LINE. THIS AREA 24 RIGHT HERE, IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ABOVE 150. THIS IS ON CALLE 25 09033 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 20 JOAQUIN BY THE MERCEDES DEALERSHIP. EXISTING CONDITION. HERE IS 1 THE 150 ELEVATION. YOU CAN BARELY SEE SOME OF THE PROPOSED 2 DEVELOPMENT IS RIGHT IN THERE. 3 THIS IS ON CALLE JOAQUIN RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE NEW 4 QUICKIE CAR WASH FAIRLY CLOSE UP TO THE SITE. AND THIS IS THE 5 PROJECT. AND I WOULD NOTE THAT’S THE 150 ELEVATION. ALL OF THESE 6 BUILDINGS IN THE FOREGROUND, THOSE DEPICT A THREE-STORY BUILDING 7 ON THE FLAT PART OF THE SITE. THE DEVELOPMENT ABOVE 150 IS THIS 8 RIGHT THERE. 9 ANOTHER ONE. THIS IS PROBABLY THE CLOSEST UP PORTION OF 10 THE VISUAL ANALYSIS. THIS IS THE HAMPTON INN AND SUITES. IT’S TAKEN 11 ON THE LOVR NEW – NEW BRIDGE. AGAIN, THERE’S THE 150 ELEVATION. 12 THESE ARE THREE-STORY BUILDINGS ON THE FLAT AREA OF THE SITE. 13 THAT’S THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 14 AND I MENTIONED THAT BECAUSE BETWEEN THE PLANNING 15 COMMISSION HEARING AND THIS COUNCIL MEETING, WE ORIGINALLY 16 LOOKED AT HAVING SOME DEVELOPMENT OUT HERE ON THIS KNOLL. 17 HAVING LOOKED AT IT AND LOOKED AT THIS VISUAL ANALYSIS, WE’VE 18 DECIDED TO ELIMINATE IT. WE’RE NOT GONNA GO OUT ON THE KNOLL 19 BECAUSE OF THE VISUAL IMPACTS. WE’RE PULLING THINGS BACK OFF IT 20 AND PUSHING THEM BACK FURTHER INTO THE SITE. 21 THIS IS LOVR AT SOUTH HIGUERA. YOU CAN’T SEE MUCH OF THE 22 SITE NOW AND YOU CAN’T SEE MUCH WHEN WE’RE DONE. 23 THIS IS THE MADONNA ROAD BRIDGE OVER 101. YOU CAN 24 BARELY SEE A PIECE OF THE CHURCH ROOF, THAT LITTLE BLUE SPECK RIGHT 25 09034 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 21 THERE. AFTER THE PROJECT IS DONE, YOU CAN’T SEE ANYTHING. THE 1 PROJECT PORTION OF -- ABOVE 150 IS OVER IN HERE. 2 THIS IS US 101 SOUTHBOUND. EXISTING VIEW. THAT BLUE 3 SLIVER, THAT’S THE CHURCH, MEADOWBROOK -- MOUNTAINBROOK CHURCH. 4 THAT’S THE 150 ELEVATION, THE WHITE LINE. AND THE DEVELOPMENT AREA 5 IS RIGHT IN HERE. 6 THIS IS FROM THE ENTRANCE TO COSTCO AND THE EXIT FROM 7 TARGET AREA. YOU CAN’T SEE THE SITE. EXISTING OR PROPOSED. 8 THIS IS COMING OUT OF TARGET. YOU CAN BARELY SEE A 9 CORNER OF THE CHURCH RIGHT OVER THERE. YOU CAN’T SEE 10 DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE BEFORE OR AFTER. 11 SO IN CLOSING, WHAT DO WE HOPE WILL HAPPEN TONIGHT? WE 12 HOPE YOU’LL AUTHORIZE US TO PROCEED WITH THE SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE 13 EIR, AND WE HOPE THAT YOU’LL SEE THE WISDOM IN ALLOWING US TO GO, IN 14 A CONSIDERED MANNER, ABOVE 150. WE DON’T WANT TO GO UP THERE AND 15 RAPE AND PILLAGE. WE UNDERSTAND THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS 16 THAT ARE THERE. 17 AND THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. I WOULD ASK TO BE 18 ABLE TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS AS THEY COME UP. 19 MAYOR MARX: SURE. 20 MR. MONTGOMERY: AND ONE OTHER THING -- 21 MAYOR MARX: GO AHEAD. 22 MR. MONTGOMERY: SORRY. IF YOU WANT TO SEE IT, I PROVIDED 23 SHAWNA WITH A COMPARISON OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION VISUAL 24 SIMULATIONS THAT WE DID FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE ONES 25 09035 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 22 FOR THE CITY COUNCIL IN A SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON OF EACH VIEW. IT 1 REALLY ENABLES YOU TO SEE THE IMPACT OF MOVING OFF THAT KNOLL. 2 I’M DONE. THANK YOU. 3 MAYOR MARX: ALL RIGHT. I THINK, COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH, 4 DID -- DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? 5 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: YEAH, THANK YOU VICTOR FOR YOUR 6 PRESENTATION. JUST A VERY QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU ABOUT YOUR 7 COMMENTS DURING YOUR PRESENTATION ABOUT THE KNOLL. 8 I GUESS I’M LOOKING AT OUR AGENDA PACKET PAGE 306, WHICH 9 I THINK REPRESENTS WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS CONSIDERING. 10 THERE ARE FIVE ENUMERATED AREAS ABOVE 150, A, B, C, D, AND E. AND AM I 11 TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU’RE OMITTING FROM YOUR APPLICATION 12 DEVELOPMENT OF AREA B? 13 MR. MONTGOMERY: ACTUALLY, YOU CAN SEE IT IN THIS FINAL SLIDE. 14 THIS IS TAKEN ON THE MAJORITY OF THE FLAT AREA DIRECTLY ACROSS 15 FROM THE CHURCH. THE KNOLL, WE HAD DEVELOPMENT HERE, SOME OVER 16 IN HERE, SOME OVER IN THERE. AND THEN WE HAD SOME PROPOSED, WE 17 LOOKED AT DOING OUT IN HERE. AND THAT’S THE AREA WE’VE DECIDED 18 THE IMPACTS ARE SIMPLY TOO GREAT FROM A VISUAL PERSPECTIVE AND 19 PREJUDICE AGAINST THE PROJECT, AND WE’RE PROPOSING NOT TO GO OUT 20 THAT FAR. 21 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: JUST TO LOOK AT AND CLARIFY -- 22 MR. MONTGOMERY: SURE. 23 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: IN PLAN VIEW, THAT’S – THAT’S IN 24 THIS EXHIBIT AREA, AREA B. YEAH. I THINK. IS THAT RIGHT? 25 09036 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 23 MR. MONTGOMERY: YES, THAT’S CORRECT. 1 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: OKAY. THANK YOU. 2 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. WOULD COUNCIL WANT TO SEE THE 3 SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON? OKAY. I’VE GOT THREE PEOPLE SAYING NO. 4 ALL RIGHT. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 5 MR. MONTGOMERY: THANK YOU. 6 MAYOR MARX: AND YES, IF – IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THINGS THAT 7 COME US DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT, WE’LL BE GIVING STAFF THAT 8 OPPORTUNITY AS WELL. SO -- 9 MR. MONTGOMERY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 10 MAYOR MARX: -- THANK YOU. 11 SO WITH THAT, I’M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC COMMENT, 12 AND I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES, 13 AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR CITY OF 14 RESIDENCE AT PRESENT. AND IF YOU REPRESENT A CERTAIN GROUP, BE SURE 15 TO TELL US WHAT THAT IS EITHER SOME – AS PART OF YOUR JOB OR AS 16 VOLUNTEER, IF YOU’RE REPRESENTING A GROUP OF PEOPLE. 17 AND THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT GIVEN THE 18 HOUR, IF YOU HEAR PEOPLE TESTIFYING AND SAYING THINGS YOU AGREE 19 WITH, PLEASE JUST TELL US BY WAVING YOUR HAND. AND EVEN IF YOU’VE 20 GIVEN ME A YELLOW SLIP, YOU DON’T HAVE TO TESTIFY IF YOU FEEL THAT 21 OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID THAT ‘CAUSE WE’RE LISTENING VERY 22 CAREFULLY. 23 AND I’M AWARE WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO, COUNTING 24 MYSELF, LIKE TO GO TO BED EARLIER THAN THIS, SO WE’LL TRY TO GO ON 25 09037 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 24 THROUGH THIS. 1 I’M GONNA CALL A COUPLE OF – A COUPLE OF PEOPLE AT ONCE, 2 AND ASK YOU, PLEASE, TO JUST LINE UP THERE IN BACK OF THE PODIUM SO 3 WE CAN RUN THROUGH THIS. 4 LESLIE HALLS IS THE FIRST ONE. ELLIOTT MARSHALL. JUDIE 5 MAYBE RESNICK. 6 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: WERE THESE FIRST? 7 MAYOR MARX: OKAY. WAIT A SECOND. THANK YOU. THESE WERE 8 FIRST, YEAH. 9 AND ROB ROSSI, DAVE ROMERO, NEIL HAVLIK. I’LL REPEAT 10 THAT CLOSER TO -- TO THE TIME. THANK YOU. I DIDN’T – YEAH, THAT’S A 11 LOT. YES, GO AHEAD. 12 MS. HALLS: OKAY. GOOD EVENING – I THINK IT IS STILL EVENING, 13 RIGHT? GOOD EVENING. 14 MY NAME IS LESLIE HALLS. I’M HERE AS AN INDIVIDUAL. I’M 15 NOT REPRESENTING ANYBODY. HOWEVER, I LIVE IN THE LAGUNA LAKE 16 AREA NOT TOO FAR FROM WHERE THIS IS PROPOSED. 17 AFTER LOOKING OVER EVERYTHING, JUST AS A CONCERNED 18 CITIZEN, THIS IS A NO-BRAINER. IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. IT 19 PROVIDES HOUSING. AND IT PROVIDES HOUSING FOR SENIORS. 20 AND I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT. I’VE LIVED HERE SINCE 1980, 21 AND ONE OF THE THINGS OR ONE OF THE MANY THINGS I LIKED ABOUT 22 LIVING IN SAN LUIS OBISPO WHEN MY LATE HUSBAND AND I MOVED HERE IN 23 1980 WAS THE SMALL TOWN CHARM, THE MISSION PLAZA AND THAT. AND 24 THIS IS HOUSING IN THIS CCRC FACILITY THAT’S GONNA HELP THOSE PEOPLE 25 09038 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 25 THAT MADE THIS TOWN SO NICE 30 YEARS AGO. AND I DON’T THINK WE 1 SHOULD FORGET THEM. 2 IT’S – IT’S A GREAT PLAN. THEY’RE ACTUALLY GOING TO 3 RESTORE AN URBAN CREEK, FROOM CREEK, WAS MOVED FROM ITS ORIGINAL 4 LOCATION, I THINK 125 YEARS AGO, AND NOW IT’S GOING TO BE RESTORED 5 TO ITS ORIGINAL LOCATION. THIS NEVER – NEVER HAPPENS. AND I’M VERY 6 EXCITED ABOUT THAT. 7 I’M RETIRED NOW. I DO A LOT OF HIKING AND STUFF, AND 8 YOU’LL STILL BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE TRAILS THERE. 9 I JUST THINK IT’S A WONDERFUL MIX. IT’S GOING TO PROVIDE 10 JOBS, MONEY COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY. THESE PEOPLE THOUGHT OF 11 EVERYTHING. I’M VERY IMPRESSED. 12 AND I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO SAY, YOU KNOW -- 13 YEAH, YOU CAN ALWAYS NITPICK SOMETHING TO DEATH, BUT THIS IS A 14 WHOLE LOT BETTER THAN PUTTING A WALMART OF SOMETHING IN THERE. 15 AND I JUST REALLY HOPE YOU’LL GO FORWARD WITH IT. IT’S -- IT’S A GREAT 16 PROGRAM. 17 AND LAST THING, I KNOW I’M RUNNING OUT OF TIME. MY 18 MOTHER SPENT THE LAST FIVE YEARS OF HER LIFE AT THE – THE JAY – THE 19 CEDARS AT THE JCA, THE CEDARS AT THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN ST. 20 LOUIS, MISSOURI. AND YOU KNOW, THESE PLACES CAN BE PRETTY 21 DEPRESSING, BUT THIS ONE WAS PRETTY NICE. AND ONE OF THE NICE 22 THINGS WAS THAT SHE HAD A VIEW OUT THE WINDOW OF HER ROOM 23 LOOKING OUT ON STATE HIGHWAY 40. 24 AND I GOT TO TELL YOU, WHENEVER WE VISITED HER, WE’D 25 09039 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 26 ALWAYS WHEEL HER OVER TO THE WINDOW SO SHE COULD LOOK OUT THE 1 WINDOW. AND IT’S KIND OF NICE TO BE IN A NICE, NEW BUILDING THAT HAS 2 A BIT OF A VIEW. 3 AND I KNOW PEOPLE SAY WELL, YOU KNOW, 150 FEET, BLAH – 4 BLAH – BLAH. I MEAN AFTER LOOKING AT THE PICTURES, WE’RE NOT 5 BUILDING ON TOP OF THE HILLS. WE’RE BUILDING JUST A LITTLE BIT HIGHER. 6 IT’S NOT GONNA BE SEEN FROM THE – THE GROUND REALLY. I THINK 7 LAGUNA MIDDLE SCHOOL IS AT OVER 150 FEET ELEVATION, SO WE’RE 8 TALKING A VERY SMALL DIFFERENCE HERE AND I THINK IT WILL MAKE A 9 DIFFERENCE IN THE QUALITY OF LIFE. 10 AND AGAIN, WE GET TO RESTORE A CREEK, WHICH TO ME THAT 11 IS JUST PRECIOUS BECAUSE WE CAN HAVE WETLANDS THERE. SO THAT’S MY 12 THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 13 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. AND THE NEXT PERSON I SEE IS ROB – 14 ROB ROSSI. OH, I’M SORRY. ELLIOTT MARSHALL. I DIDN’T SEE YOU THERE. 15 MR. MARSHALL: I HAVE SOME PAPERS TO GIVE TO YOU. I’M NOT 16 GONNA TRY TO TALK ABOUT THE ACADEMIC SIDE OF THIS BECAUSE I’M NOT 17 QUALIFIED TO, BUT I WANTED TO SHOW YOU A FACE AND PUT A FACE TO THE 18 PEOPLE WHO ARE PERSONALLY INTERESTED IN THIS PROJECT OR OTHER 19 PROJECTS LIKE IT. 20 MY WIFE AND I ARE PROBABLY THE POSTER COUPLE FOR THIS – 21 PROJECTS LIKE THIS. WE GET ALONG PRETTY WELL IN LIFE. WE CAN 22 MANAGE. WE LIVE IN A HOUSE. WE’RE ENJOYING OURSELVES, BUT WE’RE 23 FINDING THAT WE’RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DO IT TOO MUCH LONGER. 24 WE CAN’T DO THE MAINTENANCE. WHEN WE CONTRACT FOR 25 09040 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 27 PEOPLE, WE CAN’T SPECIFY WHAT WE WANT DONE. WE DON’T DELINEATE IT, 1 SO IT DOESN’T GET DONE WELL AND IT’S MORE EXPENSIVE. SO OBVIOUSLY, 2 WE’RE GONNA HAVE TO MOVE BEFORE TOO LONG. SO I HOPE YOU’LL 3 CONSIDER THAT. 4 WE CONSIDER OURSELVES CITIZENS OF THIS COMMUNITY. 5 WE’VE BEEN HERE FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS. WE CONTRIBUTE AND DONATE 6 OUR TIME TO ASSISTANCE LEAGUES, OTHER SERVICES. WE WORK WITH 7 CHURCHES. WE GO TO PLACES AND CONDUCT PERFORMANCES FOR SENIOR 8 CITIZENS. WE WORK ON RESTORING THE HISTORY OF THE PACIFIC COAST 9 RAILWAY THAT WENT AROUND THIS COMMUNITY THAT MOST PEOPLE DON’T 10 KNOW ABOUT. AND WE’RE SO PROUD OF THAT WORK WE’RE DOING. SO WE 11 FEEL LIKE WE’RE PART AND WE WANT YOU TO FEEL AND THINK OF US AS A 12 PART. 13 I HAVE ON THE PIECE OF PAPER THAT I HANDED TO THE 14 GENTLEMAN ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED TO US OVER THE LAST 15 YEAR AND FIVE YEARS. 16 WE WOULD NEED A COMMITTEE OF BRIGHT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE 17 TO HANDLE THOSE EFFECTIVELY. WE CAN’T DO IT ANYMORE. SO WITHIN 18 SOME NUMBER OF YEARS, AND I CAN’T GIVE YOU AN EXACT NUMBER, WE’RE 19 GONNA BE NEEDING IT. YOU DON’T NEED IT RIGHT NOW. BUT BECAUSE OF 20 PEOPLE LIKE OURSELVES, THERE MAY BE PLACES FOR YOU WHEN YOU DO 21 NEED THEM. 22 WE LIKE THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT BECAUSE IT’S NOT 23 DOWNTOWN. WHEN YOU GET OUR AGE, YOU’VE HAD ALL THE DOWNTOWN 24 WE WANT. WE DON’T NEED ANY MORE OF IT. WE WANT TO GO LOOK AT 25 09041 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 28 TREES AND – AND PLACES THAT ARE NATURAL AND PASTORAL. DO YOU 1 KNOW THERE’S SHEEP AND COWS OUT HERE AT THIS PLACE? IT’S A 2 WONDERFUL PLACE. SO LET ME ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT IT 3 FAVORABLY. THANK YOU. 4 MAYOR MARX: THANK – THANK YOU. 5 MR. MARSHALL: I THINK I’M GONNA RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL. 6 MAYOR MARX: IT’S A LOT OF WORK, I’LL TELL YOU. OKAY. ROB 7 ROSSI. 8 MR. ROSSI: ROB ROSSI OF SAN LUIS OBISPO. AND I’M NOT RUNNING 9 FOR CITY COUNCIL. 10 I SUPPORT THE APPLICATION MOVING FORWARD. AND – AND I 11 WANTED TO COMMENT ALSO AS A PERSON WHO SERVED ON THE LUCE, THAT 12 WHEN WE REVIEWED THIS, I DON’T THINK WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE 150-13 FOOT LINE WAS THERE, SO I DON’T KNOW THAT IT WAS REALLY TAKEN 14 UNDER CONSIDERATION. AND I THINK GIVEN THE NATURE OF THIS 15 PARTICULAR AREA OF THE IRISH HILLS, BEING THAT IT’S A FLAT BENCH, AND 16 YOU CAN SEE ALREADY WITH MEADOWBROOK UP THERE THAT – 17 MOUNTAINBROOK, I GUESS -- HOW IT SITS INTO THE HILLSIDE, THAT I THINK 18 THIS COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IN A VERY SUITABLE WAY. AND I THINK 19 THEY’LL DO A GREAT JOB WITH IT. 20 AND CLEARLY THE NEED IS HERE FOR – WITHIN THE 21 COMMUNITY, FOR A FACILITY LIKE THIS, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT 22 LOCATION FOR IT. SO I SUPPORT IT. 23 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. YES, SIR. I THINK I RECOGNIZE YOU. 24 MR. ROMERO: I DON’T COME VERY OFTEN. 25 09042 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 29 MAYOR MARX: WELCOME. 1 MR. ROMERO: I’M DAVID ROMERO. I’VE LIVED IN SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 SINCE 1956, WHEN I FIRST CAME TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE CITY. I DON’T 3 REPRE – I’M NOT – I DON’T REPRESENT ANYONE, OTHER THAN THE CITY 4 ITSELF AS I HAVE FOR MY ENTIRE CAREER WORKING FOR THE CITY. 5 AND SO I’LL MAKE MY PRESENTATION OF SOMETHING THAT WE 6 REALLY NEED ONLY FOR PART OF THIS PROJECT. DURING MY SERVICE AS 7 MAYOR, I WAS APPROACHED BY INDIVIDUALS INTERESTED IN SITING A 8 CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY IN OR NEAR SAN LUIS OBISPO. 9 DURING OUR SEARCH, I BECAME CONVINCED THAT THIS WOULD BE A 10 NEEDED AND IMPORTANT USE FOR OUR CITY. AND THE LONGER THAT GOES 11 BY, THE MORE I’M CONVINCED THAT WE REALLY NEED SOMETHING LIKE 12 THIS. 13 WE LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF SITES AND COULD NOT FIND ONE 14 THAT MET ALL THE CONSTRAINTS THAT SUCH A FACILITY WOULD REQUIRE. 15 THAT IS, THE CORRECT SIZE PARCEL WITH SEWER, WATER, MAJOR STREET 16 ACCESS, CITY AMENITIES, COMPATIBILITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND A 17 WILLING SELLER AT A REASONABLE PRICE. 18 RECENTLY, I WAS OVERJOYED TO FIND AN EXCELLENT SITE HAD 19 BEEN DISCOVERED ON THE FROOM RANCH. HOWEVER, I FIND DEVELOPMENT 20 MIGHT BE STOPPED OR SEVERELY RESTRICTED BY A LAND USE ELEMENT 21 CONSTRAINT, WHICH, IF APPLIED, WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE QUALITY 22 OF THE PROJECT. 23 THE LAND USE ELEMENT CALLS FOR NO DEVELOPMENT ALONG 24 THE IRISH HILLS ABOVE ELEVATION 150. THIS WAS NOT A WATER SERVICE 25 09043 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 30 CONSTRAINT, BUT WAS SET TO – QUOTE – PROTECT AND PRESERVE HILLSIDE 1 AREAS AND NATURAL FEATURES. THIS LINE HAS BEEN LARGELY IGNORED IN 2 ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE ALONG THE FOOT OF THE 3 IRISH HILLS WEST OF THE PROJECT SITE. 4 I’M NOT WITHOUT FAULT IN SETTING THIS LINE. WHEN WE 5 CONSIDERED LAND USE ELEMENT IN ’94 AND 2010, I WAS COUNCILMAN AND 6 MAYOR. AND WRONGLY ASSUMED THAT THE ELEVATION 150 OCCURRED 7 WHERE THE GENTLER SLOPES, WHICH HAD BEEN FARMED AND GRAZED, MET 8 THE CHAPARRAL OF THE STEEPER HILLSIDE SLOPES. IN ACTUALITY, THE 9 CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY SITE AND THE 150 CONTOUR PASSES 10 THROUGH A GRASSY MEADOW TO THE WEST OF THE MOUNTAINBROOK 11 CHURCH, FAR BELOW THE BEGINNING OF THE CHAPARRAL-COVERED 12 HILLSIDE. 13 I BELIEVE A SUPERIOR PROJECT CAN BE DEVELOPED IF THE 14 BUILDING IS PERMITTED TO CONTINUE UP THE GENTLE SLOPE TO THE 15 GRASSY MEADOW TO A LOCATION OPPOSITE AND OF THE SAME HEIGHT AS 16 THE MEADOWBROOK – AS THE MEADOWBROOK CHURCH. THIS WOULD MEET 17 THE INTENT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT VERBIAGE, STATING PROTECT AND 18 PRESERVE HILLSIDE AREAS AND NATURAL FEATURES. 19 A COMPROMISE, I SUGGEST THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PERMIT THE 20 DEVELOPMENT BUILD TO ROOF HEIGHT OF THE ADJACENT MEADOWBROOK – 21 MEADOWBROOK CHURCH AND THE KSBY STATION, BOTH OF WHICH ARE 22 SLIGHTLY EXCEED THE 200 – THE 200-FOOT ELEVATION. THANK YOU. 23 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. NEIL HAVLIK AND JUDIE – I THINK IT’S 24 REINER – PERHAPS. 25 09044 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 31 MS. REINER: REINER, YES. 1 MAYOR MARX: REINER, OKAY. SORRY. CARL DUDLEY, VICTOR 2 MONTGOMERY HAS ALREADY SPOKEN, AND THEN KEN REINER AND MILO 3 VUJOVICH-LABARRE. YES, SIR. 4 MR. HAVLIK: MADAME MAYOR. IT’S A PRIVILEGE TO FOLLOW 5 FORMER MAYOR ROMERO, AND PERHAPS OFFER A COUNTERPOINT TO HIS – 6 SOME OF HIS POINTS. 7 MY NAME IS NEIL HAVLIK. I LIVE IN SAN LUIS OBISPO. I’M HERE 8 ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY’S SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 CHAPTER. AND I’M SORRY TO SAY WE HAVE SOME MAJOR CONCERNS WITH 10 THIS PROJECT. 11 FIRST OF ALL, IT IGNORES MANY GENERAL PLAN POLICIES, 12 ESPECIALLY ENVIRONMENTAL AND VISUAL. THESE INCLUDE THE 150-FOOT 13 ELEVATION LINE, PROTECTION OF WATERWAYS, PROTECTION OF RARE AND 14 ENDANGERED SPECIES AND SPECIES OF LOCAL CONCERN, AND PROTECTION 15 OF WETLANDS. 16 IT OFFERS A HODGE-PODGE OF USES – SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, 17 APARTMENTS, AND RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH 18 THE – WITH THE RETIREMENT FACILITY. IT USES CONVOLUTED ARGUMENTS 19 TO TRY TO JUSTIFY THE NEED TO GO ABOVE THE 150-FOOT ELEVATION, 20 MOSTLY TO GET MORE DEVELOPMENT AND TO TRY TO REACH THE 1:1 OPEN 21 SPACE TO DEVELOPMENT RATIO. 22 I’D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IN OTHER PROJECTS AROUND THE 23 CITY, WE HAVE SEEN RATIOS LIKE THIS: THE TOLOSA RANCH JUST UP THE 24 STREET WITH THE MOST DEVELOPMENT AREA, HAS A FOUR AND A HALF TO 25 09045 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 32 ONE OPEN SPACE TO DEVELOPMENT RATIO. THE PERFUMO HOMES PROJECT 1 HAD 13 TO ONE. BOWDEN RANCH, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN, HAD 16 TO 2 ONE. AND EVEN TRACT 2428 IN THE – IN THE MARGARITA AREA, THE KING 3 PROPERTY, FORMER KING PROPERTY, IS TWO AND A HALF TO ONE. SO I 4 DON’T KNOW WHAT’S SO MAGICAL ABOUT THE ONE TO ONE RATIO. 5 TO ADD TO THAT, IT COUNTS LANDS ALREADY LEGALLY SET 6 ASIDE AS OPEN SPACES AS MITIGATION FOR OTHER PROJECTS AS THIS 7 PROJECT’S OPEN SPACE. AND THAT TOTALS AS MUCH AS 15 ACRES. THAT’S 8 DOUBLE-DIPPING, AND SHOULD BE DISALLOWED BY THE CITY. 9 IT FRAGMENTS THE OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, 10 THEREBY DIMINISHING OPEN SPACE VALUES. IT USES THE MOUNTAINBROOK 11 CHURCH, WHICH MADE A CONSCIOUS DECISION NOT TO ANNEX, AND USING 12 THE LOWER STANDARDS OF THE COUNTY TO DEVELOP THERE, AND NOW 13 THAT’S BEING USED TO JUSTIFY US LOWERING OUR STANDARDS. 14 THE SO-CALLED RESTORATION OF FROOM CREEK HAS MORE TO 15 DO WITH GETTING IT OUT OF THE WAY THAN RESTORING IT. THIS IS A 16 WHOLESALE RELOCATION THAT WOULD DESTROY A HEALTHY, VIABLE 17 EXISTING WETLAND BY REPLACING WITH A FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL. AND 18 MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT, IT WILL BE A FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL. 19 THE SMALL TRIBUTARY ON THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE OF 20 THE PROPERTY IS ALSO -- FROM THE MAPS -- APPEARS TO BE COVERED OVER 21 AND – AND DESTROYED. 22 SO THIS IS A SERIOUS MATTER. WE’RE STANDING NOT ONLY OUR 23 POLICIES, BUT OUR CREEK SETBACK ORDINANCE ON ITS HEAD. 24 IF ALLOWED TO GO FORWARD AS PROPOSED, THIS PROJECT 25 09046 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 33 SENDS A MESSAGE THAT, IN MY JUDGMENT, WILL PIT THE CITY AGAINST 1 SUPERIOR AGENCIES ON MATTERS OF WETLAND PROTECTION, MATTERS OF 2 RIPARIAN PROTECTION, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTION. 3 MAYOR MARX: THANK – THANK YOU. 4 MR. HAVLIK: THE CITY SHOULD SEND BACK – I’M JUST ALMOST DONE. 5 MAYOR MARX: OKAY. 6 MR. HAVLIK: THANK YOU. THE CITY SHOULD SEND THIS PROPOSAL 7 BACK FOR SOME SERIOUS RETHINKING. A SMALLER PROJECT FOCUSED ON 8 THE RETIREMENT CENTER WOULD BE ABLE TO MEET MOST OF THE CITY’S 9 GENERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS. TELL THE PROJECT SPONSORS THAT’S – 10 THAT’S WHAT YOU WANT. AND ASK FOR – 11 MAYOR MARX: THANKYOU. 12 MR. HAVLIK: -- THE CURRENT PROPOSAL, IN THE WORDS OF THE LATE 13 FIRST LADY NANCY REAGAN, JUST SAY NO. 14 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. 15 MR. HAVLIK: THANK YOU. 16 MAYOR MARX: YES. 17 MS. REINER: GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JUDIE REINER AND I’M A 18 VERY PROUD RESIDENT OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND HAVE BEEN FOR OVER 50 19 YEARS. I KNOW I DON’T LOOK THAT OLD, BUT I AM. 20 EVER SINCE MY HUSBAND, KEN, AND I LEARNED ABOUT THE 21 EXISTENCE OF CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES, WELL OVER 22 THIRTEEN AND A HALF YEARS AGO, WE’VE BEEN TRYING TO BRING ONE TO 23 SAN LUIS OBISPO. WE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT WORKED WITH DAVE ROMERO 24 MANY YEARS AGO. I’M THRILLED HE WAS HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK TO 25 09047 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 34 THAT. 1 WE’VE REACHED OUT TO VERY REPUTABLE CCRC OPERATORS 2 THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. MANY WERE TURNED OFF BY THE 3 DIFFICULTIES OF ANY REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT IN OR AROUND SAN LUIS 4 OBISPO. 5 WE FOUND ONE COMPANY, PACIFIC RETIREMENT SERVICES, 6 KNOWN AS PRS, HEADQUARTERED IN MEDFORD, OREGON. THEY WERE VERY 7 INTERESTED -- INTERESTED ENOUGH IN SAN LUIS OBISPO AND OUR MARKET, 8 THAT THEY VISITED AND THEY LOOKED VERY PROMISING LOCATIONS SUCH 9 AS THE PISMO HEIGHTS, THE LAND BEHIND GENERAL HOSPITAL, CAL POLY, 10 THE RIGHETTI RANCH, MADONNA PROPERTIES – MULTIPLE MADONNA 11 PROPERTIES, AND THE WIXSOM RANCH, WHICH THEY ACTUALLY MADE AN 12 OFFER ON IN 2006. BUT ONE SITE AFTER ANOTHER FELL THROUGH AND THE 13 HOUSING RECESSION HIT. THE TIMING WAS TERRIBLE. THEREFORE, PRS 14 GAVE UP ON THEIR SEARCH FOR A SITE IN SAN LUIS OBISPO. 15 WHAT WE FOUND WAS, THAT IN ORDER FOR A CCRC TO EVER BE 16 BUILT IN SAN LUIS OR ANYWHERE, THERE HAD TO BE A SITE WITH AT LEAST 17 20 ACRES OF BUILDABLE LAND TO ACCOMMODATE ALL FACILITIES AND 18 LEVELS OF CARE IN A CCRC; A REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT WHICH WOULD 19 RECOGNIZED THE NEED FOR MORE AND BETTER HOUSING OPTIONS FOR 20 SENIORS; AND A RECEPTIVE PROPERTY OWNER, WHO WAS WILLING TO 21 ACCEPT THE CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH DESIGN, ENTITLEMENT, AND 22 CONSTRUCTION OF THIS COMMUNITY. 23 THE ONLY PART OF THIS THAT WAS NEVER IN DOUBT IS THAT 24 THERE IS A LARGE POPULATION OF SENIORS LIKE US AND MANY OF WHOM 25 09048 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 35 WERE HERE EARLIER THIS EVENING. I KNOW YOU SAW THEM WITH THEIR 1 YELLOW BUTTONS, MANY OF WHOM – WHO NEEDED TO LEAVE EARLY. 2 WE WOULD LOVE TO LIVE IN A CCRC, A CCRC IN SAN LUIS 3 OBISPO. WHAT STARTED AS A LIST OF OUR FRIENDS OVER TEN YEARS AGO 4 HAS GROWN TO MORE THAN 250 LOCAL INTERESTED HOUSEHOLDS. MANY OF 5 THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ON OUR LIST IN THE EARLY DAYS HAVE MOVED 6 AWAY, MANY TO CCRCS LOCATED IN OTHER PLACES IN CALIFORNIA AND 7 THROUGHOUT THE US. SEVERAL MEMBERS, SADLY, HAVE PASSED ON AND 8 OTHERS ARE IN POOR HEALTH. 9 DESPITE THESE DEPARTURES, OUR LIST CONTINUES TO GROW. 10 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. 11 MS. REINER: CURRENT MEMBERS OF THIS LIST ARE HOPEFUL THAT 12 THE CCRC WILL BE COMPLETED IN TIME FOR THEM. 13 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. 14 MS. REINER: THANK YOU. 15 MAYOR MARX: OKAY. 16 MR. DUDLEY: TOUGH ACT TO FOLLOW. 17 MAYOR MARX: (INAUDIBLE) YES. 18 MR. DUDLEY: GOOD EVENING OR EARLY MORNING. MADAME MAYOR, 19 MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. MY NAME IS CARL DUDLEY. I AM A RESIDENT 20 OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FOR OVER 30 YEARS. I’M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF 21 THE PROJECT AS PRESENTED. 22 I KNOW YOU ALL REALIZE THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE 23 WORKFORCE HOUSING FOR OUR FUTURE GENERATIONS. WE ALSO HAVE AN 24 ISSUE WITH HOUSING FOR OUR AGING POPULATION BESIDES THE MUCH 25 09049 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 36 NEEDED WORKFORCE HOUSING. THE BABY-BOOMERS WANT TO STAY HERE, 1 AND A CCRC OFFERS US THE OPPORTUNITY TO GROW OLD GRACEFULLY 2 WITH SERVICES AND RECREATION READILY AVAILABLE. 3 THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED OFFERS SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY. I 4 REALIZE THAT THERE IS CONCERN OVER THE HEIGHT ISSUE AND GIVEN THE 5 DYNAMICS OF THE PROPERTY, THE ONLY VIABLE OPPORTUNITY IS TO GO UP. 6 IF THIS WAS AN OUTSIDE DEVELOPER, I’D HAVE VERY CONCERNED 7 ISSUES WITH THE – I’D BE VERY CONCERNED WITH THE VIEWSHED ISSUE. 8 BUT GIVEN THE OWNER AND DEVELOPERS ARE HOMEGROWN AND LONG 9 RESIDENTS, I FEEL THIS PROJECT COULDN’T BE IN BETTER HANDS. NOT ONLY 10 HAVE THEY PUT THEIR FINGERPRINTS ON MANY QUALITY PROJECTS, THEY 11 ALSO HAVE FAMILIES THAT WANT TO STAY HERE AND ENJOY THE QUALITY 12 OF LIFE WE ALL HAVE ENJOYED. 13 UNFORTUNATELY, THERE IS AN ECONOMIC COMPONENT THAT 14 COMES INTO PLAY. THEIR DESIGN WORKS FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF 15 ACREAGE DUE TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC ACCESS THAT ARE 16 NEEDED, AND I’M SURE YOU ALL ARE AWARE OF THESE REQUIREMENTS. 17 I’LL CLOSE WITH THIS: I CANNOT THINK OF ANYONE BETTER 18 EQUIPPED TO OFFER THIS PROJECT WHILE PROTECTING OUR NATURAL 19 RESOURCES. I SINCERELY HOPE YOU’LL AGREE WITH ME AND APPROVE THE 20 PROPOSED PROJECT AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 21 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. SO KEN – KEN REINER, MILA VUJOVICH-22 LABARRE, BRIAN ACKERMAN, CORDELIA PERRY. AND THEN PATSY WALTERS 23 OR RUSTY WALTERS. SIR, YES. 24 MR. REINER: OKAY. YES. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS KEN REINER. I’M 25 09050 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 37 JUDIE’S HUSBAND AND ALSO A SAN LUIS OBISPO RESIDENT AND 1 REPRESENTING THE – THE CCRC, THE DEVELOPMENT. AND I’M ALSO A 2 RETIRED CAL POLY PROFESSOR OF FINANCE. 3 MY INTEREST IN CCRCS IS BOTH PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL. 4 WHILE AT CAL POLY, I GOT A SMALL GRANT TO STUDY CCRCS IN CALIFORNIA 5 AND I PREPARED A REPORT THAT CONCLUDED THAT SLO WAS A – WAS A 6 GOOD, SUITABLE LOCATION FOR A CCRC. 7 AS JUDIE SAID IN HER REMARKS, OUR CCRC LIST HAS CONTINUED 8 TO GROW OVER THE YEARS. THIS IS IN LARGE PART THE RESULT OF A FAST 9 GROWING POPULATION OF SENIORS AND A LARGE AND WORSENING 10 SHORTAGE OF SENIOR HOUSING AND CARE FACILITIES. 11 I’VE EXTRACTED SOME INFORMATION RELATED TO THIS – THIS 12 SHORTAGE FROM A MARKET SURVEY PREPARED BY GRAYSTONE SENIOR 13 LIVING COMMUNITY SUPPLEMENTED WITH SOME CENSUS NUMBERS AND SLO 14 CITY REPORTS. THEY’LL BE – THEY’LL BE SHOWING UP THERE. I CAN BE --15 COMMENT THAT – OKAY. IS THE – THE FIRST – MY – HUH? I DON’T KNOW. 16 THERE’S – THERE WAS ONLY ONE POPPED UP AND I SAVED IT THERE. 17 (INAUDIBLE) THAT MANY – WELL, ANY -- 18 MAYOR MARX: WE’LL GIVE YOU AN EXTRA COUPLE MINUTES FOR 19 TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. 20 MR. REINER: OKAY. WELL, I CAN CONTINUE THE NARRATIVE AND 21 MAYBE THEY’LL -- 22 MAYOR MARX: WHY DON’T YOU DO THAT? 23 MR. REINER: OKAY. YES. WELL, ANYWAY THE FIRST SLIDE THERE -- 24 IN THIS SHOWS THAT THEY AREA IN AND AROUND SAN LUIS OBISPO HAS A 25 09051 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 38 SERIOUS SHORTAGE OF SKILLED NURSING FACILITY BEDS. THE LOCAL AREA 1 HAS 57 SKILLED NURSING FACILITY BEDS PER 1,000 PA – RESIDENTS OVER 75 2 YEARS OF AGE, WHICH IS LESS THAN TWO PERCENT – TWO-THIRDS OF THE 3 NATIONWIDE AVERAGE OF 86. 4 OKAY, SO AGAIN, THERE VERY LOW – VERY LOW NUMBER 5 COMPARED TO STATEWIDE STANDARDS, FEDERAL STANDARDS, AND ALSO 6 THE OCCUPANCY RATIO OF THESE BEDS IS 95 PERCENT COMPARED WITH A 7 NATIONWIDE AVERAGE OF 87 PERCENT. IT SHOWS THAT THERE’S A REAL 8 SHORTAGE HERE WHEN PRACTICALLY ANYBODY WITH A SKILLED NURSING 9 FACILITY BED PROPERLY QUALIFIED CAN FILL IT. 10 OKAY. AGAIN, THIS TIGHT MARKET IS PARTIALLY DUE TO THE 11 HIGH PERCENTAGE OF OVER 65S IN THE AREA. SEVENTEEN POINT SEVEN 12 PERCENT OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO POPULATION IS OVER 65, COMPARED TO 13 12.9 PERCENT NATIONALLY. IT SEEMS BIZARRE THAT A TOWN WITH A BIG 14 COLLEGE WOULD HAVE A LOT OF SENIOR PEOPLE, BUT WE DO. WE HAVE 15 THIS BI-MODAL DISTRIBUTION AGE-WISE. SO THERE’S A LARGE NUMBER OF 16 US. 17 OKAY. FURTHER COMPOUNDING THE PROBLEM, THE OVER-65 18 POPULATION’S THE FASTEST GROWING AGE GROUP IN SAN LUIS OBISPO. IT IS 19 GROWING AND CONTINUES TO GROW AS PEOPLE LIVE LONGER AND PEOPLE 20 STAY AROUND. 21 THE SECOND SLIDE SHOWS THAT THERE’S AN ESTIMATED 22 ELDERLY SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATION OF 2,310 IN SAN LUIS OBISPO 23 COMPARED TO THE 1338 UNITS ACTUALLY AVAILABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL 24 COMPARE FOR THE ELDERLY, WHICH MEANS THAT ONLY 57 PERCENT OF THE 25 09052 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 39 NEED-QUALIFIED PEOPLE HAVE A PLACE TO STAY, A FACILITY THAT WOULD 1 HOLD THEM. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE OTHER 42 PERCENT? 2 GENERALLY, THEY’RE CARED FOR AT HOME BY FAMILY 3 MEMBERS, CARETAKERS OR COMBINATION OF BOTH. AND AS AN ASIDE, WE 4 KNOW THAT SOME – THAT FULL-TIME, 24-7 CARE, YOU KNOW, IN A HOME – 5 HOME CARE WOULD COST APPROXIMATELY $18,000.00 A MONTH IF YOU WANT 6 TO HAVE THAT CARE IN YOUR OWN HOME OR HAVE TO HAVE THAT CARE IN 7 YOUR OWN HOME. 8 THE THIRD SLIDE SHOWED ALL THE LOCATIONS OR SOME OF THE 9 LOCATIONS WE LOOKED AT. WE DIDN’T JUST CONCENTRATE ON SAN LUIS 10 OBISPO. OVER THE YEARS, WE LOOKED FROM TEMPLETON TO FIVE CITIES. 11 WE’VE LOOKED AT MANY SITES THROUGHOUT SAN LUIS OBISPO. 12 MOST OF THE OTHERS HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED BECAUSE THEY’RE 13 BEING DEVELOPED FOR OTHER PURPOSES, THEY HAVE ZONING WHICH IS 14 INCONSISTENT WITH THE CCRC OR AN AG RESERVES OR HAVE TOPOGRAPHY 15 UNSUITABLE FOR A CCRC. 16 MAYOR MARX: OKAY. IF YOU COULD WIND IT UP, THAT’D BE GREAT. 17 MR. REINER: OKAY. YEAH. 18 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. 19 MR. REINER: THE IDEA BEING THERE’S A SERIOUS SHORTAGE OF 20 HOUSING OF THIS TYPE, WHICH WILL CONTINUE TO GROW. AND AGAIN, IT’S 21 HARD TO FIND A SUITABLE SITE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 22 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. YES. NEXT. 23 MR. ACKERMAN: GOOD EVENING, MAYOR MARX AND CITY 24 COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS MILA VUJOVICH -LABARRE. I REVIEWED 25 09053 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 40 THE CONCEPT OF A CONTINUED CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY WITH JOHN 1 MADONNA JUST – JUST CASUALLY LAST YEAR. I LOVE THE IDEA AND I 2 ADORE THE MADONNAS AND EVERYTHING THEY’VE DONE FOR THE 3 COMMUNITY. 4 HOWEVER, I’M HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE I HAVE GRAVE 5 CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROJECT. I SPOKE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION 6 MEETINGS, SO IF YOU HEARD ANY OF THAT TESTIMONY, I AM DUPLICATING 7 SEVERAL OF THOSE POINTS. 8 NUMBER ONE, FIRST AND FOREMOST IN THE LAND USE 9 CIRCULATION ELEMENT DISCUSSION AND IN SEVERAL PUBLIC FORUMS THAT 10 WERE TAKEN, RESIDENTS ASKED OVERWHELMINGLY TO PROTECT THE 11 GREENBELT AND THE VIEWS AND THE OPEN SPACE. APPARENTLY, IN – AND 12 THAT WAS NOT JUST IN-PERSON, THAT WAS IN OVER 2,200 SURVEYS THAT 13 WERE EITHER SENT IN OR COMPLETED ONLINE. SO THEY SAID THAT THAT 150 14 RESERVE LINE WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO THEM. 15 AGAIN, RESIDENTS WANT THEIR VIEWS AND RESIDENTS ASKED 16 THAT THE CONSTRUCTION NOT BE PASSED THAT 150-FOOT LINE, PERIOD. 17 AGAIN, THE LAND USE CIRCULATION ELEMENT DOCUMENT WAS 18 JUST SOLIDIFIED BY YOUR COUNCIL VOTE IN ABOUT 2014. COMMISSIONER 19 RIGGS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL PROVIDED ROBUST 20 DISCUSSION AND HE SHARED MY CONCERN THAT THE 150-FOOT LINE WAS 21 JUST ESTABLISHED AND HERE WE ARE ALREADY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE. 22 SO THAT’S A CONCERN. 23 SECONDLY, I’M CONCERNED THAT I WAS VERY EXCITED ABOUT 24 THIS – THE CONTINUED CARE RETIREMENT CENTER, WHICH I STILL AM. 25 09054 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 41 HOWEVER, IT’S THE 280 HOMES ALSO IN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT THAT 1 I’M CONCERNED ABOUT AND I’M OPPOSED TO. 2 I SENSE THAT THE DEVELOPER CAN MOVE ON THE CCRC, PUT IT 3 LOWER AND OMIT THE HOMES AND STILL MAKE A HANDSOME PROFIT AND 4 PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY WHAT THEY WANT. 5 THE LANDOWNER KNOWS MY CONCERNS ABOUT WATER 6 AVAILABILITY THROUGHOUT OUR WHOLE CITY FOR FUTURE 7 DEVELOPMENTS, AND I HAVE STATED THAT PUBLICLY AND HE HAS TOLD ME 8 THAT HE HAS PLENTY OF WATER, SO I BELIEVE HIM. 9 NUMBER THREE, THE OTHER CONCERN THAT I HAD IS THE 10 CONSIDERATION FOR PARKING FOR THE WORKERS, NOT JUST FOR THE 11 PEOPLE LIVING THERE, BUT FOR VISITORS AND FOR THE WORKERS THAT 12 WILL UNDOUBTEDLY INCLUDE DOZENS OF MINIMUM-WAGE WORKERS AND 13 SKILLED PROFESSIONALS. AND I DID NOT SEE THAT ADEQUATELY 14 ADDRESSED IN THE PLAN. 15 THE OTHER CONCERN I HAVE IS THE CREEK. AND I AM REALLY 16 THANKFUL THAT NEIL HAVLIK GAVE HIS TESTIMONY. I COMPLETELY 17 ENDORSE EVERYTHING THAT NEIL HAVLIK SAID. HE IS A CONSUMMATE 18 PROFESSIONAL AND HE HAS SERVED OUR CITY WELL. IT SEEMS THAT IN THIS 19 AREA – ERA WITH EVERYTHING GOING ON WITH CLIMATE CHANGE THAT WE 20 SHOULD BE KIND TO MOTHER NATURE AND THAT THAT CREEK SHOULD NOT 21 BE DIVERTED. 22 NEXT I’M ASKING YOU TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE DESIRE FOR A 23 CCRC BY MANY PEOPLE. THERE ARE MEMBERS OF RRM HERE. A LOT OF THE 24 PRINCIPALS, REAL ESTATE AGENTS, JOHN MADONNA, JUDIE REINER, WHO 25 09055 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 42 WAS MY LAMAZE COACH 27 YEARS AGO. AND I LOVE A LOT OF THESE 1 PEOPLE, BUT WHAT THEY’RE PROPOSING IS JUST TOO MUCH AND TOO BIG 2 FOR THIS PARCEL. 3 OUT OF CONCERN FOR THE LUCE PROCESS AND THE RESIDENTS 4 WHO SPOKE OUT, PLEASE HONOR THE 150 RESERVE LINE. I ASK THAT YOU 5 REDESIGN THE PRODUCT – PROJECT. THE WIN-WIN SOLUTION FOR THIS 6 DILEMMA IS TO PRESERVE THE 150-FOOT LINE, DO THE CONTINUED CARE 7 RETIREMENT COMMUNITY BELOW THAT LINE, AND PAY THE MADONNA 8 FAMILY FOR THE OPEN SPACE, FOR ITS SCENIC BEAUTY, POTENTIAL CLASS 9 ONE BIKE PATHS, HIKING AREAS, AND KEEP THE AREA AS PASTORAL AS 10 POSSIBLE. THANK YOU. 11 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. OKAY. WE’RE HAVING TROUBLE 12 KEEPING TO OUR THREE MINUTES AND I KNOW IT’S ‘CAUSE WE’RE SO 13 EXCITED ABOUT ALL THESE ISSUES, BUT PLEASE TRY TO KEEP TO THE THREE 14 MINUTES. UM, BRIAN ACKERMAN, CORDELIA PERRY, MAYBE RUSTY 15 WALTERS, CHARLENE ROSALES, WILLIAM WAYCOTT. SIR? 16 MR. ACKERMAN: HI. MY NAME’S BRIAN ACKERMAN. I RESIDE HERE 17 IN SAN LUIS OBISPO, NOT WITH ANY PART OF THE PARTIES, BUT PERSONALLY 18 BACKGROUND. DEVELOPED OVER 400 MILLION IN CCRC NOT-FOR-PROFIT 19 AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACROSS SIX STATES, HAVE EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE, 20 HAVE BEEN SCOUTING IN THE AREA FOR FIVE YEARS LOOKING FOR LAND. 21 WHAT YOU ARE CURRENTLY BEING FACED WITH ARE SOME 22 VERY HARD DECISIONS. MY BACKGROUND IS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. I 23 CAN APPRECIATE ALL THE ARGUMENTS FOR THE NATIVE PLANTS, THE 150-24 FOOT LINE WITH THE HILL AND THE VIEWSHED. 25 09056 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 43 BUT AS PEOPLE WITH THE CITY OR THE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE 1 TO COME TO TERMS WITH IS WHAT IS THE CITY CURRENTLY FACING? YOU’RE 2 BEHIND IN YOUR HOUSING STANDARDS. YOU’RE BEHIND IN YOUR 3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING. YOU’RE GONNA BE FACED, IN THE NEXT 15 YEARS, 4 WITH AN ADDITIONAL 1,000-BED REQUIREMENT JUST ON THE MINIMAL SIDE 5 FOR SENIORS THAT NEED THIS CARE. 6 THIS CARE IS VERY INTRICATE AND MOST CITIES DON’T 7 UNDERSTAND THAT THE LEVEL OF CARE IS ALL TIED TOGETHER, SO TO TAKE 8 AN ARGUMENT AND SAY, 10 ACRES, 20 ACRES, IF I WAS HERE BEFORE YOU, I’D 9 ACTUALLY BE ASKING FOR 60 ACRES. 10 I’M PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING 50 ACRES IN 11 SANTA BARBARA GOING UP THROUGH THE HILLS, GOING THROUGH ALL THE 12 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES, RELOCATING THE CREEK. I’VE DONE THIS MANY 13 TIMES, SO THERE IS GIVE AND TAKE. THERE WILL BE SOME – VIEWSHED IS 14 PRIMARILY PROTECTED, AND TO BE HONEST, I CAN’T STAND MY HILLS 15 GETTING BUILT OUT. 16 BUT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED, PEOPLE ARE ENVISIONING 17 LARGE HOUSES, LARGE FACILITIES. GENERALLY, THE SINGLE-FAMILY 18 HOMES ARE ONLY 900 SQUARE FEET, VERY SMALL, POCKETED IN CLUSTERS 19 AND HIDDEN. SO A LOT OF WAS SAN LUIS IS ACCUSTOMED TO SEEING DONE 20 POORLY, IN A CCRC DEVELOPMENT, IT’S A VERY RIGOROUS, VERY HIGH HELD 21 STANDARD ON HOW THAT LEVEL OF CARE WORKS WITH THE ARCHITECTURE, 22 WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY, AND WITH THE SITE. 23 YOU CAN’T NEARLY TAKE THAT AND SPLIT THAT UP AND SAY, 24 “WE CAN DO THIS, WE CAN DO THAT. NOW MAKE IT WORK,” TO THE GROUP 25 09057 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 44 THAT’S SITTING HERE. SO YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE OVERALL 1 COHESIVENESS OF WHAT A CCRC PROVIDES FOR THE LEVEL OF CARE. 2 THERE’S NOWHERE IN SAN LUIS OBISPO OR THE SURROUNDING 3 AREA THAT HAS END OF LIFE CARE WHERE IT IS ALL UNDERNEATH ONE 4 ROOF. THE AVERAGE GOING IN IS 84 AND THE NUMBER ONE DEMISE OF A 5 MARRIED COUPLE IS SEPARATION DURING ILLNESS, SO IF YOU HAVE ONE 6 INDIVIDUAL THAT’S ACROSS TOWN OF THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL, IT’S ALL 7 DOCUMENTED. 8 BUT I’M HAPPY TO CONSULT FOR THE WHOLE COUNCIL, AND I 9 REPRESENT NOT-FOR-PROFITS, SO I’M – EVERYTHING THAT THEY’RE 10 PRESENTING FROM A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW IS ALL THE SAME IN MY 11 WORLD. 12 BUT IT’S SOMETHING THAT SAN LUIS IS IN DIRE – DIRE NEED OF 13 AND I ASK THAT YOU NOT REACT TO THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE PRIMARY, BUT 14 REACT TO THE SENIOR CARE SIDE, AND SAY, “HOW CAN WE MAKE THE 15 DEVELOPMENT WORK AND POSSIBLY MAKE AN EXCEPTION?” ‘CAUSE IF WE 16 DON’T, THERE IS NO OTHER SITES THAT ARE APPLICABLE FOR A CCRC IN SAN 17 LUIS. THAT’S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. 18 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. YES. 19 MS. PERRY: GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU, MADAME MAYOR. 20 COUNCILMEMBERS. I AM CORDELIA PERRY AND I AM THE EXECUTIVE 21 DIRECTOR FOR THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY BUILDERS EXCHANGE. I’M 22 HERE THIS EVENING TO SUPPORT THE CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT 23 COMMUNITY. 24 WE ALL KNOW THE SENIOR POPULATION IS GROWING AND THAT 25 09058 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 45 MORE SENIOR HOUSING IS NEEDED IN THE CITY. AND THIS PROJECT IS A 1 TIMELY PROPOSAL FOR OUR COMMUNITY. 2 THE CCRC WILL PROVIDE A MUCH NEEDED SERVICE TO OUR 3 AGING COMMUNITY. IT IS A GREAT FORM OF SENIOR HOUSING BECAUSE IT 4 ALLOWS THEM TO STAY IN ONE PLACE, THE AREA THAT THEY HAVE SPENT 5 YEARS CONTRIBUTING TO AND LOVE. THEY WILL HAVE ACCESS TO ONSITE 6 ASSISTANCE AS THEY AGE AND THEIR FAMILIES WILL NOT HAVE TO WORRY 7 ABOUT FINDING ANOTHER FACILITY THAT WILL SUIT THE NEEDS OF THEIR 8 AGING LOVED ONES BECAUSE EVERYTHING THAT THEY COULD POSSIBLY -- 9 WOULD NEED WOULD BE IN ONE PLACE. 10 THERE’S NOTHING MORE TRAUMATIC FOR SENIORS THAN 11 HAVING TO MOVE. IT TAKES A HUGE EMOTIONAL AND PHYSICAL TOLL ON 12 THEM, HAVING TO LEAVE THEIR HOMES, THEIR FRIENDS, AND SOMETIMES 13 THEIR FAMILIES. 14 AND THEIR BELONGINGS. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? BECAUSE 15 SOMETIMES WHEN THE END IS NEAR THE ONLY THING THEY HAVE LEFT IS 16 THEIR BELONGINGS, THEIR LIFETIME OF MEMORIES. 17 THE CCRC WILL ALSO PROVIDE FULL-TIME HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD 18 JOBS ALONG WITH OTHER JOB OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR YOUNG CAL POLY 19 AND CUESTA GRADUATES, AND A BOOST TO THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. 20 MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT WILL PROVIDE MUCH NEEDED TAX 21 DOLLARS TO OUR CITY FROM THE SALE OF HOMES AS THE SENIORS 22 DOWNSIZE, USE OF HOTELS, RESTAURANTS AND RETAILS AS THEY CONTINUE 23 TO LIVE THEIR ACTIVE LIVES, ALL OF WHICH WILL HELP FUND OUR 24 EMERGENCY SERVICES, OUR SCHOOLS, AND IT WILL KEEP THE REVENUES 25 09059 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 46 LOCAL. 1 I URGE YOU TO ALLOW THE MADONNA FAMILY AND THE FROOM 2 TO VILLAGGIO CCRC TO MOVE FORWARD AS THEY HAVE PLANNED. THANK 3 YOU FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR ATTENTION, AND TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS 4 ISSUE. 5 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. AND SIR, I’M AFRAID I COULDN’T READ 6 YOUR HANDWRITING. 7 MR. WALTERS: YEAH, I KNOW. MY HANDWRITING COULD USE SOME 8 IMPROVEMENT. MAYOR MARX, I’M RAY WALTERS. 9 MAYOR MARX: OKAY. THANK YOU. 10 MR. CODRON: AND I’M A RESIDENT OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY IN 11 THE AVILA AREA AND I’M A PRINCIPAL WITH VILLAGGIO COMMUNITIES. 12 YOU’VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF US TONIGHT. YOU’VE SEEN OUR 13 SUPPORTERS, SOME OF THEM HAD TO LEAVE EARLIER AND WE UNDERSTAND 14 THAT, BUT SHOW UP AND COME OUT SUPPORTING A CONTINUING CARE 15 RETIREMENT COMMUNITY. AND I KNOW THAT THERE’S VERY LITTLE 16 OPPOSITION TO THAT CONCEPT HERE. IT’S – IT’S THE WHERE. IT’S THE 17 WHERE. 18 AND THE POINT IS, IS AS YOU’VE HEARD FROM THE REINERS, 19 WE’VE BEEN LOOKING FOR A SITE FOR OVER A DECADE. WE’VE LOOKED AT 20 GENERAL HOSPITAL. WE’VE LOOKED AT – AT THE CATHOLIC – CATHOLIC 21 DIOCESE LAND. WE’VE LOOKED AT THE MADONNA INN, UP BEHIND THAT. 22 WE’VE LOOKED IN TEMPLETON. WE’VE LOOKED IN PISMO. WE’VE LOOKED 23 EVERYWHERE. 24 AND THEN THE GENERAL LUCE UPDATE BROUGHT THE FROOM 25 09060 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 47 RANCH IN TO CONTENTION FOR US. WE TALKED TO JOHN AND SUSIE AND 1 THEY EMBRACED THE IDEA IMMEDIATELY. YOU KNOW, JOHN COULD HAVE 2 SOLD TO WALMART, MADE A LOT MORE MONEY THAN HE’S GONNA MAKE 3 FROM US. BUT HE SAW THIS AS SOMETHING THE COMMUNITY NEEDED, THAT 4 MORE IMPORTANTLY, WOULD HAVE A LIGHT FOOTPRINT ON LOS OSOS 5 VALLEY ROAD. IT WOULD HAVE A LIGHT FOOTPRINT ON OUR WATER USE. 6 LET ME TELL YOU SOME STATISTICS THAT – THAT VIC PUT UP 7 EARLIER. OUR COMMUNITY OF OVER 350 RESIDENCES IS ONLY GONNA 8 PRODUCE, ACCORDING TO THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER BIBLE, ONLY 840 TRIPS A 9 DAY. THAT’S COMPARED TO A COMMUNITY OF FAMILY RESIDENCES OF 350 10 RESIDENCES THAT PRODUCE OVER 4000 TRIPS A DAY. AND OUR TRIPS ARE 11 NOT DURING RUSH HOUR. WE AVOID RUSH HOUR THE BEST WE CAN. 12 THE OTHER THING YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IS OUR AVERAGE 13 HOME, AS THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE POINTED OUT, USES ABOUT HALF THE 14 WATER THAT A FAMILY HOME DOES. FIRST OF ALL, WE ONLY HAVE 1.4 15 RESIDENTS PER HOME AND A SENIOR USES ABOUT 60 GALLONS A DAY 16 VERSUS 90 OR 100 GALLONS A DAY FOR A MIDDLE-AGED PERSON. 17 OUR DEVELOPMENT PARTNER, OUR CONSULTANT IN THIS 18 PROJECT IS LIFE CARE SERVICES OUT OF DES MOINES, IOWA. AND THEY’VE 19 DEVELOPED AND NOW MANAGE OVER 130 COMMUNITIES IN 31 STATES, 20 INCLUDING ABOUT 12 IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FROM SAN DIEGO ON UP 21 TO PLEASANTON. 22 AND WHEN I HAD THEIR EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT, BRUCE 23 CANNON, OUT TO THE SITE, WE WERE STANDING ON THE SITE ADJACENT TO 24 THE MOUNTAINBROOK CHURCH. AND HE LOOKED AND HE SAID, “THIS IS 25 09061 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 48 ABSOLUTELY IN ALL MY EXPERIENCE, THE BEST AND MOST BEAUTIFUL SITE 1 FOR A CCRC THAT I HAVE SEEN.” 2 MR. HAVLIK EXPRESSED GOOD AND VALID CONCERNS ABOUT 3 THE ENDANGERED SPECIES THAT MIGHT BE THREATENED BY THE 4 COMMUNITY, AND I CAN ASSURE YOU, WE HAVE SPENT HUNDREDS OF 5 THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS TO – TO MITIGATE 6 THAT PROBLEM. 7 SO I WOULD SAY TO YOU, IN THE END, THAT THERE’S ANOTHER 8 ENDANGERED SPECIES WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT, AND THAT’S THE PEOPLE 9 IN THIS ROOM THAT ARE – THEY’RE OLDER PEOPLE. AND IF WE DON’T GIVE 10 THEM A PLACE TO THRIVE, WE WILL LOSE THEM. 11 SO LASTLY I’LL SAY -- TO NOT QUOTE MRS. REAGAN, WHO I 12 HONOR, BUT JOHN F. KENNEDY. TO PARAPHRASE HIM, IF NOT HERE, THEN 13 WHERE? AND IF NOT NOW, WHEN? THANK YOU. 14 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. CHARLENE ROSALES AND WILLIAM 15 WAYCOTT. YES. 16 MS. ROSALES: GOOD EVENING, MAYOR MARX AND CITY 17 COUNCILMEMBERS. CHARLENE ROSALES WITH THE SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. WE’D LIKE TO SHARE OUR SUPPORT TO 19 AUTHORIZE THE INITIATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED 20 SPECIFIC PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. 21 TO GO BACK TO SOME PREVIOUS COMMENTS WE PROVIDED TO 22 THE PLANNING COMMISSION EARLIER THIS YEAR, HUNDREDS OF 23 COMMUNITY MEMBERS, CONSULTANTS, ADVISORY BODY MEMBERS, AND 24 CITY STAFF WEIGHED IN ON THE UPDATES TO THE GENERAL PLAN, 25 09062 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 49 INCLUDING THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY’S LUCE TASK FORCE. UPDATING THE 1 GENERAL PLAN, AS YOU KNOW, IS A VERY EXTENSIVE PROCESS. IT WAS 2 ADOPTED AND NOW THE NEXT STEP IS TO SEE THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF 3 THE CITY’S MAJOR GOALS ON HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE OCCURS. 4 IN ORDER TO BRING MORE TRANSITIONAL AND SUPPORTIVE 5 HOUSING OPTIONS TO THE CITY TO FRUITION, SUCH AS WHERE THE 6 DEVELOPER STUDIES AND IDENTIFIES WHERE OUR SCENIC AND NATURAL 7 RESOURCES CAN BE BOTH PROTECTED OR ENHANCED AND WHERE A PROJECT 8 HAS POTENTIAL TO ADD VALUE TO THE CITY AND ITS RESIDENTS, 9 ESPECIALLY THE DEMOGRAPHIC THAT YOU RECEIVED NUMEROUS LETTERS 10 OF SUPPORT FROM REGARDING THIS AGENDA ITEM AND THE INDIVIDUALS 11 THAT HAVE SPOKEN TO IT THIS EVENING. 12 PROJECTS HARDLY GO THROUGH A RUSH PROCESS HERE IN THIS 13 CITY. THE CITY HAS DONE THOUGHTFUL PLANNING OVER THE COURSE OF 14 DECADES TO MAKE SURE THAT WATER IS AVAILABLE, NOT ONLY FOR 15 CURRENT RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO TO SUPPORT THE PHASED-IN GROWTH OF 16 NEW RESIDENTS AND THOSE VISITING AND WORKING IN SAN LUIS OBISPO. 17 AND THE LUCE REQUIRES THINGS TO BE EVALUATED LIKE 18 TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND VIEWSHEDS. AND THERE IS A PROCESS FOR THOSE 19 THINGS TO BE EVALUATED AND ADJUSTED IF REASONABLE WITHIN THE 20 TERMS OF THE GENERAL PLAN. WE NEED OUR VIEWS AND WE ALSO NEED 21 HOUSING. 22 OUR WORKFORCE IS AGING AND MEMBERS OF OUR 23 WORKFORCE’S EXTENDED FAMILY CONTINUE TO AGE. THIS IS THE TYPE OF 24 PROJECT THAT WILL MEET AN EVER-GROWING NEED, SO LET’S GIVE IT AN 25 09063 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 50 OPPORTUNITY TO BE FURTHER REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED AND FOR THE 1 APPLICANT TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT STEP OF PROPOSAL AND EVALUATION. 2 THANK YOU. 3 MAYOR MARX: YES, SIR. 4 MR. WAYCOTT: MY NAME IS WILLIAM WAYCOTT. I’M A RESIDENT OF 5 SAN LUIS OBISPO. I’M ALSO A PROFESSOR OF PLANT SCIENCE AT CAL POLY, 6 DEPARTMENT OF AG, AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE 7 PLANT SOCIETY. 8 I’M HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF WILD LANDS AND PROTECTED 9 AG LANDS IN THE CITY, AND I’D LIKE TO FIRST ASK WHY WE ENJOY LIVING 10 HERE AND WHY WE HAVE CREATED PROTECTIVE MEASURES TO – TO MAKE 11 THIS LIFE HERE ENJOYABLE. 12 THE EXISTING LAND USE ELEMENT IS THERE FOR A REASON AND 13 IF WE BEGIN TO – TO VIOLATE THE TENETS OF THOSE MEASURES, WE PUT THE 14 BEST PARTS OF LIVING AT THE CITY AT RISK. 15 CREEK REALIGNMENT IS HARDLY A SCIENCE AT THIS POINT IN 16 TIME. OUR ORGANIZATION IS WORKING WITH THE CITY RIGHT NOW IN 17 REALIGNING – NOT REALIGNING, BUT REVEGETATING THE SAN LUIS CREEK 18 IN THE MISSION PLAZA, AND HAVING A VERY DIFFICULT TIME 19 ACCOMPLISHING THAT SMALL TASK, NOT TO MENTION REALIGNING AN 20 ENTIRE CREEK. 21 RARE PLANTS DO EXIST AT THIS SITE. THIS CITY HAPPENS TO BE 22 A VERY WELL ENDOWED AREA OF RARE PLANTS, AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW. 23 THERE ARE OVER 45 LISTED SPECIES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. WHAT CITY 24 CAN SAY THAT THAT’S SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR CITY LIMITS? 25 09064 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 51 WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU STAY ON MESSAGE. I’M A SENIOR 1 CITIZEN. IT’S VERY ROMANTIC TO APPEAL TO THE – THE NEEDS OF THE 2 SENIOR CITIZENS, BUT THERE ARE PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN 3 PLACE THAT SHOULD BE FOLLOWED. 4 WE WOULD RECOMMEND THE ELIMINATION OF THE SINGLE FLIES 5 – SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING ELEMENT, THE ELIMINATION OF THE APARTMENT 6 AND COMMERCIAL ELEMENT AND STICKING TO THE PLAN TO SAVE SOME 7 PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY FOR SENIOR CITIZENS. THANK YOU. 8 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I’M GOING TO BE CLOSING 9 THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING IT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR 10 DELIBERATION AND ACTION. 11 THE MAIN ISSUES THAT STAFF HAS ANALYZED HAVE TO DO WITH 12 – THERE ARE BASICALLY TWO, MAYBE THREE -- AND PERHAPS MAYBE WE 13 COULD ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AS WE DELIBERATE. SO WHAT WE’RE 14 TALKING ABOUT IS THE MIX OF USES IS THE FIRST ISSUE, AND THE 15 DEVELOPMENT ABOVE 150 FEET AS – AS A SECOND ISSUE. 16 AND WAS THERE ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING 17 AT, MR. CODRON, THERE, IS THAT PRETTY MUCH IT? 18 MR. CODRON: WE’RE GONNA PULL THAT UP RIGHT NOW FOR YOU. 19 MAYOR MARX: OH, I SEE. CARLYN CHRISTIANSON? 20 COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON: YES, THE – I WANTED TO JUST 21 THANK STAFF AND THE APPLICANTS AND THE – AND THE COMMUNITY FOR 22 STAYING UP SO LATE AND STAYING AWAKE. I BELIEVE I WAS FADING FOR A 23 MOMENT, BUT I’M – I’M GETTING MY FOURTH OR FIFTH WIND FOR THE 24 EVENING, SO – 25 09065 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 52 I ONLY – I KNOW WE HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS TO HAVE SO I’M 1 NOT GONNA GET TOO INTO RIGHT NOW. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUICK 2 QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR MAYBE THE APPLICANT. AND THEY’RE REALLY 3 BASIC. 4 ONE OF THEM IS TAKING A LOOK AT THE – THE STAFF REPORT AS 5 WELL AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH THE 6 CHANGE – THE REQUEST FOR THE CHANGE OF USES. AND OBVIOUSLY, THE 7 MAIN IMPACT OF CHANGING THE USE MAKES OUR ECONOMIC IMPACTS, 8 BECAUSE I REMEMBER WHEN MR. JOHNSON, OUR FORMER COMMUNITY 9 DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR -- AFTER WE FINISHED OUR LUCE UPDATE AND 10 APPROVED IT, I MEAN, HE HAD TO GO THROUGH AND FIGURE OUT WHETHER 11 WE HAD A COMMERCIAL MIX THAT WOULD SUPPORT OUR — OUR HOUSING 12 DESIRES AND OUR CIRCULATION INTERESTS. 13 SO DURING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION, THEY 14 ENDED UP TAKING OUT A FINDING REGAR—WITH REGARD TO DOING A VERY 15 CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT. AND I JUST WAS 16 WONDERING IF THERE WAS REASON WHY THAT WOULD – WAS, AND IF 17 SOMETHING LIKE THAT – IF THE COUNCIL WERE TO PROCEED, IT – IF IT 18 COULD BE ADDED BACK IN. I – I THINK THERE WAS SOME REFERENCE THAT 19 IT WOULD BE STUDIED, BUT I JUST WAS WONDERING WHY IT WASN’T 20 INCLUDED IN OUR – IN OUR RESOLUTION – OUR PROPOSED RESOLUTION, JUST 21 BECAUSE IT IS KIND OF A KEY – KEY -- 22 MAYOR MARX: UH-HUH. 23 COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON: --THE KEY ISSUE IN TERMS OF 24 CHANGING USES. 25 09066 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 53 MS. SCOTT: SURE. AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING, THEY 1 REMOVED THAT BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF A DISCUSSION OF THE REDUCTION 2 IN THE COMMERCIAL USES, WHICH APPEARED TO BE GENERALLY SUPPORTED 3 OR THE COMMISSIONERS DIDN’T TAKE MUCH ISSUE WITH THAT AND DIDN’T 4 FEEL A SPECIFIC FINDING WAS NECESSARY. THAT DOESN’T MEAN IT’S NOT 5 IMPORTANT OR WOULDN’T BE INCLUDED OR EVALUATED. 6 COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THE 7 OTHER QUESTION IS: HAS THERE BEEN DISCUSSION OR WITH EITHER THE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION OR APPLICANTS ABOUT ANYTHING OTHER THAN – 9 QUOTE – GOING ABOVE THE 150 FOOT LINE? 10 IN OTHER WORDS, WE ARE HEARING ABOUT THIS IS WHAT WE 11 WANT UP TO – I THINK, THE ROOF LINES OF 238. WE HAVE A 150-FOOT. WE’VE 12 -- I KNOW FROM MY – ALL OF OUR EXPERIENCE, MY EXPERIENCE THAT, YOU 13 KNOW, SOMETIMES YOU DO A LITTLE TWEAK. YOU KNOW, YOU GO TO 180 14 FEET OR 170 FEET OR YOU GO TO 200 FEET OVER, AND JUST THIS LITTLE PART. 15 SO HAS THERE BEEN ANY OF THAT? AND IS THAT THE KIND OF 16 THING THAT WAS GONNA BE – IF WE WERE TO GO FORWARD, WOULD THAT 17 TYPE OF DETAIL AND ALTERNATIVES BE PART OF ANY REVIEW? 18 MS. SCOTT: TO ANSWER YOUR LAST QUESTION FIRST, THAT’S YES. 19 YOU KNOW, WE WOULD BE EVALUATING THAT WITH MORE – YOU KNOW, 20 WHILE WE RECEIVED A LOT OF INFORMATION, WE, YOU KNOW, STAFF HASN’T 21 BEEN PROVIDED WITH THE SITE PLAN YET, AS THIS IS A PRE-APPLICATION 22 PROCESS, TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT MORE QUANTIFIED INFORMATION TO 23 BETTER DELINEATE, SPECIFICALLY, WHERE THAT LINE WOULD BE, WHICH IS 24 WHY THERE’S NOT A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION FOR WHERE THAT 25 09067 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 54 ELEVATION LINE SHOULD BE, IF IT SHOULD BE MOVED AT ALL. 1 BUT GENERAL DISCUSSIONS HAVE OCCURRED THROUGHOUT THE 2 HEARING PROCESS AND WITH STAFF ABOUT WHAT COULD BE DONE TO FOR 3 THE PROJECT TO BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING POLICIES. AND 4 AS SHOWN IN THE PRESENTATION, A LOT OF THOSE CONSIDERATION 5 INCLUDED CONSTRAINTS BELOW THE 150 DEVELOPMENT LINE. 6 COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON: OKAY. THANK YOU. 7 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. JOHN ASHBAUGH. 8 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: YEAH, THANK YOU TO STAFF AND THE 9 APPLICANT TEAM AND ALSO ALL THE PEOPLE WEARING YELLOW BUTTONS 10 OUT THERE. MANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TESTIFY AND I APPRECIATE 11 YOUR INPUT ON THIS. 12 I’VE GOT A COUPLE – ACTUALLY, FOUR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, 13 TWO ON THE CREEKS, ONE ON TRAFFIC, ONE ON WATER. 14 SO SHAWNA, IF YOU COULD MAYBE AFFIRM FOR US YOUR 15 UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONSENSUS OF OPINION AMONG THE BIOLOGIST 16 AND THE REGULATORY AGENCIES AS TO THE FEASIBILITY OF THIS PROPOSED 17 CREEK REALIGNMENT? THEY HAVEN’T SAID NO. BUT WHAT HAVE THEY 18 ACTUALLY TOLD US ABOUT IT? 19 MS. SCOTT: THAT IS CORRECT. AND WE ALSO HAVE BOB HILL HERE IN 20 THE AUDIENCE TODAY TO ANSWER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. 21 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: I SEE HIM. HI BOB. 22 MS. SCOTT: IF NEEDED. BUT YES, WE DID HOLD A CONFERENCE CALL 23 AND WE – WE HAVE HAD A MEETING OUT IN THE FIELD WITH THE REGIONAL 24 WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD. 25 09068 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 55 AND, YOU KNOW, THE GENERAL CENSUS FROM THE AGENCIES IS 1 THAT THEY WANT MORE INFORMATION. AND THEY PROVIDED A FAIRLY 2 EXTENSIVE LAUNDRY LIST OF STUDIES AND ANALYSIS THAT THEY NEED TO 3 SEE. 4 THEY – IT IS NOT IN THEIR POSITION TO ACTUALLY SAY YES OR 5 NO. THEY EITHER AUTHORIZE OR ISSUE A PERMIT OR THEY DON’T. AND 6 THEY -- THROUGH THE REGULATORY PROCESS, THEY WORK THROUGH 7 MITIGATIONS TO -- IN ORDER FOR THEM TO ISSUE THAT PERMIT. 8 SO YOU KNOW, WE’RE NOT ABLE TO GET A CLEAR YES OR NO 9 FROM THEM IN THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS, BUT THEY’VE GENERALLY 10 BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THE CONCEPT, BUT DEFINITELY NEED MORE 11 INFORMATION. 12 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: SO LET ME JUST VERIFY WITH – WITH 13 THE SPECIFIC PLAN, WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO ISSUE A YES OR NO AT THE 14 COMPLETION OF THAT PROCESS? OR IS IT POSSIBLE WE COULD GO DOWN 15 THIS ROAD, AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN, AMENDING THE LAND USE 16 ELEMENT, ALL THE STEPS PRIOR TO ACTUALLY HAVING A PROJECT THAT 17 WOULD REQUIRE A PERMIT TO BE ISSUED, AND THEN THEY WON’T ISSUE THE 18 PERMIT. IS THAT CONCEIVABLE OR – I DON’T WANT TO MISLEAD THE 19 APPLICANT, LET ALONE ALL THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO 20 THIS IF THAT’S -- 21 MS. SCOTT: CERTAINLY. AND THAT IS, YOU KNOW, THE PRIMARY 22 REASON THE APPLICANT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS REQUESTED 23 THAT THE CITY CONTACT THE AGENCIES TO START DISCUSSIONS AT THIS 24 EARLY STAGE. AND WE DO INTEND TO CONTINUE WITH THOSE MEETINGS 25 09069 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 56 AND THOSE DISCUSSIONS THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, SO THAT WE DON’T 1 GET TO THE END AND -- AND THERE’S A SUDDEN CHANGE OF OPINION OR – OR 2 NEW INFORMATION FROM THOSE AGENCIES. 3 SO WE DO WANT TO INVOLVE ALL OF THE REGULATORY 4 AGENCIES THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. CERTAINLY, THERE’S NO 5 GUARANTEE. 6 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: NO, THERE NEVER IS. 7 WITH RESPECT TO THE CREEKS -- STILL ON THE SUBJECT OF THE 8 EXISTING TRIBUTARY, NOT THE PROPOSED FOR REALIGNMENT ON THE 9 SOUTHEASTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY, THAT -- THAT HAS A 10 CONSIDERABLE FALL, THE FROOM CREEK TRIBUTARY -- WAS REFERENCED IN 11 MR. HAVLIK’S TESTIMONY THERE. THEIR CONCERN IS IT APPEARS AS 12 THOUGH THAT CREEK WOULD BE BURIED. THAT WOULDN’T BE PERMITTED 13 WITH THIS PROJECT, WOULD IT? 14 MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT’S THE LOCATION OF A LOT OF THE 15 CHORRO CREEK BOG THISTLES, FOR EXAMPLE. THEY’D HAVE TO AVOID 16 THAT RIPARIAN HABITAT ALTOGETHER? ISN’T -- I SEE MR. MONTGOMERY 17 MAYBE WANTING TO OFFER SOME OPINION ON THAT AS WELL. SO EITHER OF 18 YOU OR BOTH WOULD BE WELCOME TO WEIGH IN. 19 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: SURE. AND – AND WE DON’T HAVE 20 GRADING PLANS AT THIS STAGE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THAT, BUT FROM 21 WHAT THE APPLICANT’S PROVIDED THERE ARE SOME ROAD CROSSINGS, BUT 22 THEIR INTENTION, AS STATED, IS TO AVOID THE SPECIAL STATUS PLANT 23 SPECIES. 24 AND THROUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PROCESS 25 09070 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 57 WE WOULD NOT ONLY BE EVALUATING DIRECT IMPACTS, BUT THE INDIRECT 1 IMPACTS TO HABITAT THAT CONTRIBUTES TO CONDITIONS THAT SUPPORT 2 THOSE SPECIES. 3 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: OKAY. I HAVE TWO MORE 4 QUESTIONS, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I’LL ASK ONE ONLY, AND THAT 5 CONCERNS WATER. WOULD THE SPECIFIC PLAN GIVE GUIDANCE LIKE I 6 WOULD LIKE TO SEE, THAT ONSITE WELL ANY WATER RIGHTS ASSOCIATED 7 WITH THE PROPERTY WOULD – WOULD BE ACQUIRED BY THE CITY AS A 8 RESULT OF THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE ISSUED? 9 MS. SCOTT: THAT QUESTION I WILL DEFER TO THE UTILITIES 10 DEPARTMENT. 11 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: GREAT. I SEE CARRIE MATTINGLY 12 COMING UP TO ADDRESS THAT. HI CARRIE. 13 MAYOR MARX: HI CARRIE. 14 MS. MATTINGLY: HELLO, COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH, MAYOR AND 15 COUNCILMEMBERS. 16 AS FAR AS THE GROUNDWATER RIGHTS OR ANY ONSITE WELL 17 BEING DEDICATED TO THE CITY, IT’S A LITTLE PREMATURE TO REQUEST 18 THAT IN MY OPINION. 19 THERE – WE’RE DOING AN ANALYSIS RIGHT NOW AS TO WHERE 20 GROUNDWATER WELLS MIGHT BEST BE LOCATED. THAT IS NOT ONE OF THE 21 AREAS THAT’S SHOWING UP AS TO BE IDEAL FOR US. 22 WE HAVE A NEED FOR TREATMENT FOR THE GROUNDWATER TO 23 BE USED FOR POTABLE SOURCES, AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE MORE OF A 24 WELL FIELD WITH A LOCALIZED TREATMENT INSTEAD OF INDIVIDUALIZED 25 09071 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 58 WELLS KIND OF PEPPERED THROUGHOUT THE CITY. 1 SO, YOU KNOW, AT THIS TIME THEY’LL – WE’LL BE DOING A 2 WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT. WE’LL BE 3 ABLE TO DEVELOP MORE OF THAT. A HYDRAULIC MODEL IS STILL NEEDED 4 TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE IF THERE’S ADEQUATE FIRE FLOW AND MINIMUM 5 PRESSURES CAN BE MET AT ALL THESE ELEVATIONS, AND WHAT NEEDS TO 6 GO IN THERE. 7 AND WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO FOR THIS, SO WE HAVE 8 TALKED TO THEM ABOUT A RECYCLED WATER TANK SOMEWHERE UP ON THE 9 HILL, BUT -- 10 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: YES. 11 MS. MATTINGLY: -- THAT WOULD BE IDEAL FOR US, FOR THE CITY. 12 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A CELL TOWER 13 RIGHT. 14 MS. MATTINGLY: BUT AS FAR AS THE GROUNDWATER RIGHTS, WE’VE 15 -- YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DIRECT US TO DO ANYTHING THAT YOU CHOOSE TO. 16 I JUST, AT THIS TIME, WE ALREADY HAVE ACCESS TO GROUNDWATER, AND 17 WE CAN PULL THAT GROUNDWATER IN THE BEST PLACE THAT’S IDENTIFIED 18 FROM THE HYDROLOGISTS THAT WE’RE USING RIGHT NOW TO STUDY IT. 19 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: OKAY. THANK YOU. 20 MS. MATTINGLY: UH-HUH. 21 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. 22 MS. MATTINGLY: YOU’RE WELCOME. 23 MAYOR MARX: WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I’M, BASICALLY, 24 VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. AND I ESPECIALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF THE CCRC, 25 09072 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 59 HAVING PRACTICED ELDER LAW, WILLS AND TRUSTS FOR MANY YEARS. I’M -1 - I’M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE -- THE SITUATION AND THE NEED HERE IN 2 THE – IN THE COMMUNITY. 3 IN TERMS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST IS THAT 4 ALTERNATIVES BE DEVELOPED TO LOOK AT VARIOUS CONSIDERATIONS. SO 5 MY MAIN CONCERN IS DEVELOPMENT ABOVE THE 150-FOOT LINE, AS 6 COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON WAS SAYING, IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE THAT 7 IT COULD BE SOME MINOR SORT OF ADJUSTMENT THERE. 8 I – I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN ALTERNATIVE, IF POSSIBLE, THAT 9 DID OBSERVE THE 150-FOOT LINE. PERHAPS SOME OF THE PARK OR OPEN 10 SPACE PLAN COULD BE – THAT TERRITORY COULD BE PLACED ABOVE THE 11 150-FOOT LINE. 12 BUT IN TERMS OF THE MIX OF USES, I’M NOT SURE ABOUT THE 13 NEED FOR THAT MUCH KIND OF REGULAR HOUSING IN – IN THAT LOCATION. 14 I’M WONDERING IF PERHAPS AN EXPANDED CCRC MIGHT – MIGHT MAKE 15 MORE SENSE. 16 OR IF – IF THERE WOULD BE R-1 HOUSING OR SINGLE-FAMILY 17 HOUSING, WOULD THAT IN SOME WAY BE CONNECTED TO THE COMMUNITY? 18 I DON’T KNOW, BUT I THINK IF WE COULD DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES THAT 19 WOULD BE GOOD. 20 IN TERMS OF THE CREEK, I SHOULD’VE DISCLOSED THIS EARLIER, 21 BUT I DID TAKE A TOUR OF THE PROPERTY, AND I LOOKED AT THE CREEK. 22 AND IT IS DEFINITELY AN ARTIFICIAL -- WHAT WAS IT THAT NEIL WAS 23 CALLING IT -- 24 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: DITCH. 25 09073 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 60 MAYOR MARX: YEAH, IT’S LIKE A DITCH. HE WAS SAYING IS THAT 1 WHAT THEY WOULD PROPOSE WOULD BE A FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL. I 2 THINK THAT’S WHAT’S THERE RIGHT NOW. 3 AND SO IF THE – IF THE NATURAL STATE OF THE CREEK COULD 4 BE RESTORED, I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD. 5 I’M ALSO CONSCIOUS OF THE TIME. IT’S ALMOST 11:30. I DON’T 6 KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I’VE GOT AN 8:00 O’CLOCK MEETING TOMORROW, SO 7 I’M HOPING THAT WE CAN CONTINUE THE DELIBERATION IN A THOROUGH 8 WAY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IF WE CAN BRING THIS TO A CONCLUSION, IT 9 WOULD BE WONDERFUL. SO JOHN ASHBAUGH? 10 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: YEAH, MADAME MAYOR, I’LL GO 11 AHEAD AND MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION BUT I WOULD LIKE TO 12 RESERVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME FOR SOME COMMENTS AS WELL, BUT MAYBE 13 JUST FOR PURPOSES OF MOVING IT ALONG. 14 COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER: I’LL SECOND IT. 15 MAYOR MARX: IT’S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. CARLYN 16 CHRISTIANSON, DID YOU HAVE COMMENTS? 17 MR. HAVLIK: YEAH. I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION. I AM OKAY WITH 18 THE FACT THAT THIS IS AN INITIATION OF AN APPLICATION. IT’S NOT AN 19 ACTUAL PROJECT. WE DO HAVE A LONG WAY’S TO GO. 20 I WILL MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS. I AM MINDFUL OF THE 21 DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. HILL, AND OUR FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATORY 22 AGENCIES ABOUT SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES INCLUDING THE 23 CREEK. I FIGURE IF YOU CAN GET RESTORATION AND CHANGE OF A CREEK 24 THROUGH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE FISH 25 09074 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 61 AND WILDLIFE AND ET CETERA -- ET CETERA, THEN YOU KNOW, IT – IT’LL GO, 1 BUT THAT IS A LONG – LONG ROAD. SO THAT’S NOT SO MUCH MY CONCERN. 2 I AM -- I AM MINDFUL OF THE FACT THAT MOUNTAINBROOK – I 3 WAS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE COUNTY WHEN THAT CAME 4 THROUGH, AND THEY DID DELIBERATELY CHOOSE NOT TO ANNEX WITH THE 5 CITY BECAUSE OF OUR – BECAUSE OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT 6 LINES AND I – I DON’T BELIEVE I SUPPORTED THAT APPLICATION OR IF I DID 7 IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME KIND OF 8 REGULATIONS THAT WE DO. 9 SO THE 150-FOOT LINE IS A CONCERN OF MINE. I’M NOT SAYING 10 THAT I, YOU KNOW, WOULD OR WOULD NOT SUPPORT A PROJECT THAT HAD 11 A DEVELOPMENT ABOVE THAT, A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ABOVE THAT, 12 BUT THAT IS MY MAJOR CONCERN. 13 I DO BELIEVE THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS TRADITIONALLY 14 SUPPORTED INFILL HOUSING AND DENSER HOUSING, AND ALL THE THINGS 15 OTHER THINGS WE’RE TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE WE WANT TO PROTECT 16 OUR HILLSIDES. 17 SO I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE SO FAR 18 ON -- ON THE VISUAL AND AESTHETICS AND I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO MORE 19 INFORMATION WITH THINGS LIKE STORY PULLS AND EVEN A BETTER IDEA. 20 SO THAT’S JUST A LITTLE -- YOU KNOW, JUST MY LITTLE 21 CONCERN THERE. 22 I DO THINK THAT THE – THE CHANGE OF USES FROM THE -- OUR 23 GENERAL PLAN IS FINE IN TERMS OF GETTING HAVING A LOT LESS 24 COMMERCIAL AND THAT – I’M KIND OF WITH YOU, MAYOR MARX, ABOUT 25 09075 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 62 MAYBE A FEW LESS HOUSING AND MORE SENIOR HOUSING, SO SOME 1 ALTERNATIVES WILL BE IMPORTANT TO SEE AND I – THAT’S WHAT WE GET 2 WHEN WE GET A SPECIFIC PLAN PROPOSAL, SO I’LL BE LOOKING FORWARD 3 TO IT. 4 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU AND I DID WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT 5 ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL. I THINK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, IT SHOULD BE 6 NEIGHBORHOOD-SERVING. THERE’S SO MUCH COMMERCIAL IN THAT AREA 7 RIGHT NOW, BUT IF YOU HAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE AND SENIORS AND 8 VISITORS OF THE SENIORS, YOU KNOW, HAVING, YOU KNOW, COFFEE SHOPS 9 AND WHATEVER THAT’S REALLY – THE COMMERCIAL THAT’S REALLY 10 ORIENTED TOWARD SERVING THE COMMUNITY, I THINK WOULD MAKE A LOT 11 OF SENSE. 12 SO IT’S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? 13 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: COULD I -- 14 MAYOR MARX: MR. ASHBAUGH? 15 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: I WOULD JUST LIKE TO TAKE A 16 COUPLE MINUTES, BECAUSE I -- YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS COMES BACK TO THE 17 COUNCIL, IT’LL BE A DIFFERENT COUNCIL AND I WON’T BE ON IT. SO THIS IS 18 PRETTY MUCH MY ONLY SHOT AT THIS. 19 AND, YOU KNOW, WE’VE HAD A VERY STRONG AND LASTING 20 AND PRODUCTIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS. THAT’S ONE 21 OF THE KEY FACTORS THAT GIVES ME THE CONFIDENCE IN – IN THEM, THEIR 22 CONSULTANT TEAM, AND OUR STAFF AND CONSULTANT TEAM THAT I’M 23 SURE WILL RESULT IN A PROJECT EVEN WITH A DIFFERENT COUNCIL THAT 24 WILL – WE WILL ALL BE PROUD OF. 25 09076 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 63 CERTAINLY, I DO WANT TO SEE THE ANNEXATION OF THE SITE. 1 WE’VE ANTICIPATED THIS IN TERMS OF OUR LAND USE CIRCULATION 2 ELEMENT, BUT I DO RECALL A DEBATE IN DELIBERATIONS FROM THIS DIAS 3 WHEN THIS CAME BEFORE US IN SEPTEMBER OF 2014, AND I WAS VERY 4 CONCERNED. 5 I FRANKLY WAS OPPOSED TO THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE TO 6 GRANT UP TO 350,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL ON THE SITE. I 7 THOUGHT THAT WAS REALLY PUSHING THE DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS 8 WHICH ARE QUITE CLEAR NOW, WHETHER IT’S 27 ACRES OR 31 AS OUR STAFF 9 HAS SAID AS TO WHAT’S POSSIBLE TO BE DEVELOPED ON THE – ON THE -- THE 10 PROPERTY BELOW 150 FEET. CERTAINLY 350,000 SQUARE FEET OF WALMART-11 TYPE SHOPPING CENTER THERE IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS. 12 SO I SEE THIS APPLICATION AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT A 13 MISTAKE THAT WAS MADE BY THIS COUNCIL BACK IN THE FALL OF 2014. IN A 14 SIMILAR WAY TO WHAT WAS DONE EARLIER WITH AVILA RANCH WHEN IT 15 WAS DECIDED IN THE AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE LAND USE 16 ELEMENT CHANGE TO SHIFT THAT FROM BUSINESS PARK TO RESIDENTIAL 17 ZONING PRIMARILY. THAT – THAT TO ME IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE’RE 18 DOING IN A SIMILAR WAY TO THE SAN LUIS RANCH. BOTH – ALL THREE OF 19 THESE SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT OUR CITY 20 NEEDS MORE HOUSING IN PARTICULARLY NOW WITH THIS PROPOSAL TO 21 SERVE THE NEEDS OF SENIORS AND – AND THE CONTINUING CARE THAT’S 22 GONNA BE PROVIDED. 23 MY DIRECTION -- IF I HAD A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THIS ONE 24 WHEN IT WOULD COME BACK, I WOULD LOOK FOR EVEN SMALLER THAN 25 09077 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 64 45,000 SQUARE FEET, CERTAINLY SMALLER THAN 50,000, WHICH IS WHAT THE 1 LUCE SAYS IS THE MINIMUM RIGHT NOW. I’D PERSONALLY BE MUCH MORE 2 COMFORTABLE WITH 30,000. 3 AND I’D ALSO LIKE TO SEE THE ROAD THAT COMES FROM THE 4 HOME DEPOT AREA INTO THIS PROPERTY NOT SEPARATE THAT RETAIL 5 COMMERCIAL FROM THE RESIDENTIAL. I’D LIKE TO SEE THOSE TWO 6 INTEGRATED MORE – MORE EFFECTIVELY. AND ALMOST MAYBE LIVE-WORK 7 TO BE CONSIDERED THERE. 8 I’M CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRECEDENT THIS SETS. I WANT THIS 9 TO BE EVALUATED IN THE EIR AND THE SPECIFIC PLAN. THERE ARE MANY 10 OTHER AREAS WHERE ELEVATION LIMITS HAVE BEEN SET FOR REASONS 11 USUALLY RELATING TO WATER SERVICE, AS MENTIONED BY THE MAYOR, 12 BUT NOT ALWAYS. THERE ARE OTHER CASES LIKE THIS WHERE IT WAS 13 PRIMARILY AESTHETICS. 14 I’M SATISFIED THE AESTHETIC IMPACTS CAN BE MANAGED. I’M 15 MUCH MORE CONCERNED, AS I MENTIONED IN MY QUESTIONING ABOUT THE 16 IMPACTS ON THE BIOLOGY -- VERY MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT THE 17 SERPENTINE ROCK FORMATION THERE. AND THE GRASSLAND AND CHORRO 18 CREEK BOG THISTLE, OTHER SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS. AND THAT’S REALLY 19 AN OVERRIDING UNDERLYING OVERARCHING CONCERN THAT I HAVE, BUT I 20 THINK THAT CAN BE MANAGED. 21 AGAIN, I HAVE CONFIDENCE IN OUR STAFF AND THE 22 CONSULTANT TEAM, AND IN OUR OVERALL RESILIENCE. MAYBE THIS WILL 23 BE DEVELOPED IN TIME FOR ME TO ACTUALLY OCCUPY IT SOMEDAY. 24 MAYOR MARX: WELL, WE’LL SEE. 25 09078 McDaniel Court Reporters (805) 544-3363 65 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: (INAUDIBLE.) 1 MAYOR MARX: THANK YOU. 2 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: THANK YOU. 3 MAYOR MARX: SO WITH THAT, I’D LIKE TO ASK FOR THE ROLL CALL, 4 PLEASE. 5 CITY CLERK: COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH? 6 COUNCILMEMBER ASHBAUGH: YES. 7 CITY CLERK: VICE-MAYOR CARPENTER? 8 COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER: YES. 9 CITY CLERK: COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON? 10 COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON: YES. 11 CITY CLERK: COUNCILMEMBER RIVOIRE? 12 COUNCILMEMBER RIVOIRE: YES. 13 CITY CLERK: MAYOR MARX. 14 MAYOR MARX: YES. SO THAT PASSES FIVE-ZERO. AND THANK YOU 15 FOR STAYING UP SO LATE, YOU GUYS. DRIVE CAREFULLY ON THE WAY 16 HOME. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. 17 (END OF RECORDED MATERIAL.) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 09079 09080