HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/10/2024 Item 6c, Biegel
Gina Biegel <
To:E-mail Council Website; Gina Biegel
Subject:Submission for City Council Meeting on 12/10/24 Item 6C
Attachments:City Council.pdf
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
To Whom It May Concern,
Please see the attached document submission for tomorrow's City Council meeting. Thank you for your
time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Gina
--
Gina Biegel, MA LMFT
CEO of Stressed Teens
Creator and Founder of the MBSR-T Program
http://www.stressedteens.com/online-learning
www.stressedteens.com
Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and
confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or
duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,
please notify me immediately at gina@stressedteens.com and destroy all copies of the original
message.
1
December 9th, 2024
From:
Gina Biegel
935 Citrus Ct.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
510-209-3601
gina@stressedteens.com
San Luis Ranch Homeowner
Subject:
City Council Meeting on December 10, 2024
Specific Item: 6C San Luis Ranch Modification
Attn:
Mayor Stewart and Council Members,
I have several questions, and I am requesting that the entirety of my questions be in the actual
minutes of the meeting.
It is my opinion that the city should not act on the specific plan amendment initiation until the
following questions have been properly answered.
Questions:
1. Project Scope and Unit Breakdown:
Can you clarify whether the 276 units include the 69–77 inclusionary affordable units, or if these
are additional? How many total door fronts (individual unit entries) are proposed for the project,
including all affordable and market-rate units?
2. Traffic Studies:
Have updated traffic studies been conducted for this revised project? If so, are the results
available for public review?
3. Affordable Housing Incentives:
What specific incentives are being provided to the developer for including affordable units? Will
the affordable units be prioritized for construction and occupancy before the market-rate units?
4. Affordable Unit Conversion:
Are there provisions preventing the conversion of affordable units into market-rate units in the
future?
5. Building Heights:
What are the proposed heights of the residential and commercial buildings in this project?
6. Parking Requirements:
What is the planned ratio of parking spaces per unit or per door front, including visitor parking?
7. Acoustic Reports:
Will the city update acoustic studies to reflect current conditions, particularly considering the
increased frequency of 737 flights over the area?
8. Airport Runway Expansion:
Are there plans to expand the airport runway? If so, how might this impact nearby residents and
developments?
9. RHNA Compliance and Specific Plan Analysis:
Has the city compared the Regional Housing Needs Allocation credits taken during the initial
specific plan approval with the actual units built? Could this data be made available to the
public?
10. Market Comparisons:
Has the city conducted a recent market comparison for housing prices and unit sizes, particularly
regarding nearby developments like the Dana Street project?
11. OSHA Compliance:
How will OSHA requirements be met during construction, particularly in light of concerns about
compliance in other city projects?
12. Report Accuracy:
Can the city clarify inaccuracies in Rachel’s report and provide references to support any
corrected claims?
13. Mello-Roos Obligations:
Will residents moving into these units be required to pay Mello-Roos fees? If so, how will these
fees be structured?
14. Updated Fiscal Analysis:
Has a new fiscal impact analysis been conducted for this project? If so, what are the anticipated
benefits or costs to the city and residents?
15. Reduction of Existing Mello-Roos Fees:
If this project is approved, is there potential to reduce Mello-Roos fees for existing residents due
to increased tax revenues?
16. Community Engagement:
Will the city host additional neighborhood meetings to gather input on this materially changed
development plan? What steps will be taken to address the concerns of existing residents who
purchased homes under prior assumptions?
17. Environmental Compliance:
How does the city plan to ensure compliance with existing Environmental Impact Reports and
mitigation monitoring programs for this project? Will updated assessments be conducted?
18. Mello-Roos Fund Usage:
Were any Mello-Roos funds allocated for unrelated projects, such as the Bob Jones Trail? If so,
is the city using these funds appropriately, or are they earning interest elsewhere?
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Gina Biegel