HomeMy WebLinkAbout7-5-17 Distributed at meeting, Vujobich-La BarreJuly 5, 2017
Mayor Harmon and San Luis Obispo City Council Members
City Hall
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Dear Mayor Harmon and San Luis Obispo City Council Members,
The current development plan for San Luis Ranch is flawed for many reasons. It is my
hope that you will take the opportunity this evening to seek resolutions to concerns that
many residents share.
Although this property is still located in the County of San Luis Obispo, the developer
and his team have worked feverishly scheduling multiple City meetings and meeting
with groups to move his proposal forward.
Interestingly enough after multiple meetings with groups and advisory bodies seeking
allegedly input, there have been few changes to his development plan. For public safety
from the local airport, he had to reposition some of the intended residential units. Aside
from that change, there are few answers provided to existing concerns.
A development of this magnitude may provide more housing, but at a significant cost to
residents.
In addition, it is not just San Luis Ranch that people are concerned with - it is the
cumulative impacts of San Luis Ranch - former Dalidio Property - a project of 580
homes plus 350,000 square feet of commercial/office and a 200 room hotel; Avila
Ranch - at the corner of Vachell and Buckley Roads- a project of 720 homes plus
20,000 square feet of commercial; and Froom Ranch - adjacent to Home Depot - a
senior living complex, 120 room hotel, 30,000 square feet commercial, plus 250 housing
units.
As you know, the Land Use Circulation Element (LUCE) that allowed for these
developments to proceed was funded by a state grant that maximized development in
San Luis Obispo. It may have been good in theory for the majority of the LUCE
members who had a background in development, and some who may personally profit
from the developments. However, it did not take into consideration many realities, some
of which I have enumerated before and will again discuss below. The LUCE process
did not provide for substantial public awareness and input. This was highlighted in the
LUCE Minority Report.
My concerns about the San Luis Ranch proposal are primarily the following:
1. Water.
Where is the water of this development? City and County residents have been
asked to conserve for months. Given climate change, is the drought truly over?
Do we as a community have enough water for current residents and the
aforementioned large projects being proposed?
2. Traffic
The number of proposed 550 residential units, in addition to the proposed office
and commercial space will produce a minimum of 1,000-2,000 vehicles making
anywhere from 2-4 trips daily. This upcoming generation may focus on walking,
biking, and bus travel out of respect for climate change, however most people will
still utilize a car. People in the surrounding neighborhoods and businesses of
Laguna Lake deserve an authentic study of what traffic will look like with this
proposed development. They also deserve a realistic appraisal of parking for the
proposed development.
Traffic flow from the proposed business development should also be part of that
same study.
Streets in the development appear to be narrow with little room for bike lanes.
One -way streets in the development should be considered. There does not
appear to be enough parking for the new townhomes.
In the preliminary conceptual plan there was a new traffic light in between Dalidio
Drive and Oceanaire. It was not clear to me whether there is one or not in this
new plan. If there is one, it is going to be problematic.
Currently, all the traffic from these homes will enter and exit Madonna Road and
Los Osos Valley Road via an extension of Froom. This is not what was discussed
at multiple LUCE meetings that I attended. It was stated over and over again that
any development on this property would require the construction of an overpass
or an interchange at Prado Road.
3. Prado Road.
As I have written and stated on multiple occasions, the proverbial "elephant in
the room" is Prado Road. For years now, people have been asking whether
Prado Road is going to be an interchange or an overpass. They have been
asking whether or not it is a "four -lane truck highway" as it appears on the LUCE
plans. As you may know, this road has been in City documents since 1960.
Prado Road also was part of the updated Land Use Circulation Element (LUCE)
Plan. Also, the LUCE plan is cited in meetings as the rationale for this immense
and dense San Luis Ranch development. Prado Road is also part of the traffic
circulation plan for Avila Ranch. The public deserves to see the entire plan and
the inclusion of the Prado Road overpass or interchange.
One cannot "cherry pick" the LUCE plan and provide for just the parts that
are "easy" and/or profitable. All of the support system should be in place in
the first phase of the development.
Since the developer is solely responsible for traffic/road improvements - his "fair
share" - this overpass or interchange will substantially impact the cost of the
residential units that are being proposed there.
For you to entertain any development on the San Luis Ranch - formerly known as
the Dalidio property - without getting a clear answer on whether or not the
overpass or interchange is even viable is unconscionable.
A transparent discussion should occur with CALTRANS about the interchange
and/or overpass as soon as possible. City elected officials should insist that the
traffic infrastructure - out of the pocket of the developer - be completed either at
the same time the development is being constructed or prior to it.
The current plan to build homes in the first phase in back of Target and funnel all
of the resulting traffic onto Froom Ranch Road and then onto Los Osos Valley
Road or onto Madonna Road is simply not fair to the public.
At past meetings, the developer's representative quipped with a smile, "Who
knows when the Prado Road overpass will ever be built." That is not funny to me.
This factor should not be an afterthought. This should be discussed now to avoid
extreme congestion on Los Osos Valley Road. Everyone needs to remember that
the other aforementioned developments of Avila Ranch and Froom Ranch will
increase the traffic. The cumulative impacts must be addressed. The traffic will
become unbearable.
It is also very wrong for Prado Road to be segmented or piecemealed. According
to CEQA, when a large project is identified, it should be analyzed with an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in that fashion. Prado Road, from Madonna
Road to Broad Street has never undergone a comprehensive EIR. It has been
"looked at" and "analyzed" but no one has ever had the courage to say, "What
can we do with the traffic, East to West, along that route?" In the recent Planning
Commission meeting commissioners demonstrated an increased awareness of
what I am concerned about. One of the commissioners stated, "Okay, if there is
indeed just an overpass, and people are in their cars at Higuera and Prado Road,
coming from San Luis Ranch, then what?
also need to point out that the developer in Serra Meadows was allowed to build
and just make Prado Road adjacent to the construction two lanes with
roundabouts, instead of the four lanes that are in the LUCE Master Plan. This is
the type of piecemealing that is a recipe for disaster.
4. Affordable housing.
Affordable housing is proposed and the question is, "At what price?" The cost of
road improvements needs to be factored into the purchase price so that the
developer can make a profit. It would be good business sense to know this
obligation beforehand. For the common person to look at the simple equation of
500 homes x $400,000= $200,000,000, it gives a citizen an idea of the profit that
Gary Grossman and his team stand to make.
Even if the cost of the land at roughly $20,000,000 and the overpass or
intersection at an estimated $60,000,000 is factored in that is still a gross profit of
$120,000,000. The construction cost of the residential construction.
will be roughly half that number. That is still a handsome profit. Also, a majority of
the homes will be priced at $550,000 or greater - not $400,000 that I just used in
this example.
Again there is minimal affordable housing in this project. In the first phase, of the 224
units, only 12 are "affordable." In the entire project, of 580 units, only 34 are "affordable."
5. Affordable housing vs. Student rentals.
Unless there is an opportunity for deed restrictions and/or strict "Conditions,
Covenants and Restraints" (CC and R's) on the property who is to say that the
units will not be turned into a mass of student rentals.
6. Noise
The noise from this development will need to be mitigated. The noise will be
from the people, the vehicular traffic, and air travel.
What is not in the preliminary plans is the anticipated noise from the four- lane
truck highway known as Prado Road and the extension of Froom Road that will
connect with Los Osos Valley Road.
On the preliminary plan, Froom Road appears that it is a line of trees, when in
reality it will be a road. It should be made more clear on the plans. Also, the
proposed elevation of the units on the plan are two and three stories tall - 35 feet
and 50 feet respectively. The residents will be negatively affected by the fumes
and the noise of vehicular traffic from both Froom and Madonna. Studies should
also factor in the noise from Prado Road when it is finished.
7. Airport Viability and Safety
My other concern is safety from air travel. The proposed development is at the
actual site of a plane crash. I was not a proponent of the Airport Land Use
Commission (ALUC) override vote that was supported by a majority of the last
City Council, due to concerns for the safety of residents on the ground and pilots
and passengers in the sky.
No one to date has been able to answer the question, "When a crash occurs on
the development, who will be held legally responsible?" Is it the City? The
developer? The airport? And/or the taxpayers?
I also believe in keeping our airport viable for industry and job growth.
8. Trees
Having viewed the San Luis Ranch plan, it shows the construction of three-story
structures on Madonna Road. The row of eucalyptus trees will need to be
eliminated. I question that loss of mature trees. I also think that it should be in the
plans for a row of trees to be planted to the east of the development near the
proposed agricultural land so that the view from Highway 101 is one of trees with
a foreground of agricultural land and not a cluster of dense homes. From the
residents point of view, it seems that they also would appreciate a view of trees
rather than one of Highway 101.
9. Animal Protection
A parts of the property is home to some environmentally sensitive animals,
specifically herons. Please address how those animals will be protected during
and after construction.
10. Access to Laguna Lake
Access to the adjacent Laguna Lake recreational area has not been given the
attention that it deserves.
Having looked at the plan, there should be an above road, pedestrian access to
Laguna Lake Park facilitated for future residents. There is an insufficient amount
of park land in the actual development. The yards on the proposed properties are
small and/or non-existent. This safe public access would allow people who bike
or walk an opportunity to cross Madonna Road without having to halt traffic.
11.Public Input
The developer has taken inordinate amounts of time to meet with groups of
elected officials, members of advisory bodies, Dwellforward and the U40 group. It
would serve the developer - Gary Grossman and his development team including
members of the architectural firm RRM - well to send a notice to the
neighborhoods and receive public feedback on the development. I believe only
one meeting was held at a local Italian restaurant approximately 18 months ago.
Residents and business owners have not had an opportunity to voice their
concerns since then.
Having this important meeting tonight during the summer, the day after the 4th of
July holiday, on a Wednesday is an example of how the public feels
marginalized.
12. Class 1 Agricultural Land
The citizens of the City of San Luis Obispo have the right to determine if they
want this Class 1 agricultural land to be annexed into the City and used for
residential housing and commercial office space.
Also, it is important for everyone to realize that the current plan provides for the
removal of 1-4 feet of topsoil to build up the construction site. How will that leave
the remaining agricultural land? What will the resulting viable crop be ... rice?
13. Access to the Agricultural Land
The developer and his poised, glib representatives extol the glories of how San
Luis Ranch residents will walk over to the working farm. This does not make
sense. It does not seem that the crops will benefit from residents walking around
the fields. It does not make sense that residents are going to cross the extension
of Froom Ranch where there will be cars and commercial trucks. This is not a
commune. It is being billed as a commercial farm with a washing station. Plans
for the development show people of all ages walking around with bags of
vegetables, graced with butterflies flying nearby and blossoming fruit trees. This
does not appear to be reality.
14. The Transit Center
The transit center proposed for part of the commercial development is an idea
worth exploring. A full service transit center for commuters, complete with a
parking structure for overflow parking from residents and for commuters would be
an asset to the community. Also, once the new City homeless shelter is
completed at 40 Prado Road, there will most likely be lots of individuals that may
need to access a bus daily. The overpass at Prado Road will make it easier for
people of all backgrounds to utilize transportation services.
15. Other options
Alternatives to this current development plan have not been fully considered.
Members of the public have offered some suggestions for you in their current
correspondence.
My best alternative and brainstorm was the one explained here in the letter below
that was submitted to both Gary Grossman and Cal Poly President Jeffrey
Armstrong. This alternative would and still can create a "win -win-win" for
everyone. In short, the alternative for this project would be for Gary Grossman to
complete and "old-fashioned land swap" with Cal Poly. Cal Poly still has plenty of
acreage to build everything that Grossman desires. The agricultural land could
be a Cal Poly working farm for decades to come. A ranch -style dorm house could
be constructed on the Grossman property by Cal Poly for agriculture students
who work the land. In turn, Grossman could build an array of housing on Cal Poly
land in a public - private partnership that would allow for students and staff to
have affordable housing. Grossman's hotel and conference center could give
students employment and real life hospitality experience. This proposal would
save Grossman the cost of the interchange, it would protect the agricultural land,
and decrease the amount of traffic substantially.
I still believe that this is an alternative that should be explored before this precious
agricultural land is built on.
The second alternative which some people may think that I suggested in jest, also
follows. It is simply short-sighted to build on this Class 1 agricultural land for the next
generation. This is one of 100 parcels in our entire County with land of this quality.
There are better places for homes.
In closing, thank you for the opportunity to enumerate concerns now so that they can be
addressed in the near future.
Sincerely,
MiCa vujovich-.Ga (Barre
Mila Vujovich-La Barre
650 Skyline Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
milavu@hotmail.com
(Alternative #1)
January 19, 2015
Dr. Jeff Armstrong — President
California Polytechnic University
San Luis Obispo, California
Mr. Gary Grossman
Central Coast Builders
Pismo Beach, California
Dear Dr. Armstrong and Mr. Grossman,
In the spirit of Martin Luther King, I have a dream.
This dream can become a reality with a few simple steps and make San
Luis Obispo the best it can be. Although you are both hard-working modest
men, I also think that people would think you were absolute saviors if you
are able to follow through on what I am about to propose.
Mr. Grossman, you as the new owner of the 131 -acres of land- previously
known as the "Dalidio property" - now called San Luis Ranch. The name
change has not changed the sentiments of many locals about that prime
agricultural land that is positioned above the City's emergency water
supply. Many residents and tourists are also enamored with the view shed
that it provides from Highway 101, with the fertile crops and the background
of our beautiful mountains.
Dr. Armstrong, under your leadership, California Polytechnic University (Cal
Poly) has continued to receive awards for its academic rigor and the
livability of the campus.
My vision, gentlemen, is for a true, old-fashioned land swap. Mr. Grossman,
you can deed the 131 -acres of prime agriculture land to Cal Poly. Dr.
Armstrong, Cal Poly will give, in turn 131 -acres of buildable land to Mr.
Grossman. The land on the Cal Poly land would be the future site of
residential housing that could be sold for the competitive market rates to
the general public.
Currently Mr. Grossman, of your 131 -acres of prime agricultural land, the
City of San Luis Obispo will receive roughly 50% of it as open space. The
remaining land would have to be the site of the residential and commercial
projects that you envision as well as the road infrastructure. A deal with Cal
Poly may not place those restrictions on you or your development team.
Mr. Grossman, as with any development project, you would be responsible
for the cost of the road infrastructure at the Cal Poly site, however I imagine
that it could be offset by the assistance of students in the various divisions
of that support both Engineering and Architecture Departments.
Mr. Grossman, you could also build a state -of -the- art hotel there if you and
your team desire to be truly extraordinary. The hotel, with conference
capabilities, could be a landmark public-private enterprise. Mr. Grossman
you could opt to could build a sustainable hotel — similar to the one on
Boulder, Colorado that is near zero waste. With the help of the award
winning architecture department and the assistance of the professionals at
RRM, it could not only have great guest rooms with rural views but a
conference center as well. The restaurant at the hotel could be open to the
public and could feature a "farm to table" theme with Cal Poly or local meat,
fish and of course fruits and vegetables.
With its proximity to Cal Poly there would never be a shortage of individuals
for near minimum wage employment to serve in various jobs that the
hospitality industry affords.
With the assistance of Cal Poly's Transportation/ Traffic Engineering
department, the new homes and hotel would have access to campus, town
and Highway 1 via pedestrian paths, bikes paths, light rail or cars.
Mr. Grossman, the genius of this idea if we can get it to work is that you
would no longer have to pay for the cost of the contentious Prado Road
overpass or interchange that may cost you as much as $70 million by
today's estimates. As you know, Caltrans has stated numerous times that
a safe interchange at Prado Road and Highway 101 would be very difficult
to construct given the proximity of Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley
Road. If eliminated, the interchange and/or overpass will not infringe upon
the integrity of the new Homeless Service Shelter at 40 Prado Road. You
would no longer have to worry about the scrutiny of the Airport Land Use
Commission and the factors that may prohibit you from building the size of
development that you desire.
You would no longer have to be concerned about whether any local
landowners would sell you land for the off-site mitigation your design team
has discussed.
Dr. Armstrong, Cal Poly would benefit by maintaining the showcase to the
agrarian based county in perpetuity. The Cal Poly staff and students will be
able to farm 131 -acres of land already adjacent to San Luis Obispo City
farm. In my mind, I picture the original farmhouse on the property being
refurbished to serve as a visitor center/farmer's market stand where local
products from both Cal Poly and native entrepreneurs could be sold — from
cheese to wine to fruits and vegetables.
Although not mandatory, there could be an eight- person student dorm on
site, and housing for a staff member. The site could even have a small
venue for entertainment overlooking the fields, and perhaps a venue for
intimate ceremonies 50 people or less. Maintaining the land for these uses
would allow the row of beloved eucalyptus trees to stay in place.
In addition, the Laguna Lake residents will be overjoyed with this proposal.
The idea of having homes at up to 500 homes and the commercial space
on that location already has voters talking to me about organizing a
referendum.
Gentlemen, I have been involved in City politics as a concerned citizen for
over 16 years.
This is simply a fabulous idea and I do hope that you will give it full and
immediate consideration.
Dr. Armstrong, the residential component on what is now Cal Poly land
could house professionals that work in our community or students. The
concept would be well-received by many voters who have been so
concerned about options for housing.
Mr. Grossman, you have told me on more than one occasion that you are
prepared to build something tasteful that you could personally be proud of. I
seriously think that this is it!
Please feel free if you would like to meet with me personally to further
discuss this concept that would be a proverbial "win" for both of you and for
the entire community as a whole. As a public school teacher, I am generally
limited to the hours before 7:30am or after 3:00pm.
Sincerely,
Mila Vujovich-La Barre
650 Skyline Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(Alternative #2)
June 19, 2017
Gary Grossman
Coastal Community Builders
330 James Way
Pismo Beach, California 93448
Dear Gary Grossman -
It is high time for another great idea! As you may recall, two years ago I creatively suggested that
you build all of your homes and commercial development on Cal Poly land. In return, Cal Poly
would have been able to use the 131- acres of Class 1 agricultural land that you currently own to
farm and work for eternity. That was a "win -win-win" idea that would have saved the agricultural
land for the public and students. It would have provided housing, jobs, a hotel, and event center
on Cal Poly land. That idea would have also have saved you the cost of the Prado Road overpass
or interchange. Although that awesome public/private partnership idea made sense to a lot of
community members, it did not blossom. I am now offering another suggestion!
Since Proposition 64, which provides for the legalization of cannabis, had not been passed when
you initially started planning for San Luis Ranch, I think that there is another viable alternative for
the 131- acres of prime agricultural land that you may not have ever considered.
As you may remember from our previous conversations, this novel idea is coming from me, a
person who has spent over 34 years in public education, teaching United States History and
Spanish. I have also consistently worked to combat the negative effects of alcohol and other drugs
within the student population through prevention and intervention programs. Marijuana, for as
insidious and detrimental as I believe that it is for developing teenage bodies and brains, has been
embraced by a majority of California voters for both medicinal and recreational use.
So, have you considered the enormous profit that you would gain from a legal, agricultural
operation planted in marijuana? The San Luis Ranch - formerly known as the Dalidio land - could
be preserved as agricultural land. There are plenty of people, including college aged students,
who would be interested in working at the location to learn how to cultivate, grow, and market
marijuana. There are also people in our community who are doing formal experiments with both
the CBD and the THC produced from the drug. A crop at that location could potentially be grown
pesticide free.
The other benefit of having a farm at that location is that the crop could be easily protected. There
is a freeway on one side, the SLO City Farm on another, and Madonna Road. It would be easy to
install a security system and fencing.
In addition, the commercial grow would be great for tourism. It could be called "Grossman's Green
Acres." There could be an innovative small commercial retail center on site with parking along
Madonna Road. There could be a variety of products for sale, including ones that do not include
cannabis - Cal Poly cheeses and chocolates, local breads and wines, fresh fruits and vegetables
and even a petting zoo!
The "Forever 21" building could be transformed into a store called "Forever 420" by a budding
entrepreneur. The store could carry a wide variety of marijuana and hemp based products. I also
think that a pro -cannabis area, such as the farm and retail outlet, would do wonders for the profits
of the surrounding restaurants.
Neighbors in the immediate area may find the odor from the crop offensive, however as most
people know the prevailing winds are from the ocean, across town, west to east. The odor would
blow over the freeway to the sewer treatment plant, the drive-in and the new Homeless Shelter at
40 Prado.
The farm could utilize forms of alternative power for the 2030 design buildout of industrial
buildings, taking full advantage of solar and wind power.
Why would this proposal be more favorable than the current one? Most people realize that the
homes currently proposed for this site are not "affordable." At maximum buildout, there will only be
34 homes for truly low- income people. As a developer, you will sell a home once. The marijuana
crop would be a renewable, continued source of income.
The Prado Road overpass and/or interchange is not going to happen anytime soon both due to
funding and Caltrans restrictions.
However, the immense profits from this marijuana farm would help to pay for that overpass
eventually and help with our City's debt. So, maybe you could examine the long term profitability
of growing marijuana vs. selling a few homes and having to grapple with the fickle
retail/commercial market for the remaining land.
The profits from this cannabis grow could potentially also help to build a secondary transit center
and provide the infrastructure of Class 1 bike lanes in that part of town.
Preserving agriculture at this site would be well-received by the Airport Land Use Commissioners.
In addition,the current San Luis Obispo City Council members appear to be very open to
marijuana legalization, promoting a "farm to pipe" ideology, and protecting the rights of citizens to
grow and use cannabis.
A large commercial grow on your site would stifle many smaller growing operations throughout
town and on the fringes of our City limits. Having a grow confined to one large area like this would
make most residents happy.
The processing of this marijuana could occur on the other side of the freeway along Buckley Road
where the controversial Avila Ranch homes are being proposed. That area is perfect for industrial
manufacturing and processing.
Since I was President of Save San Luis Obispo in 2005 when City voters stopped the previous
development desired by the previous owner Ernie Dalidio, I am again hearing from a wide variety
of residents who vehemently oppose your current development plan for San Luis Ranch.They do
not see the proposed homes as affordable, they are concerned about the horrible traffic that will
be created on Los Osos Valley Road, Froom Ranch Road and Madonna Road, they object to the
chopping down of the trees along Madonna Road, they are concerned about damage to the
current vista from Highway 101 to the west, and the severe impact this development will have on
the surrounding neighborhood character.
Why not at least consider the idea outlined here? It will save you a significant amount of money
now and make you more money in the long term.
Then, if you give the marijuana cultivation business a chance and it works, you will have preserved
this precious piece of agricultural land for the next generation! If it does not, well then you can
build homes, an overpass, and the additional traffic infrastructure.
Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this idea further.
Sincerely,
Mila Vujovich-La Barre
650 Skyline Drive
San Luis Obispo, California 93405
rnilavuOhotmaiI.com
Cell: 805-441-5818