HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/5/2017 Item 12, Vujovich-LaBarre (2)
Christian, Kevin
From:Mila Vujovich-LaBarre <milavu@hotmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, July 05,
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Fw: San Luis Ranch Concerns
From: Mila Vujovich-LaBarre <milavu@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:11 PM
To: emailcitycouncil@slocity.org; hharmon@slocity.org; agomez@slocity.org; apease@slocity.org; cchristi@slocity.org;
dan rivoire; advisorybodies@slocity.org
Cc: katie lichtig
Subject: San Luis Ranch Concerns
July 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.
1
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
2
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?
I 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
3
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
4
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.
5
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,
Mila Vujovich-La Barre
Mila Vujovich-La Barre
650 Skyline Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
milavu@hotmail.com
________________________________________________________
(Alternative #1)
January 19, 2015
6
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
7
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.
8
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
9
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.
10
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
milavu@hotmail.com
Cell: 805-441-5818
11