Plan Santa Paula Workshop III: Evaluating the Proposed Housing Plans. Summary of Participant Comments

Similar documents
4.0 CUMULATIVE SCENARIO

Community Workshop Public Comments January 14, 2015 #CantonForward

Downtown Development Focus Area: I. Existing Conditions

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY

CITY OF WEST PARK PROPOSED TRANSIT ORIENTED CORRIDOR (TOC) EXPANSION WORKSHOP JUNE 15, 2016 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

Bylaw No , being "Official Community Plan Bylaw, 2016" Schedule "A" DRAFT

Concept 1: Entertainment Favor/Opposed Pros Cons Favor: 56 Opposed: 7

MEMORANDUM Main Concepts

Summary of Key Issues from Skagit County TDR Focus Group Meetings January 7, 2014

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. Online Workshop 1 Results. May 26, 2016

PLANNING COMMISSION WILLIAMSBURG, VIRGINIA WORK SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Community Advisory Committee (CAC) Meeting #7 West Anaheim Youth Center May 26, 2016

Frequently Asked Questions

The Consequences of Residential Infill on Existing Neighborhoods in the Treasure Valley.

Eastern Corridor Planning Area Workshop No April 2016

Land Use. Land Use Categories. Chart 5.1. Nepeuskun Existing Land Use Inventory. Overview

Lathrop Homes Riverworks Survey Response Percentages

Missing Middle Housing Types Showcasing examples in Springfield, Oregon

Chapter 5: Testing the Vision. Where is residential growth most likely to occur in the District? Chapter 5: Testing the Vision

Table of Contents. Concept Plan Overview. Statement of Compliance with Design Guidelines. Statement of Compliance with Comprehensive Plan

Wood Dale Comprehensive Plan Open House #2 Summary

Tree-lined streets, multilevel

MINUTES OF THE VINEYARD TOWN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Vineyard Town Hall, 240 East Gammon Road, Vineyard, Utah January 21, 2015, 7:00 PM

In Business Q and A. Todd Nigro, president of Nigro Development. December 24 December 30, 2004 Interviewed by Jennifer Shubinski / Staff Writer


Focus Area #1 - West Industrial Area

5.9m sf of new commercial space completed; 3.8m sf in construction; 10m approved

URBAN INFILL HOUSING OPTIONS

Urban Land Use. Unit 4 GEO22F PB

Using Analysis to Improve the Environment for Transit

Downtown 2025 Sector Development Plan

REPORT Development Services

ORIGINATED BY: Reuben J. Arceo, Community Development Director

UrbanFootprint Place Types. Urban Mixed Use. Urban Residential. Urban Commercial. Residential 1% SF Large Lot 0%

CITY OF PORTSMOUTH. CITY COUNCIL POLICY No HOUSING POLICY

Hardwick State of the Town Forum & Charrette Summary

Berkley Citizens United Planning Commission, La Salette Redevelopment Meeting Packet

Evolution of the Vision for NE 181st Street Study Area

County Survey. results of the public officials survey in the narrative. Henry County Comprehensive Plan,

Housing. Approved and Adopted by City Council November 13, City Council Resolution City Council Resolution

To achieve growth, property development, redevelopment and an improved tax base in the cities and boroughs in the Lehigh Valley.

Poughkeepsie City Center Revitalization Plan

LAKE MERRITT STATION AREA PLAN

Crenshaw/LAX Transit Project Joint Development Fairview Heights Community Workshop #2 April 30, 2016

GATEWAY Mixed Use DISTRICTS. PLANNING BOARD Public Hearing August 24, 2017

Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances Public Hearing

Master Plan Review SILVER SPRING CBD. Approved and Adopted February Updated January 2013

LILLIAN WEBB PARK DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. City of Norcross, Georgia 2034 Comprehensive Plan

MINUTES. SNYDERVILLE BASIN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 8, 2018 Sheldon Richins Building 1885 West Ute Boulevard, Park City, UT

Summary of Findings. Community Conversation held November 5, 2018

60 +/- Gross Acres for: Multifamily Residential Mixed Use

Detroit Neighborhood Housing Markets

Financial Impact Statement There are no immediate financial impacts associated with the adoption of this report.

CZMP Workshop Preserving Your Community & The Environment From Development Impacts

ALC Bylaw Reviews. A Guide for Local Governments

Housing & Residential Intensification Study Discussion Paper Township of King

7. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes

Chapter 7 Riverfront District

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 2188

Approved. County of Santa Clara Office of the County Executive CE DATE: March 27, 2007 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM:

UNDERSTANDING THE TAX BASE CONSEQUENCES OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

April 1, Mammoth Lakes Market Trends Report First Quarter

8 TH STREET UPDATE & NEXT STEPS. January 6, 2016 Regroup meeting of PAB and LDC Economic Development Working Group

RESEARCH BRIEF. Oct. 31, 2012 Volume 2, Issue 3

NUMBER: How many accessory dwelling units should be allowed on a lot?

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WORKSHOP PRESERVING HOUSING AFFORDABILITY OCTOBER 13, 2015

COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. Comprehensive Site-Planning Overview. 1.1 Introduction. 1.2 Role of Government

CONCEPTUAL DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN

PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTING TOD: KEY FACTORS FOR SUCCESS. Sujata Srivastava Knowledge Corridor TOD Workshop June 5, 2013

ESTES VALLEY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

L. LAND USE. Page L-1

Community Revitalization Efforts 2016 Thresholds and Scoring Criteria

Village of Queen Charlotte OCP and Bylaw Review Open House April 29, 2017 Highlights, Policy Directions, and Choices

Eastern Corridor Planning Area Workshop No April 2016

Administrative Procedures for the collection of Development Impact Fees

Analysis of Infill Development Potential Under the Green Line TOD Ordinance

8Land Use. The Land Use Plan consists of the following elements:

PUBLIC. Public Notification. June. 11, 2013, about. invitation. 25, 2013 Community. Open House. approximately 89. Public Responsee. or unspecified).

Land Use, Transportation, and Infrastructure Committee of Denver City Council FROM: Scott Robinson, Senior City Planner DATE: December 6, 2018 RE:

Request from Chad DeWaard for a Special Land Use Permit to Operate a Home-Based Business on property located at Cascade Road SE

City of La Palma General Plan Notes from Community Workshop August 28, 2012

Demographics. Delray Beach is one of 38 municipalities in Palm Beach County, occupying approximately 16 square miles.

Waterford Township Planning Board Special Meeting November 30 th, 2015

Subject: Workshop No. 2 with Webster Street Block Development Committee and the SEA Consulting team.

MOUNT PLEASANT CENTER COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARY. Workshop Date: April 18, 2016

WOODLAND AREA GENERAL PLAN URBAN DEVELOPMENT POLICY

UNDERSTANDING DEVELOPER S DECISION- MAKING IN THE REGION OF WATERLOO

County and related Memorandum of Understanding MOU

Public Facilities and Finance Element

43 Acres. Presented by: COMMERCIAL MIXED USE LAND OFFERING LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA

Challenges to 20-minute walkable, bikeable, and by transit neighborhoods for those that

COUNTY OF LINCOLN, NORTH CAROLINA

City Hall/Public Works Open House Frequently Asked Questions

STAFF REPORT. Financial Impact Statement There are no immediate financial impacts associated with the adoption of this report.

Ohlone College Mission Blvd Mixed-Use Project OFFERING MEMORANDUM

MINUTES CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION

Instructions: Script:

Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) in Practice

Yolo County Workshop October 27, 2003

Transcription:

Plan Santa Paula Workshop III: Evaluating the Proposed Housing Plans Summary of Participant Comments Following a presentation and panel discussion regarding potential impacts to water, fiscal resources, and traffic, the third workshop in the Plan Santa Paula series gave participants the opportunity to respond to ideas generated in the first two workshops. These ideas were used to generate various potential scenarios for new development in the three expansion areas of Adams Canyon, Fagan Canyon and East Area 1, as well as a list of ideas for infill or redevelopment. Through their reactions to the scenarios and ideas, the participants in attendance indicated the general direction that they thought development should take place in Santa Paula. A limited number of individuals participated in this exercise. Adams Canyon Scenario 1 400 to 600 units Larger lot, rural, high-end housing Resort/hotel with potential golf course Walking and equestrian trails Scenario 2 600 to 850 units Larger lot, rural, high-end housing in the north Resort/hotel with potential golf course Walking and equestrian trails Additional units (moderate priced) at mouth of canyon Scenario 3 0 units; preserve Preserve for next ten years Benefits & Drawbacks Post-It Note Exercise Description: Individually, participants were asked to list one benefit and one drawback for each scenario. Scenario 1 received the most favorable response, with participants stating that the city would see fiscal benefits through property taxes, job creation, and attracting higher income residents. Scenario 2 received a less favorable response; however, someone pointed out that current residents might be more likely to be able to afford the housing in this scenario. Some participants had concerns about traffic and the increased demand for services. Benefits & Drawbacks Summary Exercise The group pointed out three areas of agreement: If preserved as in Scenario 3, Adams Canyon would be a great natural preserve. In Scenarios 1 and 2, Adams could provide possible revenue for the city. Scenarios 1 and 2 may not serve the existing citizens of Santa Paula, because of the lack of affordability, lack of proximity, housing mix, and encouragement of sprawl. Description: Briefly, groups discussed the proposed scenarios. One group focused on the potential positive fiscal impact of the development scenarios, versus no income gain for Scenario 3. One group asked, Why do we need to develop everything at once what areas will we develop in the future? Another group was concerned that the city would not see the fiscal benefit for a long time. Description: At the end of the workshop, each person was given three dots to place on the development scenarios that he/she felt were the most important to the City of Santa Paula.

Scenario 1 received the most dots (14); the other scenarios each received 3 dots.

Fagan Canyon Scenario 1 400 to 600 units High-end homes Minimal grading Scenario 2 700 to 800 units Mix of housing types (moderate, high-end, some workforce) Senior housing focus Commercial development along Ojai Road Minimal grading Scenario 3 1000 units Mix of housing types (moderate, high-end, some workforce) Retail component in the canyon Minimal grading Scenario 4 0 units; preserve Benefits & Drawbacks Post-It Note Exercise Description: Individually, participants were asked to list one benefit and one drawback for each scenario. Participants did not clearly favor any particular scenario in this exercise, but expressed support for the mix of housing types suggested in Scenario 2 and Scenario 3, and also for senior housing. They did not seem to feel that these scenarios would result in as much revenue for the city as the development scenarios for Adams Canyon. Traffic was a key concern for Fagan Canyon. There was little agreement on the number of units that would be desirable, and participants expressed more concerns about traffic in the scenarios with higher numbers of units. Participants also suggested that developing retail might keep some of the traffic within the canyon, but mostly did not comment on the retail and commercial components of these scenarios. In considering Scenario 1, participants were less positive about building only high-end homes than they were about the Adams Canyon high-end housing scenario with 400-600 units. In fact, the most commonly listed drawback in this scenario was the type of housing. Although several participants saw the housing mix in Scenario 2 as a benefit, there were just as many comments stating that the number of units was too big or too small. Traffic was a greater concern in this scenario and was cited even more as a drawback for the larger Scenario 3. Many still listed the mix of housing as a benefit in this scenario. Scenario 4 did not generate as many comments as the others, but the top benefit listed was the lack of additional traffic, and the top drawback was the lack of additional revenue. Benefits & Drawbacks Summary Exercise The group felt that other participants had agreed on senior housing as a benefit, wanted 450 or fewer houses, saw potential traffic problems and were worried about overcrowded schools. The group also wrote that the participants had not agreed on access/egress problems and the financial viability of the scenarios. Description: Briefly, groups discussed the proposed scenarios. One group wrote that senior housing might be preferable because of its limited traffic impact. Another group listed drawbacks for all scenarios: poor access and egress, drainage problems, land contamination, drain on local services, and the need for a bypass road. This group also listed benefits of Scenario 1 (senior housing, good for high end development, no workforce housing), 3 (more townhomes), and 4 (with Adams and East Area 1, Fagan is not needed for development). Another group echoed this last point, laying out a desired order of development: infill, then Fagan, then East Area 1, then Adams. Specifically, this group suggested that the Measure Y development should be carried out in Fagan Canyon instead of Adams Canyon. Description: At the end of the workshop, each person was given three dots to place on the development scenarios that he/she felt were the most important to the City of Santa Paula.

Scenario 3 received 15 dots, Scenario 1 had 14 dots, Scenario 4 had 1 dot, and Scenario 2 had none.

East Area 1 Scenario 1 1000 to 1250 units Mixed housing types with more higherdensity housing College/higher education institution Inn/hotel Mitigate loss of agriculture/maintain green edge Scenario 2 1250 to 1500 units Mixed housing types with more higherdensity housing College/higher education institution Grocery store Mitigate loss of agriculture/maintain green edge Scenario 3 0 units; preserve Preserve for next ten years Benefits & Drawbacks Post-It Note Exercise Description: Individually, participants were asked to list one benefit and one drawback for each scenario. There were few areas of agreement on East Area 1, and no scenario emerged as a favorite. Participants listed more benefits for the no-build scenario here than they did for the no-build scenarios for the canyons, citing the preservation of agricultural land and the greenbelt. Increased traffic on 126 emerged as a drawback for the development scenarios, although freeway access was also listed as a benefit. The idea of a college in Scenario 1 received some positive comments, but others felt that it would not happen. Participants reacted positively to both the inn/hotel idea and the grocery store. Benefits & Drawbacks Summary Exercise The group writing this summary saw some places where participants had agreed: increased tax revenue, higher education and a second high school, loss of prime agricultural land, and good access to 126. The group wrote that participants had disagreed on urban sprawl, traffic, a negative gateway into Santa Paula, and too much density. Description: Briefly, groups discussed the proposed scenarios. One group suggested the potential for a Hwy 150 bypass in Scenario 1 and listed freeway access as a benefit, with the railroad crossing a potential problem. This group also suggested that there is poor soil quality in the area, listing that as an argument against Scenario 3. Another group wrote that there was not enough high-end housing in the development scenarios, and listed the loss of prime agricultural land as a drawback; this group also indicated that the number of housing units in Scenario 2 was too high. This group suggested building a high school and converting a packing house into the school gym. The next group felt that the affordable mix of housing in Scenarios 1 and 2 was a benefit but did not like that it would be so visible. This group considered Scenario 3 as well, writing that it would preserve the green valley but had no economic benefit. The fourth group considered benefits and drawbacks for each scenario in detail, finding tax revenue and education opportunities as benefits for development, with traffic a key drawback. They indicated that Scenario 1 would be a negative gateway into Santa Paula and that Scenario 2 had too much density. Description: At the end of the workshop, each person was given three dots to place on the development scenarios that he/she felt were the most important to the City of Santa Paula. Scenario 3 received 12 dots, Scenario 2 received 8 dots and Scenario 1 received 1 dot.

Downtown Area & Packing Houses/Industrial Areas Ideas Post-It Note Exercise Description: Individually, participants were asked to list additional ideas for infill or redevelopment. Downtown Most participants did not suggest areas for redevelopment in downtown, which, combined with comments in Workshop II, indicates a general satisfaction with the way it looks. However, several participants indicated a desire for additional shopping or more upscale shopping. At least partly motivated by the desire to support downtown businesses, participants also suggested creating more opportunities for people to live downtown senior housing, apartments, condos, town houses, and mixed use. Some participants suggested that these downtown residences should be moderate to high end in price. Packing Houses/Industrial Areas Participants suggested various new uses for the packing houses: higher education, events, skating, bowling, theater, restaurants, art exhibits and a youth center. A couple of participants suggested re-using the packing houses for housing and two others suggested that they should be used as packing houses again. A few participants suggested tearing down the packing houses and rebuilding. Infill development ideas included housing, retail, and industrial uses. Participants identified particular areas for redevelopment--main from 10 th to eastern city limit, 12 th to Hallock, 10 th from Harvard to Main--and suggested zoning Santa Paula Street east of 12 th for residential uses. Ideas Summary Exercise The group writing this summary focused on these suggestions for downtown: mixed use with senior housing, no dime stores, grocery store, move City Hall to R.R. corridor, upscale townhouses, and better retail. The group also saw these suggestions for re-use of the packing houses: redevelop/tear down, loft use, artist, no low income, work force housing. Description: Briefly, groups discussed ideas for infill or redevelopment. Group notes reiterated some of the individual suggestions. One group wanted a higher education building (most likely as a packing house re-use) and high tech industry in town. Another group suggested that form based codes and professional planners could help with infill or redevelopment efforts. A third group suggested redevelopment from Main to Harvard, and Mill to 11 th, as well as the Harvard Blvd entry to downtown. Another group wrote that all city gateways should be enhanced and suggested multiple, possibly simultaneous, uses for the packing houses: entertainment, theatre, restaurants, art exhibits and/or youth center as well as a cultural art center. This group also proposed creating a pedestrian mall for shopping on Santa Barbara between Mill and 8 th. Description: At the end of the workshop, each person was given five dots to place on the ideas for infill or redevelopment that he/she felt were the most important to the City of Santa Paula. Downtown The most popular ideas were senior housing near downtown, with 10 dots, and preserve downtown core as is (height, architecture), with 9 dots. Move City Hall to Railroad Plaza/Mill received 6 dots and redevelop City Hall with housing/gateway project received 4 dots. Other ideas receiving at least 1 dot: market-rate housing near downtown (3 dots), townhouses/row houses near downtown (2 dots), upscale housing near downtown (1 dot), live-work in downtown (1 dot), and redevelop/rehab Railroad Plaza/Mill (1 dot). Packing Houses/Industrial Areas Enhance 10 th Street as gateway received 8 dots, with other ideas receiving fewer dots: develop packing houses at 10th, Palm & Main into live/work or artist spaces (3.5 dots), redevelop light industrial on Santa Paula into higher density housing (3 dots), develop

packing houses at 10th, Palm & Main w/other commercial/housing uses (1.5 dots), and 10th Street with mixed use shopping (1 dot). Telegraph Road Area and Other Corridors Ideas Post-It Note Exercise Description: Individually, participants were asked to list additional ideas for infill or redevelopment. Telegraph Road Area - Many suggestions for Telegraph Road centered on cleanup and improving the appearance through landscaping, medians, public areas and entry monuments (e.g. at Adams Barranca). Participants did not suggest new housing, nor new commercial development, with the exception of suggestions for mixed use (e.g. NE corner of Telegraph & Calavo) and a restaurant. A few expressed that the area should remain industrial and commercial, and others suggested adding recreational uses: drive-in theater, motocross track, and go-car track. Specific areas mentioned: south side of Telegraph from the city limit to Peck, and the area west of Vons. Other Corridors Participants expressed a desire for all corridors to be cleaned up and improved but did not suggest development. A few gave specific ideas for physical improvement: green medians, trees in medians, or citrus trees along the corridors. Other Infill Ideas A participant suggested retail infill on Calavo Rd and others repeated suggestions made in other exercises. Ideas Summary Exercise The group writing this summary expressed that infill provides much needed housing but doubted that it has a positive fiscal impact. This group saw these areas of agreement for Telegraph Road: clean industrial & commercial uses, need to clean up visual aspects of area, housing not recommended. For Harvard (10 th to Peck), the group wrote: needs major redevelopment, improve visual aspects, more commercial rather than residential. Description: Briefly, groups discussed ideas for infill or redevelopment. One group discussed the railroad as a corridor needing cleanup and fencing, and suggested a new railroad crossing on Telegraph. Another group stated that all gateways need improvement and made two suggestions for alternative transportation, possibly to reduce traffic: Metrolink service to Ventura, and a bike path along the river. Other comments reiterated the individual suggestions above. Description: At the end of the workshop, each person was given five dots to place on the ideas for infill or redevelopment that he/she felt were the most important to the City of Santa Paula. Telegraph Road Area Revitalize/redevelop Telegraph Road area as corridor/gateway from the west received 12 dots. Other Corridors & Gateways Create/enhance gateways and entries to the City received 15 dots. Other ideas with at least 1 dot: enhance Palm as gateway (3 dots), redevelop Harvard with mixed use (2 dots), enhance Peck Road corridor (2 dots), redevelop Harvard with landscaping & median (2 dots), and enhance Ojai Road corridor (1 dot). Other Infill Ideas Live-work development at airport received 12 dots, and higher density housing south of Santa Barbara received 2 dots.