[00:00:01]
GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE MERCER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2023.
[1. CALL TO ORDER]
UH, CAN WE PLEASE HAVE EVERYBODY STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? OKAY. CAN WE PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL? PLANNING COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER AGUILERA.HERE. MR. CHAIR, YOU DO HAVE A QUORUM.
[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
ITEM FOUR APPROVAL OF MINUTES.WE DO HAVE SOME MINUTES PRESENTED.
OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. CHAIR ALSO VOTES.
AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED.
OKAY. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS.
THAT IS NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
CAN DO SO NOW. AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
OKAY. NOT SEEING ANY. I'LL CLOSE THE CITIZEN AND GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR OUR FIRST ITEM.
[6. PUBLIC HEARING(S)]
THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN ERRECA.TODAY I HAVE FOR YOU GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER GPA 20 1-002 ZONE CHANGE NUMBER ZC 20 1-003 PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE NUMBER PD 21-001 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NUMBER DA19-001.
THE APPLICANT IS VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST.
THE PROJECT REQUEST IS A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE TO MODIFY THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY PLAN BOUNDARY BY REMOVING ABOUT 460 ACRES OF LAND OWNED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND ADDING ABOUT 176 ACRES TO ENCOMPASS THE ENTIRE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST SPECIFIC PLAN AREA.
FINALLY, IT INCLUDES AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION DIAGRAM TO REFLECT THE LAND USES THAT ARE CURRENTLY PROPOSED IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE CAMPUS PARKWAY ALIGNMENT. AS FOR THE ZONE CHANGE THE ZONE CHANGE IS PROPOSED TO ESTABLISH THE ZONING FOR THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS TO ESTABLISH VESTED RIGHTS AND PERFORMANCE OBLIGATIONS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS PROJECT WILL ACTUALLY NOT INCLUDE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
AS PART OF THIS PRESENTATION, WE WILL BE TABLING THAT FOR ANOTHER PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING.
BUT I DID WANT TO INCLUDE THIS AS IT WAS DISCUSSED IN THE AGENDA AND PUBLICLY NOTICED.
HERE IS A SLIDE WITH THE VICINITY SHOWN WITH THE PROJECT PROJECT SITE IDENTIFIED BY THE STAR.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S RIGHT OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERCED IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY AND IS SURROUNDED MOSTLY BY THE UC MERCED TO THE NORTH, AGRICULTURAL PASTURE CONSERVATION LANDS TO THE EAST, AGRICULTURAL TO THE SOUTH AND RURAL RESIDENCES TO THE WEST.
SO UKP NORTH INCLUDES THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LAND AS WELL AS THE VIRGINIA VIRGINIA SMITH SPECIFIC TRUST LAND AND UC SOUTH INCLUDES APPROXIMATELY 1180 ACRES SOUTH OF THE VIRGINIA SMITH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA.
IN TOTAL, THE PROJECT SITE IS ABOUT 2300 ACRES.
HERE I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE REVISIONS TO THE COMMUNITY PLAN, SO YOU CAN SEE HERE APPROXIMATELY 470 ACRES WILL BE REMOVED AND THAT AREA IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.
AND THE AREA TO BE ADDED TO THE UCP BOUNDARY IS THE AREA HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 176 ACRES, WHICH WOULD HELP ENCOMPASS THE WHOLE PROPERTY OF THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST PROPERTY.
AND THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA HERE IS THE PROPOSED LAND USE DIAGRAM.
IT INCLUDES A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, OPEN SPACE AND INSTITUTIONAL USES.
[00:05:05]
IF YOU CAN GET DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF IT, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE INCLUDES LARGE LOTS, REGULAR SINGLE FAMILY, LOTS AND SMALLER DESIGNS, SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AS WELL AS MULTIFAMILY SUCH AS R2, R3 AND R4.THE CAMPUS PARKWAY ALIGNMENT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.
AS FOR THE PROPOSED POLICY CHANGES, MOST OF THE POLICY CHANGES THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE UCP AMENDMENT ARE TO UPDATE CHANGES THAT REFLECT PRESENT DAY CONDITIONS AND THINGS THAT ARE ALSO DISCUSSED IN THE VIRGINIA VIRGINIA SMITH SPECIFIC PLAN THAT INCLUDES THE REMOVAL OF THE BUSINESS CENTER, ELIMINATION OF POLICIES THAT TALK ABOUT INTEGRATING THE UCP PLAN AREA AND THE UC MERCED LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AREA BECAUSE THE UC MERCED LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AREA HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED INDEPENDENT OF THE UCP.
THE SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT WAS.
REVISIONS WERE MADE FOLLOWING THAT HEARING AND FOLLOWING FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY AND A NEW PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT WAS PUBLISHED ON JULY 28TH, 2023.
MOST OF THE CHANGES ARE VERY MINOR TO THE PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT.
THEY INCLUDE CORRECTIONS TO TYPOS CLARIFICATIONS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY UC MERCED.
OTHER CLARIFICATIONS REGARDING HOUSING AND CHANGES TO TRANSPORTATION.
THEREFORE, IT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL GENERAL PLAN AND CAN KIND OF LIVE AS ITS OWN DOCUMENTS WITH ADDITIONAL GOALS POLICIES THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO THE AREA. THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY PLAN, INCLUDING ITS EIR, WERE CERTIFIED AND ADOPTED ON DECEMBER 21ST, 2004. IT INCLUDED DESIGNATION CALLED MULTIPLE USE URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR PRIMARILY ALL OF THE DEVELOPABLE LAND IN THE UCP AREA.
THIS MULTIPLE USE DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION IS REALLY TO ACCOMMODATE A DIVERSITY OF USES, INCLUDING HOUSING, RETAIL, COMMERCIAL OFFICE, INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH, SCHOOLS, PARKS AND SO ON.
THE UCP ALSO FURTHER IDENTIFIES IN THE MULTIPLE USE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA, THESE SUB AREAS, INCLUDING ONE TOWN CENTER AND BUSINESS CENTER AND FOUR RESIDENTIAL VILLAGES.
THE UCP STATES THAT MUCH OF THE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE MIX DENSITY AND THEIR PRECISE LAYOUT, INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL VILLAGES, CAN BE MODIFIED TO REFLECT CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS AND SHOULD BE MODIFIED DURING THE TIME OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN.
PREPARATION. SO AS SUCH, THE UCP AMENDMENT DOES INCLUDE REMOVING SOME LAND FROM THE UCP AND ADDING LAND TO ADD TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA.
AND THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA SPECIFICALLY TALKS TO RESIDENTIAL VILLAGES ONE AND TWO SUB AREAS WITH THE VIRGINIA SMITH SPECIFIC PLAN.
A NUMBER OF CHANGES WERE MADE TO THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS, BUT THEY WERE VERY MINOR CHANGES.
SO MOST OF THE LAND USES ARE GENERALLY THE SAME IN PROPORTION TO THE LAND.
THAT'S INCLUDING THE ONLY REAL SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IS THE REMOVAL OF THE BUSINESS CENTER.
THERE IS HOW THAT TRANSLATES TO ACTUAL SQUARE FOOTAGE AND UNITS IS A SLIGHT REDUCTION ABOVE 1,000,000FT² FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL SPACE AND ABOUT 2000 UNITS FOR RESIDENTIAL.
THE SPECIFIC PLAN INCLUDES A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES, COMMERCIAL PARK AREAS, RECREATION AREAS, SCHOOLS, FIRE STATIONS AND INTEGRATED BIKE AND PED FACILITIES, WHICH ARE ALL PART AND CONSISTENT WITH THE UCP AND THE INTENTION OF HAVING A DIVERSE, LIVABLE, SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY.
[00:10:06]
AS MENTIONED, THE APPLICANTS DO INTEND TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY OF MERCED.THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CITY OF MERCED.
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND FOLLOWING AB 3312 AND THE ANNEXATION OF UC MERCED.
THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE A PATHWAY TOWARDS ANNEXATION TO THE CITY AND I BELIEVE THE CITY HAS ALREADY PROVIDED DIRECTION IN A PRE-APPLICATION PROCESS TO ALLOW FOR ANNEXATION, PROCESSES, PROCEDURES TO FOLLOW.
THAT SAID, THAT MEANS THAT THE PROJECT WILL BE SUBJECT TO CODES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY, AND THE CITY HAS BEEN ENGAGED IN THE PROCESSING OF THIS PROJECT AND REVIEW OF ALL PROJECT MATERIALS, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC PLAN, DOCUMENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS PREPARED PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES.
IT INCLUDES REVIEW OF IMPACTS THAT WERE NOT ANALYZED IN THE CERTIFIED 2004 EIR THAT WAS PREPARED FOR THE COMMUNITY PLAN, AND IT DID FIND THAT THERE WERE SOME SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS, INCLUDING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, NOISE AND VIBRATION AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO NOISE AND VIBRATION AND BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, AND THEN A NUMBER OF OTHER IMPACTS THAT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WHEN MITIGATED.
GENERALLY MOST OF THE IMPACTS ARE GOING TO BE.
JUS BECAUSE YOU HAVE LESS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE REMOVAL OF SOME LAND FROM THE GENERAL, THE COMMUNITY PLAN AREA AND THEN FACTS OF OVERRIDING OR FINDINGS OF FACTS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED AND ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH SPEAKS TO THE BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT THAT OUTWEIGH THE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION WAS CIRCULATED ON JANUARY 14TH, 2022.
A SCOPING MEETING WAS HELD FOR THE PROJECT ON JANUARY 20TH, 2022.
NO COMMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE WERE PROVIDED AND THEN A NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY WAS CIRCULATED BETWEEN APRIL 28TH, 2023 AND JUNE 12TH, 2023 FOR 45 DAY ENVIRONMENTAL CIRCULATION REVIEW PERIOD AND THEN A FINAL EIR ATTACHED AS ATTACHMENT H TO THE STAFF REPORT INCLUDES OUR RESPONSES TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED AND FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND ENGAGEMENT.
FOLLOWING THAT, ON JUNE 9TH, 2023, A PRESENTATION WAS GIVEN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE PROGRESS OF THE UCP AMENDMENT AND THE VIRGINIA SMITH SPECIFIC PLAN AND COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED FROM LEADERSHIP COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE ACCOUNTABILITY, DATED JUNE 14TH, 2023, WITH CONCERNS ABOUT ADEQUACY OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, CONCERNS ABOUT LACK OF INVESTMENT IN SOUTH MERCED AND HOUSING.
ON JUNE 30TH, 2023, NOTICE OF THE AUGUST 9TH PUBLIC HEARING WAS PUBLISHED IN THE MERCED SUN-STAR AND MAILED TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE PROJECT SITE. AND THEN ON JULY 12TH, WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING TO OBTAIN FURTHER FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMISSION AND THE COMMUNITY ON THE PROJECT MATERIALS.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE KIND OF SAW THE REVISION TO THE PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT.
IN RESPONSE TO THAT PUBLIC HEARING, WE DID RECEIVE NUMEROUS LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT AND THERE WERE COMMENTS OF SUPPORT PROVIDED AT THE HEARING, INCLUDING ONE QUESTION JUST ABOUT THE PROJECT BOUNDARY.
FOLLOWING THAT HEARING, WE DID RECEIVE ANOTHER COMMENT LETTER FROM MICHAEL BELLAMY, DATED JULY 25TH, 2023, REGARDING CONSISTENCY OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN PARK POLICIES WITH THE CITY POLICIES.
IN RESPONSE TO THAT, WE DID INCLUDE A LITTLE DISCUSSION IN THE STAFF REPORT ABOUT PARK PLAN STATING THAT THE UCP WAS DEVELOPED AND ADOPTED AND IT WAS CREATED IN COORDINATION WITH THE COUNTY AND THE CITY AND THE SPECIFIC PLAN, DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENT ITSELF HAVE BEEN CIRCULATED TO THE CITY AND REVIEWED AND DEEMED CONSISTENT AT THE TIME OF REVIEW.
GENERALLY, THE PROJECT PROPOSES MORE PARK SPACE THAN THE CITY STANDARD, SO THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE PARK NOT MEETING CITY STANDARDS CAN BE REFUTED.
AND THEN WE DID HAVE AN AUGUST 9TH, 2023 PUBLIC HEARING WHERE WE BROUGHT THE ITEM TO ACTION.
[00:15:01]
WE DID NOT ACTUALLY MOVE FORWARD WITH ACTION BECAUSE WE HAD SOME LAST MINUTE INTERAGENCY COORDINATION THAT WE HAD TO FACILITATE.SO THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN, BUT THEN CONTINUED FOR THE FOLLOWING HEARING.
AT THIS AUGUST 9TH HEARING, NO ADDITIONAL NOTICE WAS PREPARED FOR THE FOLLOWING HEARING, AS ALLOWED BY THE ZONING CODE ON AUGUST 23RD WAS THE CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING.
AGAIN, WE FURTHER CONTINUE TO THIS HEARING TODAY, BUT IN THAT PUBLIC HEARING WE DID RECEIVE ONE COMMENT FROM THE LEADERSHIP COUNCIL RESTATING ADEQUACY OF SEQUA LACK OF SERVICES AND INVESTMENT FOR SOUTH MERCED PROVIDED.
AFTER THE MEETINGS, WE DID RECEIVE A RESPONSE LETTER FROM THE APPLICANT DATED SEPTEMBER 5TH, 2023.
AND IT INCLUDES A RESPONSE TO THE LEGAL STATUTE OF REVIEW, EVIDENCE OF SERVICES IN INVESTMENT IN SOUTH MERCED AND OTHER COMMENTS MADE BY LEADERSHIP COUNCIL.
THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CERTIFY THE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND AMENDING THE ZONE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY PLAN, ESTABLISHING THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE ZONE CHANGE AS MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PRESENTATION.
SO THAT ITEM WILL LIKELY COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION IN ANOTHER HEARING.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL, THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS.
WE ALSO HAVE THE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT, VP A ALSO ON CALL.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FROM THE COMMISSION? OKAY, NOT HEARING ANY.
I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM.
ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK TO THIS ITEM CAN DO SO.
PLEASE ALSO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS BOB CARPENTER, 2882, GREENFIELD DRIVE SAID IN A WAY, THIS PROJECT'S BEEN UNDER PLANNING FOR 35 YEARS BECAUSE NEXT MONTH, OCTOBER MARKS THE 35TH ANNIVERSARY OF OUR COMMUNITY COMPETING FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 10TH CAMPUS SITE.
THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST WAS WILLING TO ALLOW US TO GO FORWARD WITH THEIR LAND AS A PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE UNIVERSITY.
AND OVER THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS, WE WERE IN COMPETITION WITH SEVERAL OTHER LOCATIONS IN THE VALLEY.
AND SEVEN YEARS LATER, 1995, THE UNIVERSITY APPROVED THE VIRGINIA SMITH SITE AND ALSO INDICATED AT THAT TIME THEY HAD NO PLANS OR NO MONEY TO GO FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.
SO ANOTHER SEVEN YEARS, THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST CONTINUED TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE UNIVERSITY TO FIND BOTH THE MONEY AND THE AVAILABILITY OF LOCATING A SITE ON THEIR PROPERTY.
AND IN 1992, SEVEN YEARS AFTER THAT, THE GROUND WAS BROKEN FOR THE UNIVERSITY SITE.
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, OF COURSE, HAS ONE VERY SIGNIFICANT BENEFICIARY OF OF OF THE TRUST, AND THAT'S FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN OUR COUNTY FOR SCHOLARSHIPS TO GO ON TO COLLEGE.
IT'S BEEN A LONG, DIFFICULT ROAD TO GET TO THIS POINT.
[00:20:01]
I THINK THAT THIS PROJECT IS ULTIMATELY WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAD HOPED FOR.IN ADDITION TO HAVING A MAJOR RESEARCH UNIVERSITY IN OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH IS NOW REALITY, WAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO GREATLY INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE SCHOLARSHIPS AND MONEY AVAILABLE FOR SCHOLARSHIPS FOR OUR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.
FOR THAT REASON, I WOULD STRONGLY SUPPORT THAT YOU APPROVE THESE THESE PROPOSALS.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
BUT I WILL SAY THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN CARRIES FORWARD THOSE PLANNING CONCEPTS THAT WERE CREATED EARLY IN THE CAMPUS'S DEVELOPMENT, AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE LONG TERM VISION OF THE EARLY PLANNING EFFORTS OF THE UCLC.
THE PROPOSED PLAN IS INTEGRATED AND TAKES INTO ACCOUNT UC MERCED 2020 LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, INCLUDING LAND USE, OPEN SPACE AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING. IT HAS BEEN PLANNED TO PROVIDE A SEAMLESS TRANSITION TO THE UC MERCED CAMPUS.
FURTHERMORE, THE PROPOSED PLAN WOULD PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SINGLE AND MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING UNITS, WHICH WOULD HELP RELIEVE SOME OF THE PRESSURE ON THE OVERALL MARKET IN THE GREATER MERCED COUNTY REGION ADJACENT HOUSING AND THE PLAN FOR IMPROVED WALK AND BIKE ABILITY WILL HELP TO TAKE MORE VEHICLES OFF THE ROADS.
AND THE ADDITION OF SOME COMMERCIAL SERVICES NEAR THE CAMPUS WILL SUPPORT OUR CONTINUED GROWTH.
FOR THESE REASONS AND THE TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY THAT THE SCHOLARSHIPS GENERATED BY THIS PROJECT WOULD PROVIDE TO THE STUDENTS OF MERCED COUNTY, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE COMMISSION'S FAVORABLE VOTE.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. SCOTT MCBRIDE, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF MERCED.
678 WEST 18TH STREET HERE IN MERCED.
IT WAS ALLUDED TO IN THE STAFF REPORT PROVIDED BY YOUR STAFF EARLIER THAT THE COUNCIL DID REVIEW AN ANNEXATION APPLICATION AND THE SUPPORT WAS THERE FROM THE COUNCIL TO SEE IT GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO THAT'S A PRECURSOR TO KIND OF ALLOWING THE COMMUNITY TO KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON AN ANNEXATION AND IT ALLOWS THE COUNCIL TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK AT AN EARLY STAGE. AND SO THEY WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT.
WE DID A VERY INTERESTING COOPERATIVE APPROACH HERE, ALSO ALLUDED TO BY YOUR STAFF, THERE'S A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WHICH TALKS ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROCESS THE ENTITLEMENT APPLICATIONS.
THAT PROCESS WORKED OUT VERY WELL.
IT'S LED TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM.
SO IT ALLOWED FOR SEAMLESS REVIEW BETWEEN THE STAFF AT BOTH THE COUNTY AND THE CITY TO KIND OF WORK THROUGH THIS THING AT A VERY LOW LEVEL TO GET TO GET TO THE PROJECT THAT YOU HAVE TODAY TO CONSIDER FOR YOUR FOR YOUR SUPPORT BASICALLY IN THE NEAR FUTURE, DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE COUNTY DELIBERATIONS ON THIS PROJECT, THE CITY WILL BE DISCUSSING THE ANNEXATION.
SO THOSE ARE STEPS THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER LATER ON POST DISCUSSION AND ACTION BY THE COUNTY.
AND IT IS TRUE WE DO HAVE TO ANNEX THE UNIVERSITY FIRST BEFORE IT CAN BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY.
WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THAT AS WELL.
AND SO IT'S THERE TO KIND OF HELP PROVIDE FOR PRODUCTION OF ARENA UNITS.
AND SO WITH THAT IN MIND, THIS PROJECT WILL DEFINITELY MEET OR EXCEED OUR REQUIREMENTS.
AND SO THAT'S A VERY HUGE STEP FORWARD AS ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE CONTEMPLATED BY THE CITY, WHICH INVOLVES THE ANNEXATION WILL HAVE TO MEET ARENA REQUIREMENTS. AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE HUGE BENEFITS THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HIGHLIGHTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY.
WITH THAT IN MIND, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY.
[00:25:03]
THANK YOU SO MUCH.I REPRESENT THE PROPERTY JUST NORTHWEST OF HERE ACROSS LAKE ROAD.
AND MY COMPANY IS ANCHOR VALLEY PARTNERS.
YOU'LL SEE THAT WE SUBMITTED A COMMENT LETTER TO ON THE AMENDMENT AT THE TIME DURING THE COMMENT PERIOD, AND WE'VE REVIEWED MY TEAM, HAS REVIEWED THE RESPONSES, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY WE'RE VERY SATISFIED.
SO WE HAVE NO OBJECTION ONCE WE RECEIVE THE RESPONSES TO THE LETTER.
SO IN LIGHT OF THAT, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.
IT'S I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR 20 YEARS.
BOB'S BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR 35 YEARS.
SO I GUESS I HAVE A WAYS TO GO.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S ACTUALLY WITHIN REACH.
THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME.
AT ONE POINT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY.
THERE WAS OTHER ISSUES ALONG THOSE ALONG THE WAY.
IN THOSE 20 YEARS, THEY'VE ALL BEEN OVERCOME.
FINALLY, I THINK WE'RE UNIQUELY POSITIONED AND I DON'T WANT THIS OPPORTUNITY SLIP AWAY AGAIN.
AND THEN WE'RE HERE IN ANOTHER TEN YEARS, STILL WAITING FOR THIS TO HAPPEN.
SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO NOT HOLD THIS UP AND ADOPT THIS AS SOON AS YOU CAN.
GOOD MORNING, PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS SARA RAMIREZ, POLICY ADVOCATE WITH LEADERSHIP COUNCIL.
WE ARE A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT PARTNERS WITH RESIDENTS IN THE SAN JOAQUIN AND EAST COACHELLA VALLEYS AND ADVOCACY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND EQUITABLE INVESTMENTS IN THEIR COMMUNITIES.
TODAY BECAUSE OF THE TIME OF THE HEARING.
THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY PLAN PROJECT IS ONE EXAMPLE OF THIS TREND.
UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE TO THE NORTH AND EAST OF MERCED CONTINUE TO SEE THE PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT OF LUXURY AND MARKET RATE HOUSING CONNECTED TO CITY WATER AND SEWER SERVICES, PARK AND GREEN SPACES, NEW RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL AMENITIES WITH SIDEWALKS, BIKE LANES AND STREET LIGHTING.
MEANWHILE, SOUTH MERCED STILL DOES NOT HAVE A GROCERY STORE, AND UNINCORPORATED SOUTH MERCED LACKS ADEQUATE STREET LIGHTING, SIDEWALKS, STORMWATER DRAINAGE, WATER, SEWER AND OTHER SERVICES.
I KNOW THAT THE LETTER PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPERS MENTIONS THAT THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THERE IS A GROCERY STORE WITHIN PROXIMITY OF SOUTH MERCED, BUT RESIDENTS REALLY WANT TO EXPRESS THAT THE GROCERY STORES LISTED IN THE IN THAT EVIDENCE, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY IN PARAMETER WITHIN THE COMMUNITIES RANGE TO ACTUALLY GO TO THE GROCERY STORES.
I THINK SOME OF THE STORES LISTED WERE LIKE RALEY'S FOOD MAX JUST KIND OF OUT OF BOUNDARIES OF LIKE THE UNINCORPORATED AREA AND THEN ALSO WITH CONNECTIONS TO OTHER SERVICES SUCH AS DRINKING WATER, WASTEWATER.
MERCED COUNTY SHOULD NOT CONTINUE TO SIGN OFF ON NEW COMMUNITIES AND FILL EXISTING UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES, CONTINUE TO HAVE THEIR NEEDS IGNORED AND HAVE CITY SERVICES AND RESOURCES REPEATEDLY GET DIVERTED TO NEW NEIGHBORHOODS.
AS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE THAT EVERY JURISDICTION IN CALIFORNIA HAS A REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION OR ARENA THAT INDICATES HOUSING. AFFORDABLE TO LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS SHOULD ACCOUNT FOR OVER 40% OF THE TOTAL NEEDING HOUSING UNITS, ACCORDING TO THE COUNTY'S UNMET HOUSING NEEDS.
BUT THIS PROJECT ONLY PROJECTS 4.7% OF ITS HOUSING TO BE AFFORDABLE FOR EXTREMELY LOW, VERY LOW AND LOW INCOME RESIDENTS, BOTH EXTREME INEQUITY IN ACCESS TO SERVICES AND AMENITIES AND THE SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOUSING NEEDS AND PLANNED HOUSING IN THIS PROJECT RAISE SERIOUS CONCERNS OF FAIRNESS, EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES AND POTENTIAL FAIR HOUSING VIOLATIONS.
FOR ALL THESE REASONS, WE URGE YOU.
[00:30:14]
GOOD MORNING, BOARD MEMBERS CHAIR.I'M A REPRESENTATIVE WITH THE LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, RESIDENT OF ATWATER 1100 FRUITLAND.
I'M ALSO BEEN ON THE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD FOR 13 YEARS HERE IN MERCED.
BORN AND RAISED IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY.
AND THEN I STARTED LOOKING AT THE MATH AND IT BROUGHT ME TO THIS THOUGHT ABOUT SEEDS.
AND WHEN YOU PLANT A SEED AND WHAT IT TAKES TO GROW IT AND HOW OVER TIME YOU HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT SEED AND EVENTUALLY YOU HARVEST SOME FRUIT FROM IT. BUT WHAT I SEE HERE IS BACK IN 1971, SHE HAD A WISH.
SHE BEQUEATHED SOME MONEY AND SOME LAND TO HELP THOSE THAT WERE THE MOST DESERVING, WORTHY, WORTHY, DESERVING AND NEEDY.
AS I THOUGHT ABOUT THOSE WORDS, IT TRANSCENDED ALL SPECTRUMS OF OUR POPULATION.
AND I THOUGHT SINCE 71 TO NOW, THERE'S BEEN $6 MILLION WORTH OF SCHOLARSHIPS GIVEN TO MANY OF OUR LOCAL PEOPLE, HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS. AND THEN I THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT THAT GREW INTO AND IT GREW INTO UC MERCED AND UC MERCED SAID WAS $1.6 BILLION.
THERE WAS A HUGE INFLUX OF NOT JUST WORK LABOR, REAL GOOD JOBS, BUT MONEY INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT 6 MILLION TURNING INTO 1.6 BILLION AND THEN YOU LOOK AROUND THAT COLLEGE AND ANY OTHER COLLEGE IN CALIFORNIA AND YOU SEE UC DAVIS AS ONE OF THE BETTER EXAMPLES.
YOU SEE HOW THAT COMMUNITY DEVELOPED.
AND I THINK ABOUT THAT RETURN ON INVESTMENT FROM HER INITIAL WISH AND I THINK ABOUT WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE WHEN THIS ENTIRE AREA IS DEVELOPED AND WHAT IT PROVIDES.
I HAD TO TRAVEL TO TURLOCK IN ORDER TO GO TO SCHOOL.
WE DIDN'T HAVE A SCHOOL DOWN HERE.
AND I THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT'S GOING TO MEAN AND TO HOW MANY PEOPLE.
AND FOR ME, I KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO FOR LABOR.
I KNOW WE'VE PUT OVER 250 PEOPLE TO WORK IN THE UC MERCED PROJECT AND MANY OF THEM ARE WITH US NOW, MAKING OVER 30 BUCKS AN HOUR AS JOURNEYMAN LABORS, BENEFITS, PENSION, A GOOD LIFE.
BUT IT STARTED FROM THAT SEED AND THERE ARE SO MANY FARMERS.
IT'S TIME FOR US TO REAP OUR FRUIT.
THANK YOU. I SUPPORT THIS WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. GOOD MORNING.
THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE HERE AND WATCHING THE MEETING VIRTUALLY.
I AM A MEMBER OF THE MERCED CITY SCHOOL BOARD, A 14 YEAR RESIDENT OF MERCED COUNTY.
AND I'M ALSO A MOTHER OF THREE HIGH SCHOOL KIDS AT GOLDEN VALLEY.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT.
VIRGINIA SMITH WAS A VISIONARY TO DEDICATE LAND TO USE FOR SCHOLARSHIPS FOR STUDENTS FROM MERCED.
IT IS OUR TURN TO MAKE THAT VISION INTO A REALITY BY APPROVING THIS PROJECT.
ALL STUDENTS WHEN I SAY ALL STUDENTS, ALL STUDENTS OF THE COUNTY, INCLUDING THOSE STUDENTS WHO LIVE IN SOUTH MERCED, DESERVE A CHANCE AT GOING TO COLLEGE OR WHATEVER PURSUIT, WHATEVER THEIR PURSUITS ARE, AND WE HAVE TO BE PART OF THAT.
OUR EDUCATIONAL LEADERS THAT ARE IN THIS ROOM, ALAN PETERSON IS HERE, CHRIS VITALE, CHANCELLOR MUNOZ ARE ALL WORKING TOGETHER WITH OUR COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, STEVE TIETJEN, FOR MAKING VIRGINIA SMITH'S VISION A REALITY.
THEY'RE ADVOCATING FOR ACCESS TO EDUCATION TO THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN LEFT BEHIND FOR A LONG TIME.
I HAVE PERSONALLY MET STUDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN FRIENDS WITH MY CHILDREN OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WHO HAVE RECEIVED THE SCHOLARSHIP, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO VARIOUS UNIVERSITIES, SOME INCLUDING OUR OWN UNIVERSITY.
SO THIS ALL OF THIS IS GOING TO COME BACK TO OUR COMMUNITY AND THE NUMBERS AND THE SEQUEL.
[00:35:08]
SITUATION THEY ARE EXPERIENCE COLLEGE? WHEN WE THINK ABOUT HAVING A RESEARCH UNIVERSITY LITERALLY IN OUR BACKYARD AND THE POTENTIAL THAT IT HAS AND THE POTENTIAL THAT THIS PROJECT HAS TO IMPROVE ALL OF MERCED, INCLUDING SOUTH MERCED, I THINK THIS IS WHY YOU NEED TO APPROVE THE PROJECT.THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING PLANNING COMMISSION, WHOLESALE AND SALES 2058. JULIA LANE ATWATER, CALIFORNIA.
LIFELONG RESIDENT OF MERCED COUNTY.
ALSO PROUD SUPERINTENDENT FOR THE PLANADA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THE SORRY BOARD.
BOARD PRESIDENTS CALLING PROUD SUPERINTENDENT FOR PLANADA.
AS THE OLDEST OF FOUR CHILDREN OF MEXICAN PORTUGUESE IMMIGRANTS, FIRST GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENT, I WAS A BENEFACTOR OF GENEROUS LOCAL SCHOLARSHIPS. CAL GRANT PELL GRANT.
IN MARCH OF 23, THE TRUST WAS MODIFIED TO EXPAND TO ALL OF MERCED COUNTY, INCLUDING RURAL MERCED COUNTY, SUCH AS THE TRI DISTRICT AREA OF PLANADA, LA GRANDE AND PLAINSBURG, WHERE 90% OF OUR RESIDENTS QUALIFY UNDER A LOW SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS.
I ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE YES ON BOTH RESOLUTIONS.
THE ACTION THAT YOU TAKE TODAY WILL TRIGGER AN INVESTMENT IN OUR FUTURE READY COLLEGE STUDENTS, WHICH IN TURN WILL THEN INVEST IN MERCED COUNTY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS STEPHEN PECK. I'M THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE PROJECT BEFORE YOU TODAY.
WORKING FOR THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST.
I WANT TO FIRST ECHO SCOTT'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE COLLABORATIVE WORKING RELATIONSHIP.
YOU SEE THE CITY AND THE COUNTY TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT MEETS ALL OF OUR NEEDS.
WE'RE PROUD OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE CITY REPRESENTATIVES HERE, THE U.S.
AND SO I WANT TO THANK THANK THEM AND YOUR STAFF.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING YOU DO ON A REGULAR BASIS.
THEY DID IT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF COVID REDUCED STAFF.
IT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY BECAUSE OF THEM.
THERE'S MENTION OF IT CERTAINLY IN THE EIR, THERE'S MENTION OF IT IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
WE THINK THERE ALSO NEEDS TO BE MENTION OF THAT IN THE ADOPTING RESOLUTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOCUMENT, WHICH IS THE KEY PERFORMANCE DOCUMENT FOR ALL SUCCESSIVE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, SHOULD BE REFERENCED THERE.
WE'RE THANKFUL, AS MR. PECK HAS SAID, COMMISSIONERS, FOR ALL THE HARD WORK THAT YOUR STAFF HAS PUT INTO IT.
IT'S BEEN, AS STEVE SAID, FOR YOUR WORK.
HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.
OKAY. WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK? OKAY. NOT SEEING ANY. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM AND COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR EITHER DISCUSSION OR A MOTION.
CAN WE GET? YEAH. THERE WE GO.
[00:40:02]
FOR DISCUSSION. PART OF IT.THIS IS THE FIRST MEETING THAT I'VE BEEN A PART OF.
AND I'VE BEEN HERE FOR. FOR A FEW YEARS.
AND IT'S REFRESHING AND GREAT TO SEE YOU GUYS ALL COME TOGETHER FOR THIS.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, IT'D BE MY PLEASURE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CLARIFYING THE SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPT THE FINDINGS AND FACTS, STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM.
SECOND. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE SEQUA.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. CHAIR VOTES? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED.
MOVING ON TO THE PROJECT DETERMINATION.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION OR.
EXCUSE ME. MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, JUST REAL QUICK CLARIFICATION.
AS MISS HO MENTIONED, BECAUSE THERE'S STILL WORK ONGOING COORDINATION WITH BOTH THE APPLICANT AND COORDINATION WITH THE CITY ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AGAIN, WITH THE AGENDA AGENDIZE LANGUAGE, INCLUDING RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
WE'D RECOMMEND THAT THIS ACTION AS WRITTEN ON ON THE SCREEN BE TAKEN AND THEN A SUBSEQUENT ACTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT TO THE SEPTEMBER 27TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
PERFECT. SO I'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTION ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER 20 1-002, AMENDING THE UNIVERSITY'S COMMUNITY PLAN AND ESTABLISH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE NUMBER 20 1-001, ADOPT THE ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONE CHANGES NUMBER ZC 20 1-003.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE PROJECT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. THE CHAIR ALSO VOTES AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED. THANK YOU.
OKAY. ITEM SEVEN COMMISSION ACTION ITEMS. I'M GETTING SOME NOTES FROM THE BIG GUY HERE, AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE NEED TO CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING FOR DA 20 1-001 TO SEPTEMBER 27TH, 2003.
THAT WOULD BE A MOTION I JUST MADE.
CORRECT? YES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. CHAIR ALSO VOTES AYE.
NOW TO COMMISSION ACTION ITEMS. NOTHING FURTHER AT THIS TIME.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT. NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD.
THANK YOU. ANY COMMISSIONERS COMMENT? OKAY. NOT HEARING ANY.
I WILL ADJOURN THE MEETING. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY FOR COMING OUT.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.