Questions asked by CM Baker:
I want to clarify what might be the best way to share this information with the public to encourage helpful feed back from the community. Several field experts have suggested their willingness to conduct studies, monitor data, etc. Are we able to require additional studies or access to information, given the nature of a 380 agreement? (response below)
I think what the community is really worried about is the flow of our river and the water in the aquifer. So is there a way to monitor and better understand the exact impact of a project like this on the those outcomes, and in what ways could this project be innovative to further reduce their impact or ensure they won't use caustic chemicals on site that could pollute the aquifer. (response below)
With the protest planned and the community clearly looking to see how the City will respond, I wanna make sure that I'm helping the public know what options are available.
Also, I asked a lot of math based questions during the last consideration of this item, and further discussed some of that with Stephanie in our 1 on 1. Some things that would be helpful to clear up:
La Cima is not able to build over 20% impervious cover, but is it correct that if they continue to buy more land and add that to their agreement that the 20% would then result in more impervious cover over the whole project in terms of acreage? What are they currently at, as in what is their total acreage of the project and what is impervious cover? If this project is at 48% doesn't that just mean the impervious will be used on another part of this project, can we ensure that it is not over the aquifer?
The confusion over the M&O and I&S...Not sure if there is an easy way to explain this but it didn't seem very clear. Given that this is an option is there a way to make a chart to explain this better? (response below)
There is also the issue of what else could have been built there and what the taxes might be on a different project. As Strongtowns often points out large parking lots and single use warehouses aren't the highest tax earners for Cities. If this was mixed use CD5 with bodega style groceries and living spaces above that would likely create significant revenue for the City, is there any way to generate an estimate for comparison (like the aspire/target)? (response below)
Is this a place where we could have already teed up a conversation with the developer about all the community feedback we've gotten and clarification on their intent? For instance, it seems that while their current plan has areas dedicated as parkland, that they could theoretically come back with a different plan later to change that, right? Can we exercise restrictive covenants to require those stay parkland? (response below)
Lastly, it would be helpful to know if the developer has an end in sight, or to know how much land they intend to incorporate into their current agreement. I think it would be helpful to have a map of the aquifer with the la cima development laid over it, as well as the other impervious that is over the aquifer to give us a sense of how "at risk" this resource is.
Additional questions:
Also, it seems like we have a lot of examples of films being made in San Marcos, even recently. Is there data about the impacts those projects had on San Marcos' environment, jobs, etc?
It would also be great if staff and GSMP could acknowledge the academic research that was referenced in the previous meeting, and have some response as to how these projections are different or why we should trust the motion picture association assumptions as they relate to economic impact. (referenced academic research:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3407921 and
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3155407) (response below)