September 14, 2011 Minutes

GREATER GOLDEN HILL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES

September 14, 2011

Meeting Agenda is found in Attachment 1 at the end of these minutes.

Meeting was held at Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse – Golf Course Drive.

Vice-Chair Ruchell Alvarez called meeting to order at 6:30 pm. Agenda had been posted in accordance with Brown Act. A quorum of members was present.

Members present: Ruchell Alvarez, Richard Baldwin, Cheryl Brierton, Susan Bugbee, Maureen Burke, Carole Caffey, John Kroll, Richard Santini, David Skillman, Marie Skillman, David Strickland, David Swarens, Matt Thomas, Angela Vasconcellos, Jessica Wolf. Members absent: Pat Shields

Addition/deletions to Agenda - None.

Approvals of Minutes – Minutes of 8/10/11 meeting were approved (motion Brierton, second D Skillman) 14 in favor, none opposed, Strickland abstained.

Treasurer’s Report: – balance remains the same.

PUBLIC COMMENT.

City Council District 5 - Ashley Simmons: Distributed information about San Diego 311 that went into effect in May. It is a downloadable application that allows smart phone users to report public safety, quality of life, and environmental issues including photos, descriptions, and geo-tagging. Councilmember DiMaio’s office routes the issues to appropriate departments.

Rick L. Wright, architect. Wright represents the operators of Thomas Bike Shop at 1635 Fern Street. They are protesting a code violation at their property. Lot coverage percentages and FAR calculations are in question. The matter was referred to the Land Use Subcommittee.

Mike Burnett, You Are Here project: Reported that the project has been approved and permits are in process. They are hoping for groundbreaking before the end of September.

David Swarens: reported that contrary to what was said in the 25^th St. Renaissance presentation at the August meeting, a corner curb cut does not make a shorter distance than regular alignment.

Carole Caffey: Thanked Bernal and Fortner for their help with an issue she reported to them.

GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS.

Community Police Officer Susie de la Pena: Reported that there have been burglaries in the area. She asked that any suspicious activity, including juveniles out during school time, be reported. Reminded everyone to keep unmonitored doors and windows closed, and not to leave laptop computers unattended at coffee shops. The Captain’s Meeting will be 9/22 at 25^th & Imperial. She thanked everyone for behaving during the electricity blackout – no crimes were reported.

Caffey asked what to do about illegal dumping in her alley. Kathryn Willets reported that illegal parking in alleys is preventing trash trucks doing their pickups. Strickland asked about gunshots he heard 9/13/11 at 12:30 am near 832 24^th Street. Santini asked for help with traffic gridlock around Einstein Academy when school lets out - he is unable to get out of his driveway. He also reported increased graffiti in the area around 28^th Street and Hwy 94.

City Council District 3 – Anthony Bernal: August was City Council recess. Street repairs are in process; those with questions can call his office. Distributed flyers on Code Compliance priorities and recycling events.

Thomas asked when the new city council district boundaries would take effect. Bernal said that they would be finalized at the end of September, but the Rules Committee is discussing following the City Attorney’s opinion that they not be enforced until after the 2012 elections.

53^rd Congressional District – Katherine Fortner: Distributed September Davis Dispatch. Davis hosted 2 events locally in August: a Job Clinic and a Home Mortgage Clinic. 30 Tips for handling an emergency are available at DHS.gov. Applications are being accepted for internships in Davis office.

Brierton asked about new congressional districting boundaries that are not very detailed in the online maps.

City Council District 8, 76^th California Assembly District, Mayor’s Office: no representative present.

CONSENT AGENDA – none

VICE-CHAIR’S REPORT. Alvarez had attended the CPC meeting. The 2050 committee proposal for “transit priorities over freeways” failed to get support. Complete Streets concept was prioritized.

INFORMATION ITEMS: none

ACTION ITEMS:

b) Request to reconvene Community Plan Update Committee. D Skillman explained the reasoning behind the reconvening, which was to continue work distilling public comments from earlier meetings, to aid City planners preparing the draft Community Plan, saving rewrite time later.

Alvarez suggested GGHPC members go around the table with their comments on the proposal.

Santini and Baldwin had no comments. Brierton wondered if this would do any good, and if the City would ever show us their work in process. Burke said that there is much work to be done. We need to work on the larger issues, and comment intelligently on the City’s draft. She worries about tight schedules once the draft is issued. Thomas said it is extremely important to reconvene, to capture the vision that was articulated before it is forgotten. Meeting location problems can be overcome. Kroll said he is unsure where the process stands on certain issues. Caffey echoed Thomas, and said that a project plan is urgently needed – that would lead to shorter meetings. Alvarez said she sees both sides, but being prepared to respond to the City cannot hurt. D Skillman said any City draft could be changed. A PDO encompassing the entire community needs to be thoroughly discussed by CPUAC, GGHPC, and the community. The community needs to be informed about whatever is happening. Swarens said the highest priority is to coordinate with City staff. Forums such as the focus groups convened by Rick Accurso were a good tool and provide a benchmark for using the matrix comments. He wondered when we would get any documents from the City – would meeting before then work? Burgee said it was important not to lose momentum. M Skillman said we have put too much into this process to wait for the City draft – 30 days to review will not be enough time. Strickland said that we need to look at the current CP and highlight areas for change, and make thoughtful comments. He wondered if the City had any part of the draft completed – he said it would take several iterations for a final plan. Wolf agrees with reconvening. Vasconcellos agrees with keeping up the momentum.

Bernie Turgeon said the draft is being prepared by element, and the Land Use element might be available by early November. Staff members are working on the elements relating to their specialized knowledge.

Kathryn Willets commented about the PDO covering the entire community. PDO is an ordinance. Community Plan is the vision for the community. This brought up a question about how the PDO affects the CP. Turgeon explained that the second step of the Community Plan Update would be making changes to the current PDO to implement changes in the Community Plan.

In response to a question about whether the process would be that the CP would recommend the PDO expansion, Turgeon said that the CP would have measurable portions.

Thomas noted that Accurso did a lot of work with the matrix comments and that we should be utilizing that work. M Skillman said that the organized comments could be posted on the GGHPC blogspot. Swarens acknowledged Willets and Turgeon’s description of the PDO as a policy tool.

D Skillman made a motion that “ the CPUAC begin a series of publicly noticed meetings.” Strickland seconded.

Discussion: Swarens asked what the agenda would be. D Skillman said it would be to look at community plan and the matrix comments and compile advice for the City. Swarens thought there should be a new format. Strickland advocated continuing to review the matrix. D Skillman noted that Accurso’s work organized the matrix comments for us. M Skillman said we should approach the work by General Plan elements, as the City is doing. Brierton feels hampered by lack of information from the City. D Skillman said the GP’s organizational framework differs from our current CP – City is putting our plan into the new framework. Turgeon said the CPUAC took action on this earlier.

D Skillman restated his motion. He moved “that the CPUAC be reconvened, with the first meeting, on the first Wednesday in October, to be organizational for future meetings based upon Plan Elements, incorporating comments from previous meetings.” Strickland seconded. 14 in favor, Kroll abstained.

The question about a quorum of the GGHPC attending the CPUAC meetings was raised. D Skillman noted that CPUAC has 8 GGHPC members, which is a quorum. Swarens suggested noticing the meetings as a joint CPUAC and PC meeting, or changing the CPUAC to be a committee of the whole. Willets said the committee of the whole would be a quorum with stakeholders. Burke and Brierton liked the idea of the committee of the whole. D Skillman said CPUAC was subcommittee, and did not think GGHPC quorum in attendance was an issue. We need to check the Brown Act to clarify.

M Skillman asked if stakeholders would need equal representation. Turgeon said the stakeholder representation was not an issue, but getting a quorum of the committee of the whole present at meetings had been an issue in other communities. A quorum would be important if CPUAC was taking votes and making recommendations. Burke thought a larger committee might prove unwieldy; Swarens agreed. Caffey suggested subcommittees of the CPUAC. Willets suggested noticing of one meeting, which could be broken into subgroups. Kroll questioned what was appropriate noticing. Notices would be posted in the two community kiosks, and Turgeon said his staff would distribute to the City’s email list and post on the City website, and he would attend the meetings. Turgeon said he would research the majority attendance issues.

It was decided that a chair and secretary for CPUAC would be elected at the next meeting, if desired. Thomas will look into securing the Polish Hall as a location. Caffey said that in the future, the CDC office might be available.

a) Community Plan Update. The proposed motion “GGH Planning Committee adopts the expansion current PDO to all of Greater Golden Hill as the preferred method to guide further development and preserve community character” was not passed. Discussion:

Brierton asked Turgeon for clarification of the PDO. Burke said the motion was premature. Strickland suggested generically stating that we want a community-wide PDO. Caffey said we should defer this to the CPUAC. Willets said the current PDO is nonconforming. Swarens said we should be consistent with model motions being presented. Brierton asked if height limits were the bottom line. Thomas said the CP would define community character but the PDO would implement it. Turgeon noted that the current PDO does not cover many areas of single-family dwellings. Willets had a map showing the detail areas.

Strickland moved “GGHPC recommends that once the new community plan is completed, a PDO will encompass the entire community planning area.” Swarens seconded.

Discussion: Diego Velasco restated the CP is a vision; a PDO is an enforcing tool. Turgeon noted that this type of PDO coverage would put discretionary review on more properties, and that with either a conservation area or a PDO, we need to consider how broad the design guidelines should be. Burke said we could discuss implementation later. Swarens said charette attendees liked the concept of community-wide PDO. Brierton asked what discretionary review means. Turgeon said design guidelines drive the permitting process.

The question was called. All (15) voted in favor.

SUBCOMMITTEE & LIASON REPORTS.

Transportation Subcommittee: Strickland said they would meet in a couple of months, about Hwy 94 project. We need a freeway agreement from the city for a park over the freeway, and it will be a big process. He will ask to have discussion on the agenda next month. Turgeon said SANDAG ultimately controls the funding.

Historic: Bugbee and M Skillman met and reviewed the City’s comments on the nomination forms for the South Park Historical District, and the forms will be resubmitted.

Balboa Park: Strickland reported (1) trail #53 in the park had been named in honor of Jerry Schad (2) There will be a Festival of Lights in the park on 10/23 (3) Sept meeting included a workshop on parking ideas for the Plaza de Panama project (4) Balboa Park Conservancy is moving forward (5) Centennial Celebration committee has hired a CEO and plans are in the works.

Airport Noise: No report

Land Use: No report

D Skillman asked Willets about the 25^th St. Renaissance project. She said nothing had changed since our meeting last month. The project team was disappointed in the outcome of our votes in August; would like to bring the ideas back to GGHPC in October.

The next meeting will be Wednesday, October 12 at 6:30 pm.

Alvarez adjourned meeting at 8:25 pm.

Marie Skillman.

Secretary

ATTACHMENT 1. MEETING AGENDA

GREATER GOLDEN HILL PLANNING COMMITTEE

September 14, 2011 at 6:30 P.M.

Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse at 2600 Golf Course Drive

http://www.gghpc.blogspot.com

Monthly Meeting

6:30 CALL TO ORDER – please be punctual

a) Additions/Deletions to Agenda

1. Approval of Minutes

2. Treasurer’s Report & Pass-the-Hat

6:35 PUBLIC COMMENT

6:45 GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS

7:00 CONSENT AGENDA : None

i.Land Use Sub-Committee report. Baldwin

7:00 CHAIR’S REPORT

ii.CPC Meeting

7:10 INFORMATION ITEMS: None

7:10 ACTION ITEMS: time certain

a) Community Plan Update (1 Hour)

Proposed Motion:

The GGH Planning Committee adopts the expansion of the current PDO to all of Greater Golden Hill as the preferred method to guide further development and preserve community character.

b) Request to reconvene the Community Plan Update Sub-Committee

a.Mission and expected outcomes

b.Resolution of issue that majority of PC can not attend

c.Procedures: PC member chair, minutes, notice, Brown act, quorum

d.Working relationship with Planning Committee -- monthly reports

NOTE: The GGHPC will devote a minimum of 1 hour per month to Update Elements:

October meeting: Streetscape and Walkability

8:50 SUBCOMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS

• Airport Noise – Carole Caffey

• Balboa Park Committee - David Strickland

• Graffiti Hotline – 619 525-8522

• Community Planners Committee (CPC) – Ruchell Alvarez

• Community Plan Update Advisory Committee – City Planner Report

• Historic – Susan Bugbee

• Transportation – David Strickland

9:00 ADJOURN MEETING

Note: Land-Use Subcommittee. Confirm mtg/agenda. Richard Baldwin(kimorb_1999@yahoo.com)

Last Wednesday of the Month at 6:30PM

Location: Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse at 2600 Golf Course Drive

Historic Subcommittee. Confirm mtg/agenda. Susan Bugbee (bugbee@sandiego.edu)

1st Tuesday of the Month at 6:30pm

Location: 1724 29th Street (between Date & Elm)

*Times are estimates – Action Items may also be taken before Information Items

The City of San Diego distributes agendas via email and can also provide agendas in alternative formats as well as a sign language or oral interpreter for the meeting with advance notice. To request these services, please contact the City at 619-236-6479 or SDPlanningGroups@sandiego.gov

.

GOVERNMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES:

• Community Police Officer – Suzy de la Pena [744.9514 orsdelapena@pd.sandiego.gov

]

• Council District 3 – Anthony Bernal [236-6633 or abernal@sandiego.gov

]

• Council District 8 – Melinda Meza. melinam@sandiego.gov

. [236-6688]

• Mayor’s Office – Denice Garcia [236-7056 or deniceg@sandiego.gov

]

• 53rd Congressional Dist. – Katherine Fortner [280-5353] Katherine.Fortner@mail.house.gov

]

• City Planner – Bernard Turgeon [533-6575 or bturgeon@sandiego.gov

]

CPUAC Discussion Topics for 11/2/11 meeting

Per discussion at the 10/5/11 CPUAC meeting and the 10/12/11 GGHPC meeting, City Planner Bernie Turgeon provided this initial list of topics related to the Land Use Element of the Community Plan Update for CPUAC members and community members to review individually and provide comment at the next CPUAC meeting. The document is focused on just the land use issues raised during the CPU process that could be addressed through potential land use changes.

The next CPUAC meeting will be held 11/2/11 at 6:30 pm at the offices of the Greater Golden Hill CDC, 1504 30th Street.

Contents of Document:

Greater Golden Hill Community Plan Update

Land Use Element Topics for advisory committee discussion

Issue Area I - Potential Land Use Changes

(A) Lack of Walkable Commercial Services

Broadway High Density corridor, survey sites for land use changes

– Rezone vacant lot at 28th St and E from Multi-Family to Commercial (or mixed-use) (c12)

– More retail within walking distance of Broadway East of 28th St. (c13)

– 28th Street between A & B should be Community Commercial (broader range of commercial uses) rather than Neighborhood Commercial (c11)

– Commercial center needed in Area B (charrette map, generally Broadway & 30th) (c298)

(B)Allow mixed-use to activate streets/improve connectivity

Land use changes could be large or small scale (underutilized sites) or addressed by policies developed to promote mixed-use and/or provide zoning incentives. Connectivity can also be addressed as an urban design issue without changing land use.

– Consider Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial uses on Broadway West of 25th St. (a110)

– Consider Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial uses on B Street between 25th 28th (c162). There are also similar ideas to strengthen connectivity between South Park and Golden Hill along A or B Streets.

– Consider Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial

(c) Neighborhood Districts

A decision needs to be made whether to strengthen neighborhood identity with the new community plan. Various neighborhood concepts were discussed at the charrette, including identifying boundaries for South Park.

– Identify South Park Neighborhood boundary in Plan (c139)

– Neighborhoods should be a 5-10 minute walk, have a center, contain a variety of civic and private spaces (c33).

– Neighborhood planning examples include 25th St, Juniper/Fern, Beech 30th, 28th C (c34)

– Acknowledge/respect residential character/zone north of A St between 32nd and 34th Streets (c40).

The General Plan village concept is similar to a neighborhood district and location policies are on General Plan pages LU-6-11. The main issue is locating an area for public space (this can also be an opportunity). This could involve granting zoning incentives on private property in exchange for a park or plaza and/or reconfiguring right-of-way. Using the GP Village Propensity Map (Figure LU-1), staff has identified the potential for Neighborhood Villages at the 25th St and 30th/Fern/Juniper Commercial nodes and another at the higher density Broadway corridor (east of 28th St.)

(D) Review of Existing Land Use

Staff has identified several areas where the boundaries of commercially designated and zoned areas overlap with what appear to be single-family residences. The assumption is that the existing plan’s vision is for these areas to redevelop either as commercial or mixed-use. During a plan update, this vision can be reevaluated and/or changed or ‘fine-tuned’.

The issue to consider is whether the current commercial zoning is such an incentive that the loss of desirable historic or community character would likely result. Options to address this issue are adoption of design guidelines to preserve single-family character (while allowing commercial use) or to rezone the properties to single-family (with notice to property owners). Historic resources staff is also considering application of the Secretary of Interior Standards as sufficient to preserve historic resources within the proposed districts as well as for individually significant properties.

The areas initially identified are: the west frontage of 30th Street between Grape and Fir, and various lots along the periphery of the Beech/30th commercial area (west and south).

The land use designations are shown in the existing community plan:

http://www.sandiego.gov/planning/community/profiles/greatergoldenhill/plan.shtml

The zoning designations are online:

http://www.sandiego.gov/development-services/zoning/zoning.shtml

Numbering: (a) Advisory Committee (c) charette

Agenda for CPUAC Meeting 10/5/11

GREATER GOLDEN HILL

COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MEETING #14 Agenda

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

6:00 – 8:30 P.M.

Greater Golden Hill CDC Office

1504 30th Street, San Diego, CA 92102

6:00 Welcome & Introductions

6:10 Announcements and Public Comment

(non–agenda items - 2 minute limit – not subject to debate – future agenda requests)

6:20 COMMITTEE ORGANIZATION

Selection of chair & secretary if desired

Review of noticing requirements, Brown Act, quorum

Discussion of:

Frequency and location of future meetings

Structure of working/focus groups, information sharing, report-outs to GGHPC

7:00 PROJECT PLAN FOR FUTURE MEETINGS

BASED UPON GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS:

Land Use and Community Planning Mobility

Urban Design Economic Prosperity

Public Facilities, Services, Safety Recreation

Conservation Noise

Historic Preservation

Discussion of:

Priorities

Timeline

Utilization of Previous Work
Matrix Comments
Comment Summaries compiled by Rick Accurso
Focus Group Reports

8:30 Adjournment

*Times are approximate

The City of San Diego distributes agendas via email and can also provide agendas in alternative formats as well as a sign language or oral interpreter for the meeting with advance notice. To request these services, please contact the City at 619-236-6479 or SDPlanningGroups@sandiego.gov

.

August 10, 2011 Minutes

GREATER GOLDEN HILL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
August 10, 2011

Meeting Agenda is found in Attachment 1 at the end of these minutes.
Meeting was held at Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse – Golf Course Drive.
Chair Pat Shields called meeting to order at 6:35 pm. Agenda had been posted in accordance with Brown Act. A quorum of members was present.

Members present: Ruchell Alvarez, Richard Baldwin, Cheryl Brierton, Susan Bugbee, Maureen Burke, John Kroll, Richard Santini, Pat Shields, David Skillman, Marie Skillman, David Swarens, Matt Thomas, Angela Vasconcellos, Jessica Wolf. Members absent: Carole Caffey, David Strickland
Addition/deletions to Agenda - None.
Approval of Minutes – Minutes of 7/13/11 meeting were approved (motion Brierton, second Kroll) 10 in favor, none opposed, Santini, Swarens, Vasconcellos, Wolf abstained.
Treasurer’s Report: – balance remains the same.

PUBLIC COMMENT.
Joyce Summer, CCDC: Distributed Downtown Living Guide. CCDC will consider approval of the Horton Plaza Park, a whole block including a large TV screen and amphitheater, at their September meeting. Final redevelopment monies City will be sending to State is $49 million. 50% must be sent by 1/1/12, remaining 50% by 5/1/12. A referendum on eminent domain is being circulated.

GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS.
Community Police Officer: Reported that the boundaries to MidCity and Western division are going to be adjusted; both divisions get dispatched to incidents in boundary areas. GGH has been quiet for the last 4 months. Several persons have been arrested relating to robberies at the trolley station near Imperial.

Brierton expressed sympathy over the recent officer shooting. Santini asked about increased homeless presence at I-5 and Pershing. Police are unable to pursue these people on CalTrans property. Sgt. Tony Lessa 619-744-9400 is the new officer in charge of this issue at Western division.

53rd Congressional District – Katherine Fortner: Distributed August Davis Dispatch. Davis supported the debt ceiling agreement. 2 events are scheduled in late August (1) Job Clinic (2) Home Mortgage Clinic.
City Council District 8 – Melina Meza: Distributed District 8 newsletter.
City Council District 3 – Anthony Bernal: Distributed copies of August District 3 Dialogue. Highlighted: MOU for Plaza De Panama Project was passed; infrastructure repair data is now on website; problems with construction contracts should be reported to D3 office; Kroll and others were acknowledged and thanked for their support in replacing sod at Grape St. Dog Park.
76th California Assembly District – Lindsey Masukawa: was not present
Mayor’s Office – no representative present.

CONSENT AGENDA – none
Baldwin asked D. Skillman to chair Land Use meeting on August 31, as he and Brierton will both be absent. Swarens voiced concern about the Land Use agenda being available; this is to be discussed at their next meeting.

CHAIR’S REPORT.
City Council Redistricting. Shields reported that she and several others had presented the GGHPC wish to remain in District 3 at redistricting hearing, but said that she now thinks our July motion was not correct. Midori Wong from the Redistricting Commission distributed information about the process and said the 5 hearings about the draft map had wrapped up on 8/9/11. Additional comments from these meetings and the public input that is still being accepted will be reviewed prior to announcement of the final map on 8/25/11.

Swarens asked if San Ysidro remains in Dist. 8. It does. Brierton said she shared Shields concern about GGH being in the district with Downtown. Wong said our motion (asking that Golden Hill be placed in the district with North Park and South Park) had played a part in deciding the boundaries, but that all who wish to make additional comments should do so. Kroll said the thought there was an advantage to having GGH split between two districts. Shields mentioned issues of (1) connectivity (2) communities of interest (3) language

Wong said Kensington/Talmage (KT) might be placed in the new District 9, or District 3. GGH might still be split between Districts 3 & 8. Thomas said the latest plan proposed by KT really splits our neighborhood. Burke said she had spoken with Strickland and they both have concerns about the current plan. Kroll asked about dividing GGH into GH and South Park. Shields said she thinks standing up to Downtown interests will be very difficult. Swarens said District 8 historically was able to stand up to Downtown. Thomas worries about being with Downtown, but is not fond of the KT plan, either. Shields said she had spoken with residents of KT who want to stay in District 3. M Skillman said a lot depends on the elected official, not the District boundaries. Baldwin favors North Park, South Park and Golden Hill in the same district, but not with Downtown.

Shields had received a telephone call from CCDC about a redistricting meeting, which she viewed as the start of Downtown power politics. Swarens commented that Voting Rights Issues are important, and the KT plan adds gerrymandering that was not in the draft map.

Kroll asked that we revote on the motion passed last month. Baldwin moved, Brierton seconded, “to keep Golden Hill be together with North Park and South Park, and not with Downtown.” Thomas wondered if having a second motion would be ruffling feathers. Burke and Vasconcellos agreed. Shields said it was too late in the process for us to draw our own map. Brierton withdrew her second of the motion. D Skillman asked the population of Downtown. Santini asked who wanted to be with Downtown. Shields said she thought Hillcrest and Uptown did.

Wong said if a change is requested, another alternative should be offered. Baldwin and Santini asked who wants 6-story buildings in GGH? Burke and Thomas said the Community Plan would protect us from that, with Thomas adding that development could be throughout the community. Baldwin thinks development will push its way up the hill from Downtown when money loosens. Swarrens said the arguments about similar communities could be met by District 3 as outlined in the draft map; the real issue may be with the strong mayor system.

A vote was taken on Baldwin’s motion: “Greater Golden Hill Planning Committee wishes that Golden Hill be together with North Park and South Park, and not with Downtown.” 7 voted in favor, 5 against, 2 abstained.

VICE-CHAIR’S REPORT. Alvarez had attended the CPC meeting. CPC will be having a special meeting in August to discuss SANDAG’s 2015 plan. San Diego City Schools will be getting rid of some property – a list will be available at the September meeting.

INFORMATION ITEMS: none

ACTION ITEMS:
25TH STREET RENAISSANCE. Brian Hannegan, RRM Design Group.
Hannegan introduced David Li, who is the City’s new manager for the project. Li said that the 12/8/10 concept plan had been approved, and as of May, RRM had submitted 60% of the required documents. CPC noted missing items and several meetings have occurred. An additional 7 items could be incorporated into the submitted plan, with our approval.

Hannegan had a Power Point presentation describing the 7 changes (see Attachment 2). He said they are rushing to get these additions approved so they are more competitive with construction documents for grants. Shields asked if these changes had been made in noticed meetings. Bernal said property owners had asked to give more input, to assure the best project would move forward. GGHCDC was involved. 14 elements had been discussed, and GGHPC is now being asked to approve the following changes (design refinements):

1. Eliminate extended parkways from B St to A St and increase bulb-out…B St intersection. Adjacent Property owners have to be support diagonal parking
2. ** Changing the sidewalk to colored concrete instead of standard grey concrete. (Color not yet determined)
3. ** Relocate existing Golden Hill Sign post to a small median between E St and F St (just north of alley)
4. ** Installing Golden Hill logo emblems in pavement at a few bulb-out sidewalk locations.
5. Change single corner curb ramps at B St. to include two curb ramps per corner for B St – Lose landscape area near curb ramps
6. Change crosswalk striping at B St. from basic stripe crosswalk to pattern striping
7. ** Eliminate extended parkways from A St to Russ Blvd and to include extending the Russ Blvd planted median to A St.
SYMBOLS: ** = Contingent upon GGH MAD being able to maintain improvements, pending 9/16/11 hearing

Burke gave some history on the recent meetings. She said she attended the May public meeting and found that many ideas had been left out of the proposal. She and several neighborhood people got together and wrote letters, and the meetings Bernal described resulted.

Shields said she is concerned that meetings were not open to all interested parties, including property owners. Burke said she thought all of these items had been discussed at earlier public meetings. Shields said she thinks (1) meetings were in private (2) property owners were not properly noticed (3) this meeting does not take both of these into account.

Swarens said he voted in December 2010 for a simplified proposal. Proposed changes might affect the Historic District. He does not like changes to the bulbouts, medians being used for signs, defining the street with a pedestrian ramp, and thinks the concrete color and pattern could disrupt the historic look of the area.

Kroll noted that 4 of the 7 items depend upon the MAD. They are Business Improvement District types of items – why aren’t the businesses paying for them? Burke said we should vote now and take up this plan, and all that it will do for the neighborhood, noting that City standards would be required to be followed. Brierton suggested that the draft motion included in the agenda be amended to include approval by property owners.

Baldwin noted that 25th Street is difficult to cross. Practicality calls for shorter crossings. M Skillman suggested that discussion be limited to items that must be clarified for the project to move forward. Hannegan said that Item #1 is the only one affecting the construction documents; the big issue for him is changes in the bulbouts at B Street and the character of the ramps on B Street.

Each change was voted on individually. Results were as follows:

#5. Yes 6, No 7, Abstained 1 DID NOT PASS
#3. Yes 5, No 7, Abstained 1 DID NOT PASS
#2. Yes 1, No 6, Abstained 7 DID NOT PASS
#1. Yes 10, No 2, Abstained 1 PASSED
#4. Yes 8, No 3, Abstained 3 PASSED
#6. Yes 10, No 3, Abstained 0 PASSED
#7. Yes 2, No 7, Abstained 5 DID NOT PASS


COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE. Shields proposed having a professional facilitator at future meetings to get things moving. She asked City Planner Bernie Turgeon when the draft plan would be available. He said parts of it should be ready in November, but broad outlines could be provided in the interim. He said there are no funds for facilitators – only non-personnel funds are currently available. Shields wants something to happen to get the process moving better.

Brierton noted that we voted 3 months ago for major changes to be brought before GGHPC as they come up. Turgeon said lots of changes in the general plan might not be obvious items of interest. Shields again stressed a need to move forward. Thomas said the focus group process seemed to be working. The two motions noted on the agenda were tabled.

The focus group report forwarded to GGHPC members by Rick Accurso, regarding PDO changes, will be discussed at the September meeting.

SOUTH PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT.
Historic Subcommittee Susan Bugbee had prepared the nomination forms for this district to be submitted to the City Historical Resources Department. General boundaries are 28th Street from A North to Elm, Elm East to 30th, then jogging south along Fern and Grove to Cedar, A Street West to 28th, excluding Albert Einstein school property. She noted that once the proposal is preliminarily approved, data on each property within the district would be compiled. Swarrens noted that this data compilation could result in changes to the boundaries.

Brierton called the question, seconded by M Skillman. Motion: “The Greater Golden Hill Planning Committee supports the submission of the preliminary nomination proposal for the creation of the South Park Historic District within the 1996 boundaries (attached) as defined by Donaldson, et al. “ 12 voted Yes, 2 abstained.

SUBCOMMITTEE & LIASON REPORTS.
Transportation Subcommittee: Has not met.
Historic: will be meeting once the City has reviewed the nomination forms
Balboa Park: Strickland was absent
Airport Noise: No report
Land Use: Information items only: Urban Chickens.

The next meeting will be Wednesday, September 14 at 6:30 pm.

Shields adjourned meeting at 9:06 pm.

Marie Skillman.
Secretary

ATTACHMENT 1. MEETING AGENDA

GREATER GOLDEN HILL PLANNING COMMITTEE
August 10, 2011 at 6:30 P.M.
Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse at 2600 Golf Course Drive
http://www.gghpc.blogspot.com
Monthly Meeting


6:30 CALL TO ORDER – please be punctual
a) Additions/Deletions to Agenda
1. Approval of Minutes
2. Treasurer’s Report & Pass-the-Hat

6:40 PUBLIC COMMENT

6:50 GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS

7:00 CONSENT AGENDA : None
i.Land Use Sub-Committee report. Baldwin

7:00 CHAIR’S REPORT
ii.Redistricting

7:05 VICE-CHAIRS REPORT
iii.CPC Meeting including City Schools‘ plan for surplus school properties.

7:10 INFORMATION ITEMS:

7:10 ACTION ITEMS:
a) 25th Street Renaissance Project. City staff has requested approval of additional features beyond those approved December 2010. David Li and Brian Hannegan

Motion: GGHPC approves the following additional features to the 25th Street Renaissance Project Concept Plan Approved August 2010:
Increase bulb-out at B Street and include diagonal back-in parking spaces north of B street intersection.
Changing the sidewalk to colored concrete instead of standard grey concrete. (Color not yet determined)
Relocate existing Golden Hill Sign post to a small median between E Street and F Street (just north of alley)
Install Golden Hill logo emblems in pavement at a few bulb-out locations.
Change single corner curb ramps at B Street to include two curb ramps per corner for B Street.
Change crosswalk striping at B Street from basic stripe crosswalk to ladder stripping.
Eliminate extended parkways from B Street to Russ Blvd and to include extending the Russ Blvd planted median to A Street.

b) Community Plan Update

a.Motion: The GGH Planning Committee adopts the expansion of the current PDO to all of Greater Golden Hill as the preferred method to guide further development and preserve community character. Rick Accurso
b.Motion: The GGH Planning Committee requests the City provide a contract facilitator for the remaining CPUAC meetings. Shields

c) South Park Historic District. The historic subcommittee has prepared the preliminary nomination proposal for submission to the city to create the South Park historic district within the 1996 boundaries defined by Donaldson et al.

Motion: The Greater Golden Hill Planning Committee supports the submission of the preliminary nomination proposal for the creation of the South Park Historic District within the 1996 boundaries (attached) as defined by Donaldson, et al.

8:50 SUBCOMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS
a) Airport Noise – Carole Caffey
b) Balboa Park Committee - David Strickland
c) Graffiti Hotline – 619 525-8522
d) Community Planners Committee (CPC) – Ruchell Alvarez
e) Community Plan Update Advisory Committee – City Planner Report
f) Historic – Susan Bugbee
g) Transportation – David Strickland

9:00 ADJOURN MEETING



Note: Land-Use Subcommittee. Confirm mtg/agenda. Richard Baldwin(kimorb_1999@yahoo.com)
Last Wednesday of the Month at 6:30PM
Location: Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse at 2600 Golf Course Drive

Historic Subcommittee. Confirm mtg/agenda. Susan Bugbee (bugbee@sandiego.edu)
1st Tuesday of the Month at 6:30pm
Location: 1724 29th Street (between Date & Elm)

*Times are estimates – Action Items may also be taken before Information Items

The City of San Diego distributes agendas via email and can also provide agendas in alternative formats as well as a sign language or oral interpreter for the meeting with advance notice. To request these services, please contact the City at 619-236-6479 or SDPlanningGroups@sandiego.gov.


GOVERNMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES:

• Community Police Officer – Suzy de la Pena [744.9514 orsdelapena@pd.sandiego.gov ]
• Council District 3 – Anthony Bernal [236-6633 or abernal@sandiego.gov]
• Council District 8 – Melinda Meza. melinam@sandiego.gov. [236-6688]
• Mayor’s Office – Denice Garcia [236-7056 or deniceg@sandiego.gov]
• 53rd Congressional Dist. – Katherine Fortner [280-5353] Katherine.Fortner@mail.house.gov]
• City Planner – Bernard Turgeon [533-6575 or bturgeon@sandiego.gov]

Attachment 2

Here is a link to the 25th Street Renaissance Presentation,

25thStPresentation on Google Docs

July 13, 2011 Minutes

GREATER GOLDEN HILL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 13, 2011

Meeting Agenda is found in Attachment 1 at the end of these minutes.
Meeting was held at Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse – Golf Course Drive.
Chair Pat Shields called meeting to order at 6:33 pm. Agenda had been posted in accordance with Brown Act. A quorum of members was present.

Members present: Ruchell Alvarez, Richard Baldwin, Cheryl Brierton, Susan Bugbee, Maureen Burke, Carole Caffey, John Kroll, Pat Shields, David Skillman, Marie Skillman, David Strickland, David Swarens, Matt Thomas, Members absent: Richard Santini, Angela Vasconcellos, Jessica Wolf.
Addition/deletions to Agenda - None.
Approval of Minutes – Minutes of 6/8/11 meeting were approved (motion Brierton, second D Skillman) 12 in favor, none opposed, Burke abstained.
Treasurer’s Report: – balance remains the same.

GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS.
Community Police Officer- Suzy de la Pena: Reported two incidents South of imperial: (1) on 7/3 a developmentally disabled person was molested – male perpetrator has been found (2) 4 incidents of inappropriate touching by a male jogger. Introduced Lt. Dave Mitchell, who is taking over from Lt. Murphy in this area.

INFORMATION ITEM (b) SDPD Police Position on Western Division Boundary in So. Park. Police Captain Jones spoke about the Police Beat Restructuring that has been proposed as a result of the Dept.’s looking for more effective used of resources. They decided to leave Juniper Street as the northern boundary of the division. They feel officers from Western Division can respond to the area faster than from Central Division.

Thomas asked if the entire department was being realigned. The proposal is being assessed and changes will be made. Capt. Jones said restructuring that took place in the 1990’s had worked well to reduce crime. Burke noted that it seems odd that the small area north and west of Juniper to Switzer Canyon, geographically connected to the rest of South Park, is not in the same beat. Capt. Jones said that response times are best from the Western Division. D Skillman asked if a beat map was available. Capt. Jones had one with him. Kathryn Willetts offered to post it at the Greater Golden Hill CDC office.

Thomas said that businesses in the area are concerned about coverage. Police officials agreed to attend the South Park Business Association meeting July 27 to discuss the situation. Swarens noted that the issue was brought to GGHPC by SPBG. Shields said that geographical logic goes to changing the boundaries.

GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS continued.
City Council District 3 – Todd Gloria: Distributed copies of July District 3 Dialogue. Gloria said he backs the police decision on the boundaries. He said Police Department is not one of the city services up for privatization. He noted that the closest officer, regardless of Division, responds to an incident. Mid-City boundaries would be changing in the North Park area.

Gloria noted that (1) City Budget was passed with fire department brownouts eliminated, libraries and recreation center closings avoided (2) City is being asked to make a $70 million payment to the State from redevelopment funds, $7 million of this coming from District 3 projects. San Diego and several other cities plan to sue the State of California over the new redevelopment law. (3) New business in South Park – Stone Brewery (4) Resodding of Dog Park is happening; Dist. 3 is matching private funds from park users.

Thomas said he thought crime data statistics would help reassure businesses near the Juniper boundary. De La Pena said they are available on ARGIS system; and are based upon calls received. We should always call if there is something to report. Burke thanked Gloria for his support on the 25th Street Renaissance project, which is being re-energized. She reminded Gloria that a cap over Hwy. 94 is desired.

City Council District 8 – Melina Meza: Distributed flyers about the Water Reuse Program, and noted that she can help arrange tours of the demonstration project.

76th California Assembly District – Lindsey Masukawa: State budget was passed with many cuts including redevelopment and education. Select Committee on Homeless will be meeting in San Diego on 7/20.

Shields is concerned about sober living facilities for 6 or under; Gloria has talked to Police Chief Lansdowne about the issue. Masukawa explained that the State is turning the tracking of non-violent parolees over to local governments, and funding provided is not necessarily adequate. Atkins is working to improve the situation. Shields said that citizens and service providers need a seat at the table for these discussions.

53rd Congressional District – Katherine Fortner: Distributed July Davis Dispatch, and flyers about Grant Writing Training. Public meetings scheduled this month include 7/19 interactive meeting on Federal Budget and 7/22 Protecting Medicare Forum.

Brierton asked if Greater Golden Hill would remain in Davis’ district after the federal redistricting. Fortner said that representatives are not part of the process – outcome is presently uncertain.

Mayor’s Office – no representative present.

PUBLIC COMMENT. None
CONSENT AGENDA. None
CHAIR’S REPORT. Shields said that GGHPC is an advisory group to the City. She is triaging presenters, hoping to give the committee enough time for discussion and taking positions if desired.

INFORMATION ITEM (a) REDISTRICTING. Chief of Staff Midori Wong: Final draft map is not yet available, several are being studied. Shields asked if GGH status is stabilized; some maps proposed putting us with City Heights. Caffey said some maps had put GGH with District 8. A district boundary from Hwy 94 North makes sense to her, putting all of GGH in one district, and asked what we could do at this point. Wong suggested GGHPC take a stand on the draft map when it becomes available next week. Public comment is to be taken at meetings between 7/26 and 8/3. Burke noted that this is a short comment period. Shields said all of the meetings take place before GGHPC next meeting.

Shields polled the committee: Do we want to take a position? Majority in favor. Shields asked if our position was that the southern boundary should be Hwy 94. Brierton moved, D Skillman seconded, that an emergency item be considered. Motion passed.

Caffey offered a motion on her position, seconded by D. Skillman. Kroll asked what the other boundaries would be. Willits said that having 2 council members representing the community has historically been helpful. She noted that demographics in the south part of GH are different, more similar to Downtown. Swarens agreed that split representation has advantages.

Brierton called the question – 10 in favor, 3 abstained

The motion was stated: “Greater Golden Hill Planning Committee recommends to the City Redistricting Commission that Golden Hill be included in the District that includes South Park and North Park.” 10 voted in favor, 3 abstained.

Secretary M Skillman will notify the City Redistricting Committee of this vote.

SUBCOMMITTEE & LIASON REPORTS.
Transportation Subcommittee: Has not met.
Historic: South Park Historic District application will be discussed at August GHPC meeting. Volunteers are sought for doing the survey work, once the application has been processed.
Balboa Park: Did not meet in July
Airport Noise: Meets next week
Land Use: Information items only: Urban Chickens, a troubled property owner.


INFORMATION ITEM (c) CalTran/SR-94 HOV/BRT Project.
Ron Caraet, outgoing project manager, introduced incoming project manager Andrew Rice and associates Jenne and Truedau. The current proposal is to add one HOV/BRT lane in each direction on Hwy 94. One ramp has been dropped. Original map and 2 with alternatives currently under consideration were shown.

Alt. 1 would place the 2 new lanes on a bridge from Hwy 805 over Hwy 94, over existing Home Avenue ramps, ending just east of Hwy 15. Interchanges at Hwy 94 and Hwy 15 would be changed to standard exits. Eastbound ramp to Hwy 94 at 32nd Street, westbound Hwy 94 loop ramp from northbound Hwy 15, and the currently existing exit lane on southbound Hwy 94 to Market Street would be eliminated. This would eliminate the dangerous left lane exit from 94 east to 15 south, which the Committee saw favorably, but would eliminate the exit from 15 north to 94 west, the 30th street onramp to 94 east, and the Market Street exit to 15, which the Committee saw as decreasing access options for GGH residents.
Alt. 2 would place the 2 new lanes on a bridge from Hwy 805 to 25th Street. Interchanges at Hwy 94 and Hwy 15 would be not be changed. This alternative had adverse noise, air quality and view impacts for GGH.

Rick Accurso asked about the 94/15 ramp closure. Caraet said the loop is too tight as currently configured. Swarens likes changing the 94/15 interchanges; wonders what the right of way changes are. Caraet showed the areas that must be purchased on the map. He said only a few buildings would be impacted. D Skillman asked if these maps are available online – they are not as they are undergoing changes. Final draft is not due until May 2013. Brierton expressed concern about noise. Thomas asked how high above exiting Hwy 94 the bridges would be – 16 ft. M Skillman said many views would be lost. Caraet said they had heard lots of ideas and were preparing a package for SANDAG to review.

Willetts distributed a handout about an Urban Park over SR 94, a cut & cover from 22nd to 25th Streets. She said this type of project is being done around the country to recover community space lost in freeway construction over the decades. She was asked to come back to GGHPC in October to discuss further. Burke said GGH has no parks currently.

Brierton asked if our comments at this meeting would be taken into consideration. Caraet said the two alternatives he described are being carried forward. Thomas asked if the cut & cover at 25th Street was being taken seriously. Rice said price for construction (without landscaping) would add $50 million (2 blocks) to $85 million (3 blocks) to the cost of the project. Currently, only funding for the environmental reports is in place. The alternatives are being forwarded to SANDAG for approval of further funding.

Brierton asked about the need for this project. Rice said it is part of HOV/BRT project from South Bay all the way north on Hwy 805. Baldwin said he thought the half a billion-dollar cost of this project would be better spent for additional rail. Caraet said trolleys on wheels are part of SANDAG’s plan, which uses existing right-of-ways. Rail would require additional real estate, and has more grade issues. Burke asked what the commute time saving from this project would be for South Bay residents. Caraet said SANDAG & MTS plan to have buses run at 10-minute intervals. Shields asked Caraet to send her the actual time savings figures. D Skillman asked about access points from Southeast San Diego, since none were shown in original plan. Caraet said that SANDAG had committed to a study and another station. Swarens voiced his concern about air quality and noise standards for the cut & cover, and wondered what uses would be allowed on the aboveground part. Shields is concerned about impacts to local traffic flow.

ACTION ITEMS.
a) Community Plan Update. Shields said she was planning to have discussions at upcoming meetings where PC would take a stand on CP issues. Turgeon said he supports moving the process forward.

b) Results from survey and assessment of park and recreation needs for GGH, NP & Uptown.
Howard Greenstein from City Planning explained that a scientific survey was needed, in addition to all of the community input from meetings and charettes, to inform the Recreation Element of the Community Plan.
BW Research was hired to take the scientific survey about usage, priorities and future development of parks and recreation. The telephone survey (land line and cell phones) was done during March 2011. The presentation would show the results of the survey. Similar presentations will be made to PC in North Park and Uptown, and to the Balboa Park Committee.

Josh Williams from BW Research distributed copies of his PowerPoint presentation and the full report including questions. Both reports will be available on the City website. Among the results: 54% of GGH residents use neighborhood parks or outdoor areas at least weekly. 54% are very satisfied with these facilities. Expanding existing trails and updating facilities was preferred over developing new ones. 74% see Balboa Park as a regional park as well as serving local needs. For complete results, see http://www.sandiego.gov/planning/community/profiles/greatergoldenhill/index.shtml

Brierton asked if Balboa Park had been defined in the survey to include the Golf Course area, because she believed that GGH residents did not all perceive this to be part of Balboa Park, yet all wanted more access to trails for bikes & pedestrians in the southeast area. Williams said such information is limited in a telephone survey. Burke asked where to send feedback on the survey. Greenstein said he would accept it at hgreenstein@sandiego.gov Willetts asked if addresses of respondents could be identified. Williams said they are only by neighborhood or Zip code.

Shields asked if there could be another presentation of this information to our group. Greenstein said that was not practical, but comments could be taken to the presentation at the Balboa Park Committee on 8/4. Swarens said comments on the product (survey) should go to City planners. Brierton was concerned that this survey would be used to override the extensive community planning input received for over a year, concerning the GGH residents' desire to have greater access to Balboa Park from the southeast area, where the Park borders on South Park and Golden Hill, for pedestrian and bike trails. Turgeon said planners would consider all of the information, not just this survey.

a) Community Plan Update, continued. Shields asked Accurso to read through the comments the focus group had compiled about Balboa Park. The comments, with references to the East Mesa Precise Plan, had been circulated to GGHPC members in advance, and can be found in Attachment 2 of these minutes. Members were asked to vote on whether each comment should be forwarded to City planners as reflecting the view of the committee.
- Install a Pedestrian/Bicycle path on the eastern edge of the park (28th street alignment) between Date and Maple. Yes 11, No 1, Abstain 1
- Provide safe walkways and bike paths, particularly along Golf Course Drive. Yes 13
- The portion of the City Operations Station north of Russ Boulevard is dedicated parkland. Develop the Pershing Recreation Complex at that location for active recreation. Yes 12, Abstain 1
- Preserve the historic fountain in Golden Hill Park. Yes 13

Several comments related to pedestrian and bicycle paths in the park. Alvarez and Kroll expressed concern about the number of paths suggested. Concern about exact locations and wording of the comments was voiced. Deborah Sharpe, a project officer from the Park Planning Section in Development Services Division at the City, said that the City has a set of suitability criteria for trails that would be applied to any improvements or additional trails. After receiving this information, members voted on these 4 comments together, Yes 11, Abstain 2
- Provide a pedestrian/bicycle path along Russ Boulevard between 28th and 26th. Near 28th Street, follow the golf course fence line and bridge over the small canyon.
- Provide pedestrian and bicycle paths from Golden Hill Park to the Pershing Recreation Complex.
- Continue the sidewalk along Russ Boulevard from 26th to 24th.
- Provide a pedestrian/bicycle path along Pershing to allow access to the Pershing Recreation Complex, the Florida Canyon and Balboa Park area from the vicinity of 19th and B Streets.

The remaining comments require fuller discussion at future meetings: - Install a low fence around the dog park at Grape Street Park. Set aside a portion of the park for other activities such as a children's playground. - Create a gateway feature at the entrance to Golden Hill Park. -Remove the existing fence along Russ between 25th and 24th.
Comments the focus group compiled relating to PDO and Zoning will be discussed in a similar manner at the next meeting.

c) Discussion of Plaza de Panama. Shields said she wanted GGHPC to have the opportunity to officially comment on the Jacobs project. It was on the June agenda, but we were given information at that time was that the project was not going forward, after the Memorandum of Understanding failed to receive a positive recommendation at the Rules Committee. The full City Council will be voting on the MOU next week.

Strickland said he wanted GGHPC to wait to vote until the matter of the MOU was decided. If the MOU does not pass, there won’t be a project to vote on. Since the EIR is going through the process, he felt we should wait to vote on those alternatives.

Shields wanted us to vote. Brierton agreed. Swarens said he wanted our vote to inform the City Council vote.

Motion 1 was amended to read “To oppose the “bypass bridge” off of the historic Cabrillo Bridge embodied in the current Jacobs plan for Balboa Park” Vote was Yes 10, No 3

Motion 2, relating to closure of the Cabrillo Bridge, was pulled once it became clear that we had incomplete information about those plans.

Bruce Coons of Save Our Heritage Organisation thanked us for the vote. Secretary M Skillman will prepare correspondence for the Chair to forward to all City Council members and the Mayor’s office.

The next meeting will be Wednesday, August 10 at 6:30 pm.

Shields adjourned meeting at 9:15 pm.

Marie Skillman.
Secretary





ATTACHMENT 1. MEETING AGENDA
GREATER GOLDEN HILL PLANNING COMMITTEE
July 13, 2011 at 6:30 P.M.
Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse at 2600 Golf Course Drive
http://www.gghpc.blogspot.com
Monthly Meeting


6:30 CALL TO ORDER – please be punctual
a) Additions/Deletions to Agenda
1. Approval of Minutes
2. Treasurer’s Report & Pass-the-Hat

6:40 PUBLIC COMMENT

6:50 GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS

7:00 CONSENT AGENDA : None

7:00 CHAIR’S REPORT

7:10 INFORMATION ITEMS:
a) Redistricting. Tentative Map. Midori Wong
b) SDPD Police position on Western Division Boundary in So. Park
c) Caltrans/SR-94 HOV/BRT Project. Staff update & Community input

8:00 ACTION ITEMS:
a) Community Plan Update process. Progress report and interim procedures for community input through the full Planning Committee. Turgeon/Shields
b) Results from the survey and assessment of park and recreation needs for the Greater Golden Hill, North Park and Uptown Community Plan Updates - Howard Greenstein, City Planning, Josh Williams, BW Research Partnership.
c) Discussion of Plaza de Panama
Motion: To oppose the “bypass bridge” off of the historic Cabrillo Bridge embodied in the Jacobs plan for Balboa Park.
Motion: The committee finds any closure of Cabrillo Bridge will be highly detrimental to citizen access to the Park and the efficient operations of Park institutions. Therefore the committee strongly opposes the proposed closure of Cabrillo Bridge.

8:50 SUBCOMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS
a) Airport Noise – Carole Caffey
b) Balboa Park Committee - David Strickland
c) Graffiti Hotline – 619 525-8522
d) Community Planners Committee (CPC) – Ruchell Alvarez
e) Community Plan Update Advisory Committee – City Planner Report
f) Historic – Susan Bugbee
g) Transportation – David Strickland

9:00 ADJOURN MEETING



Note: Land-Use Subcommittee. Confirm mtg/agenda. Richard Baldwin(kimorb_1999@yahoo.com)
Last Wednesday of the Month at 6:30PM
Location: Balboa Park Golf Course Clubhouse at 2600 Golf Course Drive

Historic Subcommittee. Confirm mtg/agenda. Susan Bugbee (bugbee@sandiego.edu)
1st Tuesday of the Month at 6:30pm
Location: 1724 29th Street (between Date & Elm)

*Times are estimates – Action Items may also be taken before Information Items

The City of San Diego distributes agendas via email and can also provide agendas in alternative formats as well as a sign language or oral interpreter for the meeting with advance notice. To request these services, please contact the City at 619-236-6479 or SDPlanningGroups@sandiego.gov.


GOVERNMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES:

a) Community Police Officer – Suzy de la Pena [744.9514 orsdelapena@pd.sandiego.gov ]
b) Council District 3 – Anthony Bernal [236-6633 or abernal@sandiego.gov]
c) Council District 8 – Melinda Meza. melinam@sandiego.gov. [236-6688]
d) Mayor’s Office – Denice Garcia [236-7056 or deniceg@sandiego.gov]
e) 53rd Congressional Dist. – Katherine Fortner [280-5353] Katherine.Fortner@mail.house.gov]
f) City Planner – Bernard Turgeon [533-6575 or bturgeon@sandiego.gov]



Attachment 2. BALBOA PARK COMMENTS

Draft 6/23/11:
Balboa Park recommendations
On May 14, 2011, five members of the CPUAC (Marie and David Skillman, Maureen Burke, David Swarens and Rick Accurso) met informally to review the Balboa Park comments from the CPUAC Meetings 1-5 matrix and the Charrette matrix. We drew up a list of recommendations for the park that we think have merit and which we believe reflect the main themes in the public comments. Subsequent review of the 1993 Balboa Park East Mesa Precise Plan revealed that the majority of our recommendations were anticipated in the Precise Plan (excerpts included).
Install a Pedestrian/Bicycle path on the eastern edge of the park
(28th street alignment) between Date and Maple.
Install pedestrian/bicycle trails to connect between Date and Maple Streets. Construct pedestrian and bicycle bridges within the canyons as necessary. The character of the bridges should follow the craftsman style of the adjacent neighborhoods utilizing materials related to the landscape of the Park such as cobbles,- concrete, and steel pole rails. The bridges should be small scale, intended to span drainage ways and steep portions of the canyons. (page IV-64)
Install a low fence around the dog park at Grape Street Park. Set aside a portion of the park for other activities such as a children's playground.
Construct five play areas for children, geared for different ages throughout the Neighborhood Edge. Each area shall include children's play equipment and seating for accompanying adults. [...] the fourth is in the Grape Street Park [...] (page IV-62)
Provide a pedestrian/bicycle path along Russ Boulevard between 28th and 26th. Near 28th Street, follow the golf course fence line and bridge over the small canyon.
Provide sidewalks along Russ Boulevard from 28th Street to the Golden Hill Recreation Center, bridging over the small canyon. (page IV-63) Provide low level pathway lighting to supplement the dispersed street lighting.
Lighting cut-off design should be cognizant of residential neighborhood intrusion. (page IV-65)
Provide safe walkways and bike paths, particularly along Golf Course Drive.
Provide a pedestrian sidewalk and bicycle lanes along Golf Course Drive. (page IV-93)
Bicycle lanes will be 7 feet wide at a minimum, 8 feet preferred where the right-of-way is adequate. Bicycle Lanes will be along:Pershing Drive, entire length 26th Street Florida Drive Zoo Place Morley Field Drive
Golf Course Drive (IV-113)
The portion of the City Operations Station north of Russ Boulevard is dedicated parkland. Develop the Pershing Recreation Complex at that location for active recreation.
The City Operations Station currently occupies what will be the Pershing Recreation Complex. [...] The portion south of Russ Boulevard will remain as the City Operations Station, accessed from 20th and B Street, as this segment is not dedicated parkland. (page IV-95) The Balboa Park Master Plan designates the land of the City Operations Station, north of Russ Boulevard, to be reclaimed for public park use. The recommendation
of the East Mesa Precise Plan is to utilize this area for active recreation and as an attractive entrance to the East Mesa from downtown and Interstate 5. (page IV-95)
The Precise Plan includes recommendations such as: relocating the velodrome to the Pershing Complex; construction of a soccer field; parking for 218 cars; a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Pershing to Inspiration Point and the Central Mesa; ponds, picnic tables and a playground.
Provide pedestrian and bicycle paths from Golden Hill Park to the Pershing Recreation Complex.
Construct and maintain three pedestrian/bicycle trails to link the Golden Hill area with the Pershing Recreation Complex in the valley below. Two trails should provide access unimpaired by stairs while the third, at the southern edge of the Park should have short segments of stairs to provide direct access. The maximum
grade of the two northern trails is to be eight percent, with sections at five percent wherever possible. Each of these trails should be paved with asphalt because of the anticipated high frequency of use, and sloped for proper drainage. (page IV-86)
Create a gateway feature at the entrance to Golden Hill Park.
Create a neighborhood oriented gateway feature at the entrance to Golden Hill Park, near the intersection of 25th Street and Russ Boulevard. In light of security concerns, the new feature should not be a reconstruction of the historic gazebo once found in the area but possibly a small plaza, fountain, or work of public art.
(page IV-84)
Continue the sidewalk along Russ Boulevard from 26th to 24th.
Remove the existing fence along Russ between 25th and 24th.
Provide concrete sidewalks along Russ Boulevard from the Golden Hill Recreation Center west to the paved trails of Golden Hill. (page IV-87)
Preserve the historic fountain in Golden Hill Park.
Preserve the old stone fountain at the head of the southwestern canyon in a state of "arrested decay" until the area has reached a level of security that would reinforce its protection. Utilize photographs from the historical society and informationoffered by the members of the Golden Hill Community and the San Diego Historical Society to follow the original character when restoration is implemented.New plumbing, circulatory system, electricity, and a new source of water will be required. Consider reclaimed water when available. (page IV-84)
Provide a pedestrian/bicycle path along Pershing to allow access to the Pershing Recreation Complex and the Florida Canyon area from the vicinity of 19th and B Streets.
Although this is outside of Balboa Park it's an important park access issue.