From:Cynthia Replogle
To:City Council
Subject:Agenda Item 11.A — GP/LCP Update and Final EIR
Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 3:25:35 PM
External Email
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
I am a Pismo Heights resident and write to identify what I believe is a foundational data gap in the GP/LCP update, and to raise questions regarding the Safety Element update.
I. The Plan Lacks an Occupancy Profile of the Existing Housing Stock The GP/LCP projects 1,111 new residential units and approximately 1,979 new residents through 2040. Its analysis of population growth, infrastructure needs, evacuation capacity, environmental justice, and the balance between resident and visitor needs all rest on those projections.
However, the plan contains no analysis of a foundational question: what fraction of Pismo Beach's existing residential units are primary residences, and what fraction are vacation homes, second homes, or investment properties whose owners are present intermittently or not at all? I can speak to this from direct personal knowledge. Two houses across the streets from my corner lot are second homes visited occasionally. The adjacent house to the north of mine has been vacant for over four years and its owner lives in Las Vegas. This pattern is not unique to my neighborhood, and the City seemingly has no formal accounting of its extent or its implications for the assumptions underlying this document.
For most cities this might be a secondary concern. For Pismo Beach — a coastal tourist destination whose entire planning vision is built around managing the tension between resident quality of life and visitor experience — it is a foundational one. The plan cannot accurately characterize that tension, or plan coherently for the community's future, without knowing who actually lives here.
II. The Safety Element Update
Staff has indicated the Safety Element update is not expected to be complete until end of 2027 — more than three years after it was extracted from this package. Will the Council establish a formal milestone commitment as a condition of tonight's adoption? The 2022 Safety Element draft addressed wildfire hazard and acknowledged Pismo Heights' limited access, but contained no evacuation route capacity analysis. Will the Safety Element update include the evacuation route capacity analysis required by SB 99 for Pismo Heights and other neighborhoods with limited accessibility? Will it address nonprimary residence occupancy patterns as a factor in peak evacuation load?
Thank you for your consideration of these comments and questions.
Best,
Cynthia Replogle
Pronouns: she/her/hers
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.