M EMQRAN DLJ M CityofPoway
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS
(Agenda Related Writ ings/Documents provided to City Council or Staff after distribution of the Agenda Packet for the September 16, 2025 Council Meeting) DATE:
TO:
FROM:
CONTACT:
SUBJECT:
September 16, 2025
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Carrie Gallagher, City Clerk ~
(858) 668-4535 or cgallagher@po« ay.org
Public Comment
Attached please find correspondence received after the agenda posting deadline.
Reviewed/Approved By:
w~~e~
Assistant City Manager
1 of 10
Reviewed By:
Alan Fenstermacher
City Attorney
Approved By:
Chr~
City Manager
September 16, 2025, Public Comment
HOMES AND PROPERTY ARE AT RISK DUE TO THE CONDINTION OF THE STROM DRAINAGE CHANNEL; DISCUSSION BELOW ONLY COVERS THE
SECTION OF THE CHANNEL WHICH RUNS BEHIND RIVERBEND RD AND RIVERBEND CT.
The absence of any maintenance has elevated the condition of the channel to a dangerous level. The city does not maintain the channel. I have lived on Riverbend Court for over 35 years. I was contacted by representatives of the Public Works department in 2023 and was informed that ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN THROUGH THE HAZARDOUS TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM, only to learn that the plan was to shred the trees and distribute the wood chips in the drainage area which adds to the current problem. My property borders the channel running between Riverbend Ct and Espola Rd. The length of this section is less than 10% of the total length of this section of the channel so totals are likely 1 O times higher.
TONS OF DEBRIS IN THE CHANNEL
I have been removing accumulated debris from this channel, about 500 pounds of debris per week (over a ton per month). I have removed over 16 tons of debris from the area behind my home over the last two years. There is no mention of any clearing of debris. The channel was plugged during the heavy rains of 2023 due to channel debris.
DEAD TREES
There are over 10 dead trees behind my property (trunk diameters greater than three inches.) I was told IN 2023 that removals were suspended and would be covered by the HAZARDOUS TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM. Only one of these dead trees has visible markings. It is not clear if any of these dead trees will be removed by the current plan. The current plan does not include the channel behind Riverbend Rd.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
2 of10 September 16, 2025, Public Comment
Dear Mayor Vaus and Poway City Council Members, City Manager Chris Hazeltine and Director of Development Services Julie Procopio.
Poway Voices supports an ordinance requiring Council approval of MDRAs subject to hillside/ridgeline review
Status prior to rescinding resolution No. 85-019
One of the reasons Poway incorporated in 1980 was to protect hillsides and ridgelines from development and the city's initial General Plan included objectives and policies to address this. In April 1985 the City council passed resolution No. 85-019; a resolution of the City Council of the City of Poway, California, requiring minor development review application (MORA) approval by the City Council for ridgeline developments. More specifically, "major topographical features" identified in the City's first General Plan, adopted by the City in September 1983, contained objectives and policies with respect to "hillside residential design". Thus, ridgeline development (for prominent ridgelines and hilltops) required city council approval and was included in the city council regular agenda.
A general plan update in 1991 identified additional strategies to further protect the city's significant topographical features.
The goals of the resolution were to preserve sensitive areas and maintain their environmental integrity by ensuring stricter oversight of development projects. Ideally natural features, wildlife habitats and sensitive ecosystems, protected by state and federal environmental laws, could be conserved. Avoiding ridge line building also prevented "visual scarring" of the natural landscape. Key to the resolution was the requirement for the City Council to have final approval and to guarantee that any development aligns closely with community standards, the General Plan, and provide critical opportunities for citizens to participate in the process. The resolution also promoted a level of trust in local governance.
Status following the rescinding of resolution No. 85-019 In February 2013 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-001 whereby Resolution 85-019 was rescinded and consequently no longer in effect. The resolution was proposed by then Deputy Major John Mullin and passed in a three (Vaus, Higginson, Mullin) to two (Grosch, Cunningham) vote of City Council. The proponent of the resolution made the case that the change would allow for streamlining the process by eliminating the City Council review step. In addition, there was a claim, without data, that implied the streamlining would save a significant amount of staff time. Data was presented noting that during the period from 2007 to 2012, 19 reviews were undertaken, and all were approved. This was viewed as an argument to eliminate the City Council review step when in fact it merely demonstrates that the review process was working. Support for rescinding resolution 85-019, in addition to Deputy Mayor Mullin, Mayor Higginson and Councilor Vaus came from two developers including Deputy Mayor Mullin's brother-in-law who at the time was a developer in the City of Poway. Opposition came from Councilor's Grosch and Cunningham and several citizens. Citizen objections were focused on the 3 of 10 September 16, 2025, Public Comment
potential impact on quality of life and what was viewed as a change to a system that was working well. Indeed, paraphrasing objections, "why should the city acquiesce to the demands of the few (developers)" and ignore the general public. Several opponents mentioned that ridge line development, by its nature, is visible from a significant distance and not just the immediate neighborhood. This last comment is particularly important since the notification system for such MDRAs is now only sent to households within 500 feet of the proposed development. This system is obviously flawed and not appropriate for a development on a ridgeline that can be seen from miles away. Examples of the failure of this process include the Amazon building on Scripps Poway Parkway which was administratively/ministerially approved by the Director of Development Services, without the required ridgeline/hillside review. Many residents only became aware once construction was completed.
In conclusion Poway Voices gives our unequivocal support to Councilor Maeda's proposal to restore Resolution No. 85-019 and we believe that this support is consistent with our desire for greater transparency and public participation in the decision making process.
4 of10
Sincerely,
Nick Carruthers, Chris Cruse, Alison Park, Jana Johnson, Torrey Powers, Lori Grennan and Eric Weller
September 16, 2025, Public Comment
What we like about Poway Ridgelines
Pomerado Road Looking West Twin Peaks from Silverset Park What we hate about neighboring cities - Sabre Springs/Poway Road Where Poway is going wrong
Williams Ranch Subdivision
5 of 10
The Amazon Building
September 16, 2025, Public Comment
-·c:; ~
C: -~
:::s > 0 Cl)
(.) '-
C) ~
C: ·-·- -'- Cl)
·- C)
:::s -c
er ·-a, '-
'- CD
Cl) -c O·-
C: !!l.
1'1"111! -\\I ·-
c: .c: ·--c 0
'- +'
0 +'
C: 0 Cl) n:s .....
u, .c
~~ a. u,
a.<C
::::s ~
u, C
u, :E
Cl) ~
-~ 0
~ ni
~ > n:s e
~ a.
0 a. a.. n:s
6 of10
-c ca
0 ~
>-ca
~
0 a. ........
tn
C)
C:
■-I■•
c..
(/)
Cl)
I■•
.c ca
(/)
7 of10
co
0 .... ....
0 V,
ti)
"C ....
ti)
3 C"
ti)
... ....
. en
N
0 N u,
'"ti
C:
C"
n
n
0 3
3 ti)
:::, ....
April 1985 - City Passed Resolution 85-019
► Required MORA approval by city council for prominent ridgelines and hilltops ► General Plan update in 1991 identified additional strategies to protect the city's significant topographical features
►
Benefits
► Preserved sensitive areas
► Prevented ridgeline scaring
Ensured that development aligned closely with community standards ► Provided critical opportunities for citizen participation ► Promoted a level of trust in local governance
\D
0 .... ...
0 February 2013 - City Passed Resolution 13-001
Rescinding Resolution 85-019
► Eliminated the city council review step
Arguments in favor Arguments against
• Streamlining process • Why change a system that worked ~ • Saved time • Why should the city acquiesce to the
demands of a few (developers)
-c ....
tD
3 C"
tD
-~ • Saved money
N
0 N
_u,
"'0
C:
C"
n
n
0 3
3 tD
:::, ....
• Ridgeline development has visual
impact well beyond the 500 ft
notification radius
...
0 0 .... ...
0 Williams Ranch
How has this worked out?
The Amazon Building
-:.
L~- ~; I~ -~St..1':~~I ~;•i -:.1,~ ~':.:1,r#A ··-- · •-·--·~a, il.lll!!P~~E_ South of Poway Road
V,
II)
"t:I
rt
II)
3 C"
II)
""I
n
0 3
3 II)
:I
rt