From: Cervantes, Clarissa <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2023 5:01 PMTo: Futrell, Mike <[email protected]>Cc: Lujano, Miguel <[email protected]>Subject: Fwd: [External] Request to refer to City Council the Mt Vernon Ave RC zone site case PR-2021-001108(DR, GE)Hi Mike,Please see the request below that has come in from one of my residents in Ward 2, who is also amember of the Friends of Riverside Hills.The Friends have several experts and researchers who are extremely familiar with the landscape ofthe Box Spring Mountains, hills, etc. They’ve won and settled several lawsuits with the city overmultiple projects that I’m sure the COA can provide you with. I’d like to see this item referred to the city council as this could potentially have an impact on reserveand wildlife. Thank you! CM Cervantes From: Richard Block <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2023 12:08 PMTo: Cervantes, Clarissa <[email protected]>Subject: [External] Request to refer to City Council the Mt Vernon Ave RC zone site case PR-2021-001108(DR, GE)CAUTION: This email is originated from OUTSIDE of City of Riverside and was not sentby any City Officials or City Staff. Do not click on links or open attachments unless youare expecting the email and know that the content is safe. If you suspect this is a phishingor malicious email, please contact the helpdesk.Thursday, Feb 23, 2023To: City Councilmember Clarissa CervantesFrom: Richard and Jane BlockRe: Request for referral to City Council of a DRC project approval Dear Clarissa,Jane and I are very happy to have been early supporters and to have had you as theCouncilmember for our ward. We understand that you are running for the State Assembly –unfortunately the University neighborhood is not included in that district, but we certainlythink you are very well qualified for that role, far more so than Ronaldo. We hope you succeedin that race, but will be sorry to lose you as our councilperson.Now to the subject of this email: We are asking you to refer to the City Council the Mt VernonAve RC zone site proposal PR-2021-001108(DR, GE), which was approved by the DRCyesterday over objections by university neighborhood residents, including immediateneighbors, and the UniversityNeighborhood Association, and Friends of Riverside’s Hills.As you know, referral to the Council is an alternative to filing an appeal to the PlanningCommission (and then perhaps having to appeal to the Council) with each appeal requiring a$2,529 fee, with those rather exorbitant fees being an unfair burden on the immediateneighbors and, if done by a larger public interest group, such as the University NeighborhoodAssociation, an unfair burden on any such public interest group. In fact the large appeal fee isso unfair that the case planner originally told a neighbor that there was no fee for an appealfor a project on a single RC zone lot, but then had to correct herself when her error waspointed out to her. INDEED IT USED TO BE THE CASE THAT THERE WAS NO FEE FOR CITYRESIDENTS TO APPEAL PLANNING DECISIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL.As noted below, the project at issue, with its hugely excessive grading, will have bad impactsnot only on the project’s immediate neighbors, who are vociferously opposed to it, but badimpacts throughout the University neighborhood and on the adjacent-to-the-project BoxSprings Mountain Reserve and its wildlife.The project involves a house and ADU on an RC-zoned lot, the problem being that theapplicant chose to put the buildings up on top of a hill, necessitating a long steep drivewaywith a massive amount of grading, so that, per the project grading plan, there will be over9,400 cu yds of cut, 3,900 cu yds of fill , and an export of over 5,500 cu yds of dirt, which at 11cu yds per 15-ton dump truck will be roughly 500 dump truck loads, and those dump truck willhave to go through quiet streets of the University neighborhood. And the grossly excessivegrading will also create noise impacts to the immediate neighbors as well as creating airquality construction impacts to wider neighborhood and to the Box Springs Mountain Reserve.And speaking of the Reserve, the proposed ADU would be only 54 ft and the house only 61 ftfrom the Reserve -- the Staff Report to the DRC falsely says the Reserve is to the west andmuch farther away from the buildings whereas it is actually to the east and a stone’s throwaway, one example of egregious errors in that Report, despite letters stating the actual facts.
The unnecessary placement of the buildings so close to the Reserve will impact with light andnoise the wildlife in the Reserve and violate provisions of the Western Riverside CountyMultiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to which the City is supposed to becommitted, and this in a very high fire hazard zone.The staff considerations ignored expert testimony from an architect experienced with hillsidedevelopment that the buildings could be located farther west down the hill with very muchless grading (and with less fire hazard and farther from the Reserve), so that the project asapproved appears to violate the Grading Code restrictions on RC zoned steep lots aboutminimizing grading and preserving hilltops.Thus it really needs to be considered by the City Council, with an updated and corrected staffreport. In asking you to refer it, we are not expecting any commitment to oppose the projectwhen it gets heard by the Council. We are simply urging you to have this case referred to theCouncil as a matter of public interest and fairness.Thanks, and regards,Richard and JanePS: You may also get the same request directly from the University Neighborhood Associationand from Friends of Riverside’s Hills, and from a representative (Brian Williams) of theproject’s immediate neighbors, but from communications with all of them, I know they allwant the same thing: to have it referred to the Council.Sent from Mail for Windows Stay in-the-know with all things Riverside! Connect with us atRiversideCA.gov/Connect.