VOTER
INFORMATION PAMPHLET
MEASURES, ANALYSES AND
ARGUMENTS (whichever is applicable to
your ballot) Arguments in support of, or in opposition to, the proposed laws are the opinions of the authors. |
|
|
the “Glenwood Residential Project located on the
east and west sides of Glenwood Drive, north of Casa Way (APN 23-241-09,14)”
be adopted? |
See
following pages for arguments. |
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY MEASURE MMeasure M is a
referendum challenging Sections 1 through 4 and 6 through 8 of Ordinance No.
16-ZC-190 which was adopted by the Scotts Valley City Council. The challenged portions approved a
specific plan and a development agreement for the “Glenwood Residential
Project” which is generally located on the east and west sides of Glenwood
Drive north of Casa Way (APN Nos. 23-241-09 and 23-241-14) authorizing 49
residential lots on 11.01 acres, a 1.62 acre reserve parcel zoned for
residential uses dedicated to the City, a 7.3 acre park parcel and
approximately 160 acres of open space.
A “Yes” vote by a majority of those voting means that Sections 1
through 4 and 6 through 8 of Ordinance No. 16-ZC-190 shall go into
effect. A “No” vote by a majority of
those voting means that Sections 1 through 4 and 6 through 8 of Ordinance No.
16-ZC-190 shall not be adopted. s/ Robert J. Logan City
Attorney City
of Scotts Valley The above statement is an
impartial analysis of Measure M. If you desire a copy of
the measure, please call the Scotts Valley City Clerk’s Office at
831-440-5602 and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you. |
|
44-527
VOTER
INFORMATION PAMPHLET
MEASURES, ANALYSES AND
ARGUMENTS (whichever is applicable to
your ballot) Arguments in support of, or in opposition to, the proposed laws are the opinions of the authors. |
|
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE MAfter nearly five years of constructive dialogue, dozens of public
hearings, and two years of good faith negotiation between the City and the
property owner, Scotts Valley has reached a fair and reasonable compromise on
the Glenwood property. We believe
this carefully considered plan deserves your support. The property owner has listened carefully to our concerns and
dramatically scaled back their project by more than two-thirds, from 145 to
49 homes clustered in the least environmentally sensitive portion of the
property. Their current proposal not
only accomplishes the community’s primary directive to preserve open space,
but also incorporates other benefits for our community. The
scaled down plan: · Clusters
44 houses on 11 acres across from the high school (approximately 5% of the
land); · Preserves
160 acres of contiguous open space, including the northern meadow (formerly
earmarked for housing), and the surrounding hillsides; · Dedicates
7 acres to the City for the expansion of Siltanen Park; ·
Saves approximately 95% of the land as open space
and parkland. The
benefits to Scotts Valley are significant: · The
community can enjoy a diverse and wonderful open space; · Youth
sports teams will have new parkland available for playing fields at no cost
to the City; · Our
public schools will receive more than $400,000 for needed improvements; · The
project pays to convert large water users to the City’s recycled water
system, reducing citywide water demand; ·
The project funds necessary improvements to
Glenwood Dr./Scotts Valley Dr. The project finally approved by the City Council reflects the
determination of all parties to reach a fair and reasonable compromise among
the various interests of our community.
Most importantly, this project is good for Scotts Valley. Let’s end this debate and move on. On March 5th, vote YES on
Measure M. s/ Sheryl Ainsworth, Council Member, City of
Scotts Valley s/ Randy Johnson, Vice-Mayor, City of Scotts
Valley s/ Paul Marigonda, Council Member, City of Scotts
Valley |
Rebuttal
to Argument in Favor of Measure M What the developer isn't telling us- Open space: The
current proposal does not guarantee the preservation of open space. Public
access and recreational opportunities could be lost forever. New park land: Of
the 7.23 acres offered for parks, only 4 acres are useable due to set-aside
requirements for endangered species protection. The taxpayers, not
the developer, will pay to install the playing fields. School fees: The
developer, as well as anyone who builds or remodels, is required to pay
school fees. The additional fees from the development will not offset
the impacts to Scotts Valley Schools. Water: Whether
or not the proposed development is built, the recycled water facility will go
into operation, thus reducing over-all water usage. Traffic improvements: Although
this project promises minor road improvements, the developer's contributions
will do little to solve the increasing gridlock from the new homes and
high school traffic. Major road improvements, not to be made for some
time, will come from a combination of state and city funds. In
1999, Scotts Valley voters overwhelmingly defeated this developer's first
proposal. Now the project is back again with fewer benefits and
increased costs for the taxpayers. This project is not good for Scotts
Valley. This is Scotts Valley's last open space, and once it's
gone, it's gone forever. We urge you to vote No on Measure M. s/ Stephany Aguilar,
Mayor s/ Cliff Barrett,
Scotts Valley City Council Member s/
Margo Hober, Vice-president, Scotts Valley Water Board Save Scotts Valley, s/
Marianne Woosley, Treasurer |
44-528
VOTER
INFORMATION PAMPHLET
MEASURES, ANALYSES AND
ARGUMENTS (whichever is applicable to
your ballot) Arguments in support of, or in opposition to, the proposed laws are the opinions of the authors. |
|
|
ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE M How many
times must the voters say no to the Glenwood Development plan? In 1999, Scotts Valley voters
overwhelmingly defeated this developer's first proposal. Once again, in 2002,
the voters are forced to protect the last open space in Scotts Valley. If you
care about preserving the beauty, character, and integrity of Scotts Valley
for future generations, we urge you to vote No on Measure M. · The
Development does not protect open space. The current provisions of the development
agreement allow for the open space to be owned by a Homeowner's
Association. This entity would be
poorly equipped to manage the land, and would almost certainly prohibit
public hiking trails with scenic overlooks and picnic areas. The developer and the city could agree in
the future to rezone the open space for more homes. · The
Development is too dense. The developer plans to build large homes on small 6,000 square foot
lots – far too dense for the rural outskirts of Scotts Valley. In addition, the "opportunity"
parcel at Santos Pond allows for future development that would further
destroy the natural character of the Glenwood. · The
Development will increase traffic gridlock. More than 400 daily car trips through all Glenwood intersections would be added by this development. The cumulative effect of new development, inadequate road improvement funds, plus the ever-increasing high school traffic threaten public safety as well as quality of life. · The
Development will create long-term tax burdens for everyone. The developer pays one-time fees, while
taxpayers pay forever to provide services to the Development. The developer fees will not come close to
covering long-term municipal services such as road maintenance, recreation,
police, fire, and schools. This is Scotts Valley's last open space,
and once it's gone, it's gone forever. Please join us in voting NO on
Measure M. s/
Stephany E. Aguilar, Mayor s/
Cliff Barrett, Scotts Valley City Council Member s/
Margo Hober, Director, Scotts Valley Water Board s/
Michelle Stewart, Vine Hill School Teacher Save
Scotts Valley, s/ Marianne Woosley, Treasurer |
REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE M Some
people are never satisfied. The Homes are Clustered on 5% of the Land Two
years ago Glenwood’s critics charged the housing plan would “completely
surround the Glenwood meadow,” and favored “clustering development at one
end.” Now they say that the current
proposal – with housing clustered on about 5% of the land – is “far too
dense.” The
plan brings a modest number of new homes to Scotts Valley, while protecting
our natural surroundings. The
Plan Permanently Protects Open Space
The opponents’ claim that “the developer and the City could agree in the future to rezone the open space for more homes” is simply false. The City Council’s primary objective in approving this plan was to ensure that the Glenwood would be permanently preserved for the enjoyment of Scotts Valley residents. This plan rezones approximately 95% of the property to open space and parkland. The plan requires the City (or a City-approved agency) to preserve the property “in perpetuity as open space.” The landowner must relinquish all rights to future development. The agreement expressly forbids the City from developing the open space, except for passive recreation and open space uses. The open space will be protected by a conservation easement and/or deed restrictions that prohibit future development. Let’s
Be Fair
This is a fair and reasonable plan that brings needed housing to our community. Let’s seize this opportunity to save 95% of the Glenwood for future generations. Please
join us in voting “YES” on Measure M.
s/
Sheryl Ainsworth, Council Member, City of Scotts Valley s/
Randy Johnson, Vice-Mayor, City of Scotts Valley s/
Paul Marigonda, Council Member, City of Scotts Valley |
44-529