Saturday, May 26, 2007

Illustrations and Resources You May Not Remember

This blog has many posts. This post may be the 248th post, or there abouts. Within the posts, which are way to long for some readers, are illustrations and resources that sometimes should probably be brought back for review.

The first illustration and resource is the illustration Bob provided to us for what seems like forever, for his current plans for a 2,300-unit development.

The resource for that plan included a predicted number of bedrooms, according to Bob himself that he gave to me in early January of this year.

The illustration if of what appears to be a now-dead plan, and the number of bedrooms were Bob's predictions and will also go away, perhaps


Now here is the resource numbers Bob gave me during a January CAC meeting:

These numbers were given to me by Mr. Bisno as an "off the top of his head" type of disclosure and, by no means, are the official totals that may be in line if he is successful in having an ordinance adopted allowing him to actually build 2,300 homes within the Ponte Vista area.

There will be two sections to the project.

Here are the numbers generated for the Senior Housing section of Ponte Vista at San Pedro, according to Mr. Bisno's personal thoughts:
575 total units.
30%, or about 173 homes would be studio or 1-bedroom type units
60%, or about 345 homes would be two-bedroom units.
10%, or about 57 homes would be three-bedroom units.
Adding the number of bedrooms together would give you a total of a about 1,034 bedrooms within the 575-home Senior Housing section.

(In the DEIR you may remember that it predicted a permanent population of this section to be approximately 1,038 persons.)

Now I will move to the non-age restricted section of the development:

1,725 total units
Approximately 16%, or about 276 homes would be "lofts" and have no walls between sleeping areas and living areas, or be a one-bedroom unit, with walls that separate the sleeping area from the other living area. The "loft" could have the sleeping area above the living area.
44%, or about 759 homes would be two-bedroom units.
30%, or about 518 homes would be three-bedroom units.
10%, or about 172 homes would be four-bedroom units.
Adding the number of bedrooms together would give you a total of 4,036 bedrooms in the non age-restricted section of the development.

(You may also remember the DEIR's stated prediction that this section would have a projected permanent population of 3,275 persons.)

This brings brings the total numbers of bedrooms that MIGHT be at a 2,300-home Ponte Vista development to:

5,070 possible total bedrooms or sleeping areas within Ponte Vista.

(Bob's DEIR estimated that the total population of Ponte Vista would be 4,313 permanent residents. These figures estimate that 757 sleeping areas, at least, would never have anyone sleeping in them and that is not counting the numbers of folks who will be sleeping at least two to a bed.)

During the late May, 2007 CAC meeting, Bob had an illustration passed around and shown to the CAC members of what the lot illustration would be for an R1 or single-family, detached housing project with lots measuring at least 5,000 square feet, might look like.

Below is the illustration Bob had passed around and the CAC members got to look at. The illustration is a part of the DEIR and is what Bob's illustrators believe an "all R1" Ponte Vista might look like, as far as they are concerned.




It appears now, according to Bob, that neither illustration will provide an illustration of his "new" plans. If and when that illustration becomes available, I will post it on this blog.

What is interesting to me to note is the number of bedrooms Bob included in his current plans and what someone commented about on a previous post. The "anonymous" person wrote that Bob may attempt to cram more bedrooms into fewer units. If this is the case, we all need to know the projected number of bedrooms as soon as Bob reveals his "new" plan. we also might look at the ratios and numbers of bedrooms Bob speculated would be in his current plans.

Now that I have reviewed the number of projected bedrooms in Bob's current plans, it look very likely that there will be a higher population at Ponte Vista, than Bob may admit to, with the "new" plan. If 757 sleeping spaces were going to be built for nobody, according to Bob's population projection, might that mean that perhaps renters, sub-lets, leases, and non-family roommates may come to any "new" site that Bob is allowed to build?

If you would like any more help in finding resources that are within this blog, please Email me and I will do my best to help you out.

6 comments:

mellonhead said...

It sorta just came to me. Why shouldn't Ponte Vista have the same density as Rolling Hills Riviera and Peninsula Verde Drive? Each neighborhood has only one way in and out--Western Ave. Hummm...

Anonymous said...

my point exactly. HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL THIS BEOMITH HOLD? I THINK HE IS UP TO NO GOOD. SOMETHING ELSE BOTHERS ME. HOW WILL THE COMMUNITY BE ASSURED THAT A LARGE OPEN SPACE OF UP TO 40 ARCES IS NOT USED LATER TO BUILD MORE UNITS?
IT WOULDN'D BE THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY.

Tom said...

Anonymous 2:10pm

The reason more units could not be built later is because a SPECIFIC PLAN would be a new municipal law. In order to build anything other than what was specified in in would require the law be changedby a vote of the full City Council.

This is much different than it the parcel remained R1. If someone bought some of the land from Bisno, they could request a zoning change or variance for that samll piece, and it would require a minor amount of beaurocratic work by the Planning Department.

M Richards said...

Tom does make a reasonable point in suggesting that a person might purchase several adjoining R1 homes and lots and request a zoning change for those particular lots in order to build a set of condo units or apartments. We still see this every day in and around San Pedro and other communities. It would certainly be very expensive for such a person to attempt that, especially in a brand new development of R1 lots and homes.

Another thing that might need to be considered is what if the developer of a condo project or any other type of project, for that matter, built the first phases of the project and then for some reason, went bankrupt? What might happen to the remaining land he owns? Could he get out of bankruptcy by claiming that if the zoning were changed on the remaining land such that financing could be provided, would the City allow him to change the zoning and build apartments or more condominium units that was previously approved for that remaining land?

With Single-family residences, on R1 lots, perhaps the built out time would be much quicker and a developer could have all the buildings on the site completed sooner, rather than later. He could still declare bankruptcy, but with the first phases built as SFRs on R1 lots, getting the City to approve large apartment buildings or condos on the remaining will be more difficult. The residents already living in the first phases would have a lot of strength themselves, and help for many others to fight any plans that went against the original ordinances creating the development, in the first place, I think.
MW

Tom said...

Mr. Wells,

There would be no need for any resident to fight for anything. Any digression from the approved Specific Plan would simply be halted by City Building Inspectors.

It would help a lot if there was not all this fanning flames of unrealistic fears. There are plenty of actual issues to be concerned about without stretching for unlikely ones.

Tom Field

M Richards said...

Mr. Field,

Just what may happen if Bob gets his new plan approved and then abandons it before all the units are completed? Is he required to post a bond prior to any construction beginning to insure the completion to the built out according to the Specific Plan and/or any ordinances that are approved?

I think we have seen developments that are stopped during their construction phases due to the developer's going out of business.

What real insurance can any of us have that the Department of City Planning won't change their rules due to changes in the marketplace or how a developer's building functions are progressing.
MW