01-11-2022 CC RPT 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

of a rationale to initiate a re -call. Let's not forget recent precedent of no rationale for the gubernatorial recall and 'problems with an agenda' as the stated rational for a recall of a local public official. This is an exercise in futility if not failure. It will lead to a larger deficit, decreased commercial and residential desirability and massive flight of those living here, paying a pretty price to do so, whether renting or owning. Not only are you putting in a highly polluting site, you're replacing public parks and land that cleans the air and contributes to societal health. This land is why the aforementioned bicyclists come to this part of town in droves. What kind of logic is that? Look at the view, the realtor said, of the 2nd logistics center on the road? In a residential area? And, while the City may have loads of parks and an ornate library downtown, this project replaces some of Riverside's natural beauty. Do you really think people will choose to move into an area due to its logistics center? How about those sightlines! I am all for economic development. Yet, that economic development needs to be balanced. McDonalds learned that it doesn't need to be within 5 minutes of every American home. Hence, there is something called market saturation. What if this logistics trend is short-lived or there's too many of these facilities for the long-term need? What if the assumption that residents will stay is an urban legend? If you can't see the hills, trees, and mountains, your property is worth less. Although assessed valuation only changes upon property sales, there will be hundreds of property sales, lowering valuation, lowering city and county tax revenue, reducing public services. Is that part of your oath? Has there been an environmental impact study? Has there been any sort of resident survey to see if this is desirable? Have you seen the divisiveness the moreno valley logistics center caused and that was in a commercial or undeveloped area! The lack of thought that is going into Riverside projects is concerning and reason for at least a few of us to run for city council so that the terrain and character of this city aren't obliterated. Yes, obliterated. Does it matter if mountains are there if you can't see them due to large buildings and haze. I couldn't think of a worse site for this project. In 5-10 years, which one of you would like to live next to the equivalent of an EPA super -fund site or be the realtor selling homes on the other side of the park land; if any is left. Finally, the Police Department is far below where it needs to be with regard to sworn officers. While the City Fire Department is ISO class I, significant increases in structures, flammable material, etc. could lead to a reduction in that rating. It also occurs to me that Riverside County Fire is probably ISO Class II or III. As an insurance broker, I appreciate the class I status. I'd hate to see that status reduced. The city has a deficit, development is excessive, and that will lead to a lower rating. That will lead to higher insurance costs. Related to this, in Moreno Valley, AMR has a 10 minute response time. This was before covid, when crews are either being re-routed from ED's who are at capacity or before crews had to take additional steps to clean their rigs. Just what kind of impact will such a site, employing 100's and attracting 1 00's of drivers have on local water, power, sewer, ems, fire, and police resources? Economic development that exceeds current road, public safety, and utility infrastructure is not added revenue; its an extra expense. I expect some degree of formal response. I also expect this to be in the public comment section of the minutes of the meeting and hope it will not be a kangaroo court, where the decision has already been made. 2