Here are some comments after reviewing the implementation tools from the University Specific Plan. My hope is that others will do the same and add, embellish or correct any omissions I may have made.
Many of these items bear on the issues the working group is grappling with.
- UNP 1.1.1 The City / UCR Coordinating Committee is one vehicle for communications.
- It’s mostly what UCR is up to rather than what the residents in the community are up to.
- The Working Group and the communication it has fostered is a better representation and more effective vehicle for dialogue on neighborhood issues.
- The University Neighborhood Assn.is the existing vehicle for neighborhood resident dialogue and communication
- It’s mostly what UCR is up to rather than what the residents in the community are up to.
- UNP 1.1.2 Encourage UCR to share development plans. This is an area in need of a lot more vigorous nurturing.
- The case of flip flopping on locating their toxic and hazardous materials site is a case in point.
- Not only is it an inconsistent use for the area, the findings for locating it next to the dorms, child development center and a residential neighborhood were capricious and self serving.
- On the plus side is the Valencia Hills cul de sac and the Glenmor !! landscaping plan along Valencia Hills
- The case of flip flopping on locating their toxic and hazardous materials site is a case in point.
- UNP 3.1.1 The Urgency Ordinance was not asked for. I wouldn’t count that as a win just yet.
- It has to prove itself anything but symbolic.
- It has the potential to be helpful if compliance is explored and ways to achieve it are implemented.
- UNP 3.2.2 Neighborhood Livability Program suffers from poor data collection and collating.
- The wack-a-mole approach to promoting neighborhood standards with code enforcement and policing is an expensive option and may be the reason the existing enforcement tools have not been widely implemented in the past. .
- Collating and sharing data among residents and staff is still in need of streamlining and greater transparency.
- We can’t make good decisions without good data.
- UNP 3.2.3 Exploring opportunities to encourage property owners to upgrade older properties needs to be re engaged.
- With Redevelopment, our neighborhood
- received almost zero benefits while the conditions leading to area deterioration were allowed to grow unchecked..
- Now we are in crisis and there is no Redevelopment agency funds.
- We do have Public Utility energy rebates.
- How could these be used as a spring board for upgrading the housing stock to current standards.
- What benefit could our neighborhood gain from partnering with CCERT or some of UCR’s engineering programs or community research programs?
- How could we be the perfect test case area and
- What other programs are available? Low cost housing? Healthy Communities?
- What grant money is available to help?
- What kind of low effort, high impact projects would give us the greatest leverage?
- How many landscape makeovers would it take to impact the perception and property values in the neighborhood?
- What other curb appeal, grass roots initiatives can we fund?
- How much social capital would be required to offset funding constraints?
- With Redevelopment, our neighborhood
- UNP 6.1.1 Watkins Drive in the Master plan was the arterial gateway into the neighborhood.
- It was designed with bike and walking trails on both sides of the street.
- It was to have monuments at both ends.
- There was no parking from Blaine to Valencia Hill.
- We still have parking on the West side of Watkins and
- there is no landscaping , no coordination with UCR for their side of the street.
- UNP 6.2.1 Examining opportunities to increase parking for multiple family residential units should not be a ‘closed’ issue.
- We’re seeing the impacts from single family houses operating as multiple families with added vehicles every day.
- Clearly some sort of parking requirement needs to be considered with multiple renters in single family neighborhoods.
- We’re seeing the impacts from single family houses operating as multiple families with added vehicles every day.
- UNP 6.4.1 No action on a multi-purpose streetscape for Watkins Dr. See 6.1.1 No action
- UNP 6.5.1 No action on master bike plan for the neighborhood,
- no signage,
- no street paint,
- trail maps are incomplete
- UNP 6.6.1 Friends of Riverside’s Hills is working with Ralph Nunez and County Parks and Open Space Officials to
- fund and build bike and walking trail segments aligning the Perris Valley Metrolink line
- fund and build bike and walking trail segments aligning the Perris Valley Metrolink line
- UNP 6.6.3 Additional local trail connections. See above
- A wildlife overpass connecting the Box Springs Mountains via Coyote Hill over the 215/60 to Sycamore Canyon Park is required to maintain wildlife viability
- A wildlife overpass connecting the Box Springs Mountains via Coyote Hill over the 215/60 to Sycamore Canyon Park is required to maintain wildlife viability
- UNP 6.7.2 Perris Valley Line project is dialogue is complete. Construction is imminent.
- Other agencies will be required to step up for funding of the pedestrian and wildlife under crossings
- no first responder access from tracks blocked by freight trains. This is a common issue..
- Public safety is at risk and the consequences of ignoring this issue will be dire for residents, students and the City.
- UNP 6.7.1 FRH and the UNA will be in communication with RCTC and other agencies to develop the landscaping plan
- along the sound walls running approximately from Spruce St to Mt. Vernon Ave.
- Irrigation connections will need city support
- design and planting will be community driven.
- Landscaping will be part demonstration garden and part local agriculture.
- Possible trail segments along this corridor
- UNP 7.1.1 Our comprehensive park plan is still collecting dust on a shelf.
- Lack of expertise or resources for large wilderness areas has driven services to
- developed, larger parks like Anduluka,
- We remain without a dog park,
- no pocket parks
- no community center,
- no library or park and rec services.
- School gardens are wanted and needed
- IM{ 7.1.2 Preserving Box Springs Mountain Park needs to go further.
- The riparian area leading to Box Springs needs revitalization.
- invasive weed species throughout Islander Park need attention
- See comments 6.7.2 re public access and public safety concerns.
- Explore Gage Canal Bike way and trail network.
- Let’s revisit this conversation before we leave it up to our risk management department.They wanted to ban food trucks too.
- Access is for all residents We shouldn’t be figuring out how to constrain or diminish public access to one of our best local assets.
- If it can work for rails to trails, it can work for a Gage canal to trails.
- What are the Safe Routes To School in the University Neighborhood?
- We have several grade schools, middle schools and day care facilities.
- Let’s revisit this conversation before we leave it up to our risk management department.They wanted to ban food trucks too.
- UNP 7.1.4 Upgrading major streetscapes. Let’s revisit what we can do.
- Budget considerations only go so far.
- Social capital and creativity can often make up huge deficits in budgetary realities.
- Watkins Drive Big Springs Median Makeover:
- was done collaboratively with public works, vendors and neighbors
- donated materials, zero hard costs
- sweat equity
- Other projects can be identified.
- Alcohol and Tobacco Ads still appear in the window of the Liquor store at Watkins and Big Springs
- The UNA and Friends of Riverside’s Hills regularly do major trash clean ups on the South end of Watkins Drive
- This is the other Gateway to the Neighborhood.running through our hillsides and arroyos.
- This is also in the City – County bike and hiking trial linkage corridor
- This is the other Gateway to the Neighborhood.running through our hillsides and arroyos.
- UNP 7.1.5 Creating public art and wayfaring graphics is another low cost high impact project we should be looking at right now.
- This could help counter the impacts from investors buying and not contributing to the area, .
- A graphic update and public art can help raise the perceived value of the neighborhood.
- We don’t have to stop because we don’t think we can afford it.
- Let’s find out what we can do first, then figure out how to make it happen.
- Little Free Libraries are being rolled out in the neighborhood.
- UNP 7.1.6 In addition to Mt. Vernon Park, we should be exploring how to option Dr. Last’s parcel.
- adjacent to Islander Park along Mt. Vernon and Linden Avenues.
- Explore creative financing options that would make it possible to secure this site.
- UNP 7.1.7 What about public gathering spaces in the not so mixed use, high density areas?
- We don’t have to be elaborate
- some benches, fruit trees or pocket parks would go a long way toward fostering neighborhood connections.
- We are grossly lacking in any considerations for this sort of asset.
- parking at Islander Park is non existent or unavailable most times.
- We already have bus stops. Maybe we could start with them.
- Some place to post neighborhood notices, or better yet,
- a wi fi network that streamed neighborhood posts, events or information would be great.
- RTA already is bringing on wi fi and USB charging ports on the new buses.
- UNP 7.2.1 Public Notice for projects impacting us sounds good. We could improve this easily.
- We didn’t get much of a heads up on the notice to rezone the parcel at Watkins and Spruce to high density residential.
- That caused some consternation among neighbors already suffering from the impacts of too many rental properties.
- A post to Nextdoor, or an email to the UNA would be a start in addition to notices run in the classified section of the paper.
- That’s something we could start with to get the information that affects us before the neighbors.
- Is there a way to be notified from planning or public works for area specific updates?
- UNP 7.2.2 The regular review of the plan needs to be formalized with a date and time so we can get feedback from the residents.
- This bit was the huge missing from the original plan. No review, no conversations and no significant action.
- We’re living with the consequences of that approach now.
- If we get lot’s of feedback on this review, hopefully we’ll be on our way toward the annual review and the ability to update as necessary.
- A collaborative advocacy around the neighborhood plan adds to the overall quality of life in the neighborhood
- An added bonus is the City gains ground in process improvement.
- This saves time, money and resource utilization is more efficient.
If I think of anything else, I’ll bring it up at the working group meeting.