Boulder Ridge Update
Progress – The New Proposal Could Work!

County and Rocke Garcia Meeting
Tuesday, March 10th

As we communicated to you earlier, we did attend a meeting hosted by County Planning this past week to get first hand information on Rocke Garcia’s revised proposal for his “Event Tent”. At the November Planning Commission meeting we had strongly indicated that if Rocke proposed an “Event Building” instead of a “Event Tent”, we believed that we could find common ground on his proposal. Without a real building to contain sound, we have been very skeptical that our neighborhood would not be negatively impacted. We had gotten several informal updates from County Planning that Rocke was moving forward with a revised proposal that addressed our main concern – noise – by constructing a real building. We attended this update meeting with anticipation and some anxiety. But, the bottom line is simple – Rocke is proposing a real building that should contain the sound. With a few clear rules and regulations that still need to be finalized, the building should address our concerns!  

Here are some details:

• Rocke has listened and responded to our major concern.
• The building plan seems fine. It looks quite nice and should be able to contain excessive noise. It is a positive that the windows do not open, further aiding in sound reduction. The doors, that obviously do open, face the existing clubhouse, away from our neighborhood.
• The “rules and regulations” on use of the building will be extremely important. We are working with Planning to provide input. Some of the questions that we want addressed include:
  
  

· Amplified music inside only?  No outdoor reception/event music speakers?

· Is an outdoor PA system (called amplified broadcasting) allowed?  How will this be managed?

· A monitoring procedure needs to be robust given the lack of compliance in the past. Given the permanent nature of this project (not a temporary tent), it seems that the County should require a reasonable investment in a simple on-going monitoring system.

• Finally, as proposed by Rocke’s attorney, we are interested in establishing a procedure for advance notification of significant future development proposals. But, to be clear, this agreement would not include any statement by us that we believe the 1993 BOS resolutions which restrict future development are null and void. We would have to make it clear that this procedure is in addition to the 1993 resolutions – if and when he applies for something that may or may not be allowed under 1993, we would get advance notice.

The CEQA document is now out for review and is posted to our website along with all of the other key documents on this proposed development. Please take a few minutes and read over this material if you have any questions.

So, in summary, we are making good progress. We need to finalize the rules and regulations on the use of the proposed “Event Building” and then get everything fully documented to ensure on-going compliance.  This new proposal is planned to be heard at the April 2nd Planning Commission meeting. As usual, we will be in attendance.

Your Graystone Board