Mountain Views News, Combined Edition Saturday, April 18, 2020

CAPOCCIA (continued from page 1)

Back to the Meadow. The Passionist Fathers realized years ago 
that they needed funds to provide for retired priests who are living 
longer. They inventoried all their facilities and strategized 
on how to fulfill their mission while divesting some of their real 
estate assets to raise cash. They concluded that they would close 
some facilities outright, keep others, and subdivide property 
where appropriate. The Passionists have determined that the Mater 
Dolorosa Retreat Center was a core part of their ongoing mission, 
but the Meadow was not, and had to be monetized.

The Passionists problem is that the Meadow is zoned as Institutional, 
meaning they have an entitlement to develop such things 
as assisted living, a school, or a hospital. All of these potential 
uses would either not fulfill their financial objectives and/or not be 
compatible with their stated mission at the retreat center. In other 
words, the Passionists are concerned with exactly the same thing 
that nearby residents are concerned with - traffic, noise, blocked 
views, and preserving the quiet character of the neighborhood and 
the Retreat Center.

Remember the proposed Maranatha High School at One Carter 
that was voted down by the City Council? Of course you do. That 
situation was similar, but different in a fundamental way. One 
Carter was zoned for residential, but Maranatha needed institutional 
zoning to proceed. The City Council determined that the 
institutional use was more impactful in a negative way to the surrounding 
neighborhood and the City as a whole. The environmental 
impact report stated that the additional traffic would have 
required a traffic signal at Baldwin and Sierra Madre Boulevard! 
The City Council voted against the high school project, thereby reaffirming 
the entitlement for residential development, paving the 
way for what we have now.

For the Mater Dolorosa site, Sierra Madre does not have the ability 
to deny institutional development. Because the Passionists have an 
entitlement to develop institutional, they can present a plan, follow 
all the legally required steps including an environmental analysis, 
no more than a few public hearings, and be assured of approval 
as long as critical environmental mitigation is achieved, if deemed 
necessary. Of course, they also must be in compliance with city 
and state codes. 

If the Meadow was zoned as residential (as it once was prior to 
1997), there would be no need to make concessions. They would 
have been able to submit a plan for over 100 houses, which would 
comply with our city’s R1 regulations. Because the Passionists believe 
that a housing development is more compatible with their 
mission, they now must negotiate a deal where they would get the 
right to develop housing in exchange for a change in zoning. Concessions 
were proposed, and now we’re just starting the public discussion 
phase.

Here’s an outline of concessions proposed by the Passionists for 
the public’s and the City Council’s consideration:

• A 3.5 acre park that’s developed (turn-key) and funded for 
maintenance in perpetuity
• Funding for select improvements to Bailey Canyon Park
• Donation to the City of approximately 45+ acres of open-
space unimproved land above the Retreat Center
• No more than 42 single family homes (R1 zoning would 
allow more than 100 homes)
• Netzero water use - meaning that expected increase in water 
consumption will be offset by funding water saving improvements 
elsewhere in Sierra Madre
• At least seven public hearings including two workshops 
starting late June/early July.


Here are the concessions that the City has offered:

• Provide dedicated staff for plan review
• Freeze application costs at today’s rates
• Enter into a development agreement upon zoning 
approval.


So the question for all Sierra Madreans is not whether we get what 
we want, but whether we would prefer a residential development 
or an institutional development, and how can we design the best 
plan for Sierra Madre?

On April 28, the City Council will consider approval of a Memorandum 
of Understanding (MOU) which will facilitate the administration 
of the proceedings, by providing for more public input, 
not less. The MOU mandates that the Passionists hold additional 
town-hall style meetings, outside the maximum five public hearings 
mandated by state law. Furthermore, the Passionists cannot 
officially submit a plan for development until the town hall meetings 
have been completed. The MOU also establishes a schedule 
for conclusion, whether that conclusion is an approval or denial of 
the proposed project.

The MOU is a starting point. What’s been negotiated to this point 
is a framework, which included public input. The workshops and 
public hearings will be for the purpose of balancing interests between 
Sierra Madre residents and the Passionists. For example, 
is the size of the proposed park appropriate? Should it be bigger 
or smaller in exchange for bigger or smaller houses? Should there 
be more lots with smaller homes, or fewer lots with bigger homes? 
Less parkland in exchange for more varied home designs? Perhaps 
the Passionists would be willing to make other concessions 
outright. Your voice is important. I hope all Sierra Madreans take 
advantage of the opportunity to influence the outcome, by sharing 
your concerns and ideas at the public hearings.

Again, I personally want to see the Meadow stay just the way it is. 
But as Mayor, I’m open to any alternative that’s in the best interest 
of Sierra Madreans. You can’t always get what you want. Which 
brings to mind a follow on from a classic verse - “But if you try 
sometime, you just might find, you get what you need!”

Next week: Why Can’t Sierra Madre Just Buy The Meadow?

John Capoccia

Mayor

jcapoccia@cityofsierramadre.com

355-6407

2

F.Y.I.

Mountain View News Saturday, April 18, 2020 

Proposed Monastery Development


FROM THE CITY OF SIERRA MADRE

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (Excerpt)

BETWEEN THE CITY OF SIERRA MADRE AND THE CONGREGATION 
OF THE PASSION, MATER DOLOROSA COMMUNITY, 
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION OF PROCEEDINGS TO 
ADOPT A SPECIFIC PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 
AND AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN AND CORRESPONDING 
LAND USE MAP AND ZONING CODE AND CORREPSONDING 
ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF 
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AT 700 NORTH SUNNYSIDE 

AVENUE, SIERRA MADRE, CALIFORNIA 91024 

1. “This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (“MOU”) will facilitate the administration 
of the Proceedings, discussed below, and will not dictate a substantive outcome regarding 
the Proceedings or the Applicant’s Project. This MOU grants the Applicant procedural rights. 
It does not grant any planning or land use entitlements.”

 

2. “The City’s consideration of this proposal and its entrance into this MOU reflects the City’s 
agreement only to consider, not to approve, the Project and in no way precludes the City’s consideration 
of alternatives to the proposed Project, including a no-action alternative whereby all 
proposed development would be denied, as well as approval of one of any number of alternative 
proposals that entail greater or lesser density or different land uses.”

 Walter Cailleteau, DVM Free Exam!
927 N. Michillinda Ave. For New Clients 
Pasadena, CA 91107 Bring this coupon to save! 
(626) 351-8863
Mountain Views News 80 W Sierra Madre Blvd. No. 327 Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024 Office: 626.355.2737 Fax: 626.609.3285 Email: editor@mtnviewsnews.com Website: www.mtnviewsnews.com