HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/12/2020 Item 2, Lopes
From:James Lopes <
To:Advisory Bodies; Scott, Shawna; Corey, Tyler
Subject:Planning Commission - Froom Ranch EIR
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Froom Ranch EIR and Site Plan
I hope you will study the letter by Allan Cooper, which I support.
With extreme sites such as this one, we need a Commission which will hone up on compact, interactive and
environmentally safe planning. From a whole to a half offer of development of land above 150 feet, we are not
impressed with the site plan of sprawl all over the site, as though a strong wind blew the potential community all around
this massive regional "black hole" of a shopping center. We are a small town, and I jest in some fun, but many projects
with a traditional, walking and socializing character can be studied by your Commission and the developer to easily
reach a much more fun-pedestrian neighborhoods, instead of isolated waiting rooms for the residents.
The site is a massive flood gate from the Irish Hills. The impacts from this runoff and flooding negate the benefits which
the Site Plan speculates.
Please respond closely to the City's General Plan and Community Design Plan in addition to CEQA. Unfortunately, the
City has passed ephemeral "escape" policies for your to override the significant potential impacts. The City might as well
receive a hand-off of cash as the first benefit. It is as though the City wants to become the northern arm of Los Angeles,
which unfortunately is too easy to say.
I support the points in Allan Coopers.
I support a re-design of the project to stay within the acceptable impacts which the EIR identifies.
A. A compact order of buildings and uses, as a local, relaxed, Western version which creates urban, traditional 10 units
or more per acre, building heights, outdoor private and community spaces.
B. A replacement of the proposed suburban densities, which are an apparent duplex or similar densities. Senior housing
could be ordered together in a resort setting as earlier proposed. An example would be the Lodge at Squaw Valley, in
height, floors and ground floor social uses.
C. A reduction or elimination of the Commercial Retail site, so that it does not increase commercial traffic on Los Osos
Valley Road.
D. A Central Living area where the shopping Commercial Retail is proposed, for the Senior Housing and support staff
housing, which should be provided in costing.
E. Limitation in design under the initial level for impacted vehicle, bike and pedestrian travel.
Interactive site analysis and planning must be your direction to live within the "rules" for CEQA, without negotiating the
brazen City "trade-off" offers.
1
Thank you and best thinking,
James Lopes
AICP
Congress of New Urbanism
Former ARC member
2