HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/28/2021 Item 4a, Stansfield (2)
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Advisory Bodies
Subject:RE: PC Communication for Tonight's Meeting - Re Westmont Development
From:
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 1:57 PM
To: Advisory Bodies <advisorybodies@slocity.org>
Cc: 'William Stansfield' <
Subject: PC Communication for Tonight's Meeting - Re Westmont Development
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Dear Planning Commissioners,
This is Maryann Stansfield, 653 Stanford Drive.
Tonight’s agenda item 4a, Westmont Avenue 23 Lot Subdivision and Environmental Review- Planning staff
recommends: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo, California,
recommending the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Review and
Tentative Tract Map No. 3157 to create twenty-three (23) residential lots in the Low-Density (R-1) Zone (SBDV-
0169-2020, EID-0170-2020).
While my husband Bill and I don’t agree with some of the content in the Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Review document, so do many of our neighbors who are speaking out as well.
This particular email is about me and my husband’s concerns regarding parking, traffic, and tree and plant
removal on the southern end of the property that is not properly being mitigated, and will change the
aesthetics and the skyline of the neighborhood. Also, dust mitigation and PG&E poles/lines.
Dust Mitigation Plan
Being one of 5 properties right up against the building property line, I’d like to request that a dust mitigation plan be
included. Once this is approved and the building starts we will have no say. There are at least 5 properties is adjacent to
a huge vegetative buffer that will remove 2 eucalyptus trees, an Oak tree, and two large pine trees, among other 20 – 30
foot tall brush growth. The ground underneath this area will then be excavated and made into a drainage ditch which
will create a high dust situation. What is the plan to make sure our homes are not covered in dust every day? That our
air quality is managed?
PG&E Lines and Poles
There will be a retaining wall built on the other side/below our fence line. We also have a tall PG&E pole 8 inches from
our fence in this vegetative buffer zone that has not been addressed. Will the pole be removed and the lines put
underground? Will PG&E then need to dig up the back yards of 5 homes that abut that border? We need to better
understand what is happening with the pole and retaining wall directly on the other side of our fence before this plan is
approved
Population and housing:
How many homes are approved to be built on each lot? What is the maximum? What is the maximum car
allowance
1
o Currently the plan says 3: residence, ADU and JADU and that is allowable density with city zoning
regulations and state regulations as well. What about SB9, SB 10 and SB 478 will that make it 4 homes
per lot?
o With that many home on each lot, traffic and parking truly become a point of concern. How many cars
per lot now? 8? 10? 15? 8 x 23 = 184 additional cars driving up and down our streets and needing
overflow parking.
o We are concerned that street parking spill down into the original Stanford and Cuesta roadways even if
there is a 4 car parking requirement for the residence.
o With SB9 quickly passing through the state legislature, it is concerning that no traffic study has been
done in the case that 4 homes should be allowed on each R1.
o Can we push the final vote on the plans until after SB9 passes?
Aesthetics
A vegetation buffer is being completely removed along the southern boarder of the development, which will
change the aesthetics of the 5 homes along the property line.
o This green belt is slated to become a drainage ditch with no vegetation mitigation to replace the trees
and current vegetation slated to be removed.
o The 100 trees being removed must be mitigated 1:1, but where are they being planted? It is not clearly
defined in the plans.
o The current plan shows removal of 3 Eucalyptus trees throughout development that the tree
commission has recommended be saved. Has a Monarch Habitat Assessment been conducted?
o We have video of Red Shoulder Hawks in the Eucalyptus Trees, along with other wildlife.
o The image below shows the entire green belt that will be removed and how the aesthetics will change
for our neighborhood and several homes. The smaller green circle shows the site of where 2 large
eucalyptus trees and one coast oak are slated to be removed against the advise of the tree committee.
o That beautiful skyline, eco system filled with birds, hawks, butterflies and so much more will be
completely removed. At this time, I see a drainage ditch going in in the same spot. Where are the trees?
Where is the mitigation to this aesthetic change?
o The CEQA requires mitigation for aesthetic changes to a neighborhood. What is it? These trees can be
seen from the back yards of homes all up and down the street. These skyline trees deserve another
chance.
o Greenbelt in Red, 653 property in orange, eucalyptus trees circled in green, drainage ditch in purple on
second image.
Thank you for your time.
Looking forward,
Maryann
Maryann Stansfield | Vice President
805.283.6251 (direct) | 805.215.3331 (m)
653 Stanford Dr., San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93405
www.mentalmarketing.com
2
w1 4 o S.IDR
;D
ma .
7 { �r ---r- �.
ILIUM
LOT
I I I
"' -Jt_1� ' - �. J �i i I • u� `MV l W..,r
.
I III
ag
L_7 or
J l _
�� @' 341 S
w �.• � •1 o`�-�S �'' AT A4 TREAT A6 TREAT A7 TREAT A9
976 SF 1909 SF
R' �C - ; �'�: �� y '`"• ry TREAT A5
l id! _-. - Vl- •� la" •,� - j ` .���