Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-25-2014 th AllenSuomme_� by_+ aul Allen March 25, 2014 Comments to the City of San Luis Obispo Regarding Cal Poly's Proposed Housing South Project Introduction and General Comments Almost everyone in San Luis Obispo supports efforts by Cal Poly to house more of their students on campus. The problem with Cal Poly's latest dorm proposal, Housing South, is its location, and the massive intrusion it creates for existing nearby, quiet single - family residential neighborhoods. Housing a large number of new freshmen, who will be experimenting with new personal behaviors and who are just learning to be responsible adults, right next to these neighborhoods is a recipe for community disaster. There absolutely needs to be a better, more suitable buffer zone between the new proposed four -story dorms and nearby single- family homes, or between the new dorms and Teach School, a growing magnet elementary school for high - achieving youngsters. By placing the dorms right across from the neighborhoods, Cal Poly is intimidating families and homeowners and encouraging them to move away, and sell their homes to new owners who will then rent to students. With very little expenditure or effort, Cal Poly thereby gets the advantage of added student housing within close walking distance of the campus. It also sets the stage for building more dorms in future years across from Monterey Heights, with the same disastrous effect on that neighborhood. Residents along Slack Street and in Monterey Heights are speaking out in unanimous opposition to the proposed location of Cal Poly's new dorm. It is totally out of character with their professional and blue collar neighborhoods, and a genuine threat to their homes and families. Serious, viable alternatives have been proposed at several public meetings about the Housing South project, but these have never been given serious consideration by Cal Poly. Cal Poly administration values expedience and reduced dormitory construction cost far more than neighborhood vitality and wellness in the City. In addition to speaking out for themselves, San Luis Obispo residents and working families need the City to speak out and step in on their behalf, to defend their homes and the hard -earned quality of life we all treasure here. Specific Comments on the Recirculated Draft EIR Section H, pg ES -20 Nuisances Associated with the Student Population The DEIR states "Community members were concerned with the project contributing to this ongoing problem" (trespassing, congregating, walking through neighborhoods). COMMENT: The DEIR fails to acknowledge community concerns about the project contributing substantially to neighborhood deterioration, brought on by owner- occupied residences being sold, owners moving out, and residences being used as student rentals. 2. Section 3.1.3, pg 3 -2 Campus Enrollment COMMENT: The DEIR fails to mention or incorporate recent proposals to increase Cal Poly's enrollment from the current 19,000 ( approx.) to 24,000 (approx.) in the near future. The effects on enrollment growth this Housing South project, its impacts and mitigations should be addressed now, not years down the road. 3. Pg. 4.1 -21 COMMENT: The view of 4 -story dorms immediately adjacent to Slack Street is atrocious. The Housing South project will dramatically change the quiet, residential character of this neighborhood and Teach School, right across the street. 4. Section 4.6, pg 4.6.2 COMMENT: No traffic impact analysis is performed on the 4 -way boulevard stop intersection of Grand Ave. and Slack Street, a major entrance to Cal Poly and the proposed Housing South dorms. This is an unacceptable deficiency, as high, added traffic at many times will affect public safety and parents delivering their children to classes at Teach Elementary School. 5. Section 4.8.3, pg 4.8 -11 and beyond- Cultural Resources COMMENT: No mention is made of the project's high negative impact on residential neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the project. Long -time residents, professional and blue - collar families, will move to get away from the dense student population. Their homes will be rented to students and a further cancerous deterioration of the neighborhoods will occur. There should be a significant buffer zone between high - density student dorms and existing neighborhoods. 6. Section 4.8.7, pg 4.8 -21 Population and Housing COMMENT: Under Displace Housing or People, no mention is made of the project's strong contribution to movement of existing families away from adjacent neighborhoods, to be replaced by student renters. 7. Section 5, pg 5 -1 Alternatives Analysis COMMENTS: Alternative site H -12 & H -16 was not genuinely considered, as it this alternative was judged to be "inconvenient" for existing users. How does that stack up against the huge inconvenience of the existing proposal on adjacent homeowners and residential neighborhoods? The 8.7 acre site was rejected due to "lack of proximity to dining facilities ". Cal Poly will build more dorms in the near future, and should focus on this area of campus for housing expansion rather than cause neighborhood deterioration on the south border of campus, and within the City of San Luis Obispo. They should plan properly and build for the future now. Adding some dining component now, and building the new freshmen dorms on the 8.7 acre site would do this. Such planning for the future would "continue to enrich and develop the residential community on campus" (pg 5.3). This "planning for future dorms" objective would also be met by Section 5.5.3 Location Alternative- H -12 &H -16 Parking Lots. The DEIR and Cal Poly planners fail to genuinely weigh the value of these alternatives, by continually discounting the fact that the project, as proposed, will have dramatic negative impacts on the peace and quality of existing adjacent neighborhoods within the City of San Luis Obispo. The DEIR does this consistently throughout the document. 8. Section 5.5.4, pg 5 -9 COMMENT: The DEIR further concludes (erroneously) that building the proposed parking structure on Slack Street would not mitigate project impacts on adjacent neighborhoods, even though a significant and highly desirable buffer would be created. Paul Allen, Foothill Area resident for 40 years - 544 -2306