HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/5/2023 Item 6a, Justesen
From:Erik Justesen <
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Item 6a, Dec. 5th CC Agenda
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Dear Mayor and Council members, I provided this feedback to Adam Fukushima in response to a recent message he sent
out to the Development Roundtable group regarding the poten?al for a new “Inconvenience fee”.
First let me say I love what the city is doing to improve ac?ve transporta?on systems all through town. The new bike
ways, enhanced cross walks, ped signals, warning lights, curb cuts, road diets, sidewalk repairs etc., make a huge
difference to improving the quality of our community in a sustainable, safe, and livable way. Thank you!
Regarding the discussion for an “inconvenience Fee”; While I very much favor enhanced no?cing associated with
significant construc?on projects downtown (both private and public), I can’t for the life of me imagine why SLO would
consider adding another tax on redevelopment projects in the downtown core.
This “inconvenience fee” flies in the face of the communi?es long held efforts to redevelop our downtown core by
a?rac?ng investment and developers to help us create a more vibrant city center. Adding residen?al units is a core
policy of the city. Redeveloping vacant and underu?lized buildings (of which we have many) and sites to create the kind
of urban neighborhood that is desired by residents and tourists alike is embedded in many of our public policy
documents. New development and adap?ve reuse projects are sorely needed as they play a cri?cal role in ensuring
downtown vitality.
The staff report indicates that an “inconvenience fee” would serve as an incen?ve to developers to get their projects
completed more quickly thus reducing impacts on public ways. I believe this characteriza?on completely misunderstands
the mo?va?ons the private sector has in delivering projects. There is not one developer who doesn’t want to get their
project build as fast as possible. Time is money. Period. A fee for going slower is puni?ve and will not do anything to
speed up construc?on. Improved responsiveness and quicker turnarounds on inspec?ons, decisions, and service by the
city during construc?on would actually be much more effec?ve. This fee would not have any material effect to speed up
construc?on rather it creates addi?onal costs and barriers to inves?ng in our downtown.
We all know that developing a project in a constrained downtown environment is far more costly and difficult than
developing a project outside this area. The issues that must be addressed from purchasing parking spaces for
construc?on deliveries and trades to access the site, to complex traffic management planning, public no?cing, and a
myriad of other issues that must be confronted all add to the already high cost of project development.
In the end if we as a city want to see investment in our downtown core, for all the reasons enumerated in the
Downtown Vision and General Plan, slapping yet another fee on the pile is one of the worst things we could do. Just
because some other ci?es in the US have done it does not make it right for SLO.
Thanks for being open to my input!
Best,
Erik Justesen
1
ERIK JUSTESEN
CEO + President
Direct: (805) 903-1208 | Mobile: (805) 431-6032
RRM Careers | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram
rrmdesign.com
2