Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-07-2024 Goldman (Property Development @ LOVR East of Hwy 101)1 From:Lorraine Goldman < Sent:Wednesday, February 7, 2024 12:17 PM To:Advisory Bodies Cc:steve@peck . Subject:Proposed property development at Los Osos Valley Rd east of 101 overpass    This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.  07 February 2024       Dear Planning Commissioners and Staff;    Recently the residents of Los Verdes Park I and Park II were invited to hear about proposed development plans for the properties adjacent to their communities. Thank you to Mr. Wade and Mr. Peck for their invitation. It was wonderful to hear that private residences are planned, instead of an all night gas station, or complex of commercial-retail buildings. The plan seems to be in alignment with the State’s mandate to increase housing opportunities. What is planned is 2 relatively high density residential communities on either side of Los Osos Valley Rd (LOVR) east of the 101 overpass; a Senior community and a family community. Again, housing needs being addressed. Predictably current residents of the area expressed their concerns regarding the negative impact of such a development; Air and light pollution, noise pollution, change in vista, change in wind patterns, availability of water, utilities and services. Concerns that people employed to build out the plans be hired from local companies. Residents were assured negative effects would be minimal. A new access road could be made available to current residents linking LOVR to Buckley at Higuera (a plus). A new traffic light would be installed to help control traffic patterns on LOVR (a plus). Residential communities as neighbors are definitely preferable to grand commercial installations. If the perimeter road is approved, I would want assurance that access to it from Los Verdes Park II and the planned family residences would be controlled by private gates. This would prevent public access to either of the communities. “Underground” parking is planned…how many cars per unit? Will there be sufficient parking for guests? Household workers? Hopefully the CCandRs will outline residency requirement to limit quick turnover to rentals, sublets, etc. The plans we saw include 2 and 3 story structures with 220 and 223 residential units. This plan seems to echo the plan of residential structures along Madonna and Froom Ranch Roads. Please forgive me, but these homes look like a nightmare vision of suburbia, packing in as many units as possible. This will bring an increase in traffic, in spite of the conciliatory statistics Mr. Wade’s hired consultants provided. I spoke with Mr. Wade. He is sure it would not be worth his efforts to reduce the number of units built. Perhaps reducing the size of the pool and community center would provide more area to allow him to lower the profile of the community and still meet the numbers he requires. 2 I fully accept that new home construction will happen in this area. I recognize the need for new homes. I also recognize the need for the quality that the “SLO Life” promises. I would ask you of the SLO City and County planning boards, to seriously consider if these homes, as planned, might have a negative impact on the surrounding communities. Our natural resource supplies will surely be taxed with increased demand. There will however be jobs in the service sector as more trash collectors and trucks will be needed, more mail delivery personnel, more busses and drivers; more room in Cold Canyon Landfill. Hopefully the new service employees will find this new housing affordable, so as to allow them to work locally. Of course, tax revenues will increase. But let us not cavalierly dismiss the negative impact that density has on people; perhaps increasing the demand on social services, and medical services. I recognize the owner/builder’s right to a profit. I appreciate his refusal of a quick sale to the purely commercial interests. I ask that if possible, the number of units and the height of the buildings be reconsidered to reduce the density and stress on the neighborhood. Surely there is profit in protecting the SLO life. Respectfully, Lorraine Goldman Resident Los Verdes Park II