Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/1/2025 Item 8a, Flickinger Sarah Flickinger < To:E-mail Council Website Subject:04012025 Meeting Public Comment for Agenda Item 8a Attachments:04012025 Flickinger Comment Agenda Item PH 8a.pdf This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Please find a public comment from Sarah Flickinger attached for consideration for the April 1, 2025 City Council meeting, agenda item 8a: Broadstone Village Review Thanks! 1 March 31, 2025 To Mayor Stewart and Councilmembers Boswell, Francis, Marx and Shoresman: I’m writing to comment on Public Hearing, Agenda Item 8.a.: REVIEW OF AN INITIATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONE, AND ANNEXATION TO FACILITATE BROADSTONE VILLAGE, A PHASED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AT 12500 AND 12501 LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD, for the April 1, 2025 City Council meeting. Today I write expressing my personal views and opinions as a resident of the City of San Luis Obispo, which have been informed by many years, perspectives and roles in service to the community. For those who don’t know me, I was a resident of Los Verdes Park I for 13 years (2005-2018). I served as a past president of the Los Verdes Park I Homeowners’ Association, Inc., as well as former special board member, appointed to work amongst a team of representatives from both Los Verdes Park I and Los Verdes Park II homeowners’ associations to represent the neighborhoods’ interests in past dealings with the City. I no longer hold these roles, but I was involved as an advocate and neighborhood representative in both actions relating to the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange projects as well as the Avila Ranch development. Additionally, for full disclosure, I currently serve as a board member for Friends of the Bob Jones Trail as well as an advocate for disability inclusion as co-chair of Access for All, a fund of the Community Foundation San Luis Obispo County. I am also an LCI (League Cycling Instructor for Safe Cycling programs) with the League of American Bicyclists. And I’m a mother who taught my child to bike safely while raising her for many years in Los Verdes Park I. I participated as an active community member in the LUCE process years ago, and, in past employment spent several years promoting the City and the greater area as a destination. The opinions expressed herein are my own as an individual, but are informed by these many perspectives. And while I live elsewhere in the City of San Luis Obispo now, I still care dearly about and regularly find myself in this particular area of town. We have many friends still living in the LVPs and surrounding neighborhoods. My comments are lengthy, but they are thorough, and I would be obliged if you would consider them. As always, I’m happy to speak with any of you individually to further clarify the perspectives herein; please feel free reach out to me directly at any time. With the proposal before you for consideration today, you have an incredible opportunity – a legacy type of opportunity – that will impact generations to come in San Luis Obispo, and I urge you to take your time and due diligence in evaluating more than just the staƯ-presented alternative. It is not the only option. This is an opportunity to bring specific kinds of much-needed residential to the City, correct past errors in City development and shape the creation of one of the City’s gateways. The neighborhood (in the sense of the entire area southish of Tank Farm and east of US 101) in question is a rich tapestry of income levels, backgrounds, ages, housing types, neighborhood commercial, a school, commercial enterprises and industrial uses. It is vibrant, but it has long been an afterthought, with myriad piecemeal mitigations for traƯic over decades of development along the LOVR , S. Higuera, Madonna and Tank Farm corridors as well as the airport area and points south of the City limits. It has long been a traƯic nightmare for motor vehicles, and worse for those wishing to use active or public transportation in the area. While some neighborhoods may have private parks, public recreation is sorely lacking for those living in housing outside of such neighborhoods or coming into the area for work. For individuals with disabilities, navigating to accessible transportation options can be a challenge, with limited crossings, fractured or completely missing sidewalk facilities and significant distance from services elsewhere in the City. While there are City and SLCUSD bus routes with stops in the area, getting to and from those stops safely can be a challenge. And, at more than 2.2 miles from the designated neighborhood elementary school, CL Smith, and even further from Laguna Middle School and San Luis Obispo High School, “Safe Routes to Schools” for these neighborhoods has hardly been an option. For years residents of the Los Verdes parks and other neighborhoods in the vicinity were told that the traƯic issues would be solved by the addition of the Prado Road Interchange – a mitigation that slips farther away each passing year that it remains a plan rather than a completed project. The time to address the situation is now, and before you is the solution: the LOVR Bypass. The bypass creates a long-term fix to years of insuƯicient and/or uncompleted mitigation measures. As proposed, with signalization at LOVR and Buckley, it creates a complete circulation in this portion of the City, and should be built in its entirety before or with the first phase of any development project on these parcels. TIF funds have been collected as mitigations from many developers over the years for impacts to this area, and this is an opportunity to put them to use addressing a major traƯic issue, as well as safety, noise and air quality concerns. I appreciate the inclusion of the complete streets concept for improving local active and accessible neighborhood circulation, but, as an LCI, I know that adoption is easier the safer it is made to feel for users. To that end, I would suggest a signalized driveway crossing for pedestrians and bikes at the driveway to the southern portion of the Broadstone development (for path running parallel to LOVR Bypass). If LVPII opts for the oƯer of access, I would urge a full HAWK signal for both driveways and a crossing of the LOVR Bypass at that location. Working in concert with the development’s contributions to the LOVR Bypass, City improvements could be made for the now-relieved existing portion of LOVR from the Bypass signal to the signal at S. Higuera, as well as along S. Higuera between Buckley and Vachell. This is an area with school bus stops and many residents wanting to use active transportation modes to access nearby neighborhood commercial. Existing TIF funds collected as mitigations for the impacts of past developments contributing to failures in this area could be used for improvements. These improvements also support safe routes to schools for existing and future residential developments The complete street for the LOVR Bypass, as well as complete street improvements on the portion of LOVR between the Broadstone properties and the signal at S. Higuera should be a given for supporting active transportation and improved (currently failing) multimodal transportation in the area after decades of neglect, and too many incidents. However, it should not replace the planned portion of the Bob Jones trail located adjacent to the proposed development on the creek side (between 101 and the development) for the southern parcels. The Bob Jones Trail is a beloved, community-driven, dedicated separate corridor that serves transportation and recreation needs between the City of San Luis Obispo and areas of the County south of the City. This is a portion of the City severely lacking in recreation facilities, and a trail adjacent to a major roadway does not provide the same solace and recreational benefits (clean air, quiet, safe for all abilities, health enhancement, green views, educational opportunities) as the planned and agreed upon original alignment of the Bob Jones Trail segment connecting LOVR and Buckley. The Bypass as a complete street and the originally planned BJT connector can both exist, with suƯicient space remaining for the development to be successful. In fact, it would enhance the development and the greater neighborhood , oƯering residents close access to a recreation and transportation facility that could take them all the way to Avila Beach if they would like. It would also provide a more direct active route for guests at nearby hotels to access events at the Octagon Barn or even out to Edna Valley and the greater SLO Coast Wine Country. This is a gateway, and the planned Bob Jones Trail connector, long envisioned as a separated, creek side facility, could be among its stars. The BJT in a creek side location could also provide essential access and egress between the neighborhood and the 101 for fire and life safety, including serving as a fire break or added capacity in the event of a necessary evacuation scenario. As you are also considering the WUI via the updated CalFire maps and accommodating for how the climate continues to evolve emergency planning and response, this is an opportunity to proactively prepare for whatever the future may bring. The complete streets for the LOVR Bypass and the existing portions of LOVR and S. Higuera in the area should be a given, as this has long been known to be a failing, dangerous LOS for active transportation modes. The multimodal mitigation measures called for and approved in multiple past development EIRs included completion of the Bob Jones Trail extension as well as future improvements along the arterials. Any proposal for the Broadstone south development should include both a complete street LOVR Bypass as well as a separated Bob Jones Trail connector, running along the creek side of the development near its original community-selected orientation. The benefits of both are essential to the existing and future residents of this area of the City. A separated trail with multiple benefits (transportation, public safety, climate preparedness and recreation) could oƯer options for additional funding streams as well. On another note, I – like six percent of the population – have an allergy to natural rubber latex. When the LOVR interchange projects were completed, rubberized asphalt was used to mitigate noise impacts in excess of allowable residential levels. This asphalt, however, combined with traƯic dust, contributes significant rubber particulate that can cause latex allergies (caused by recurrent exposure to natural rubber latex), exacerbate existing asthma and allergies, and pose other health and environmental problems. I would strongly urge you away from using such materials in or around this area in the future. It makes active transportation along streets less healthful or practicable, and, as seniors have an elevated occurrence of latex allergies (11% for seniors vs. 6% of the general population), is especially important given the proposed type of development. The use of allergen-removing trees and landscaping (via OPALS scoring) and/or active air filtering technologies throughout the developments could significantly support improved air quality in and around the development and the larger neighborhood area. Having the separated BJT alignment also oƯers an alternative for those seeking to avoid such particulate while engaging in active modes of transportation or recreation. Lastly, as the question of aƯordable housing requirements is before you, I support the inclusion of aƯordable housing units in the development, as would be consistent with the diversity of the larger area and the community it has created. I would also suggest a condition that a percentage (or – better – all) of the units and facilities be built to universally accessible design standards to support the inclusion of individuals with disabilities throughout the new neighborhoods, as well as make the neighborhoods visitable by any community member, enhancing belonging and community engagement for everyone. Our City has one opportunity to do this right, creating a beautiful, inclusive, welcoming gateway at the crossroads of LOVR, S. Higuera and Buckley and correcting years of under-mitigated impacts. I urge you to support moving forward with the project, taking the utmost care to ensure that it serves not just immediate eƯiciencies, but the long-term wellbeing and belonging of all who live, work and visit San Luis Obispo. Sincerely, Sarah Flickinger