Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-13-2015 BW1 WhiteSubject: FW: Future Goals COUNCIL MEf:T1,N­1 ITEM NO.-, RleCl_p1VED1 JAN 12 2015 From: Linda White Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 4:10 PMS CY To: Christianson, Carlen, Carpenter, Dan, Marx, Jan, Ashbaugh, John, Lichtig, Katie, Rivoire, Dan, Anthony Meiia It is said that doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. I insanely submit the following letter to the City Council: January 11, 2014 I have been attending City Council meetings for 15 months, always speaking to neighborhood wellness, the second of the 2013-2015 City Council Goals. In my first letter to the City on October 16, 2013, I mentioned that we have many ordinances e.g. parking, noise, trash can, furniture on roofs, parking in front yards, five non - related adults, etc., etc., etc. We have zoning, density, accessory structures, additional living units, and now a proposed rental inspection program. We have neighborhood services personnel, parking enforcement officers, etc., etc., etc. We have a community development department, planning commission, and architectural review commission, etc., etc., etc. A large percentage of the issues that all of these commissions, staff and ordinances try to regulate are the problems associated with high concentrations of 18 to 22 year-olds living en masse in our community. We need to address and treat the underlying cause of our problems rather than continue to use the Band-Aid approach to treat the symptoms of this epidemic. Does anyone on the Council have the courage to ask why the City is forced to pass so many ordinances, employ so much personnel, and expend so much money to combat the negative effects of the University? Everyone agrees that the University is an asset. It is an excellent institution of higher learning. It is a jewel among the CSU system. The educational programs are outstanding and make our graduates sought after by businesses not only statewide but nationally. The University benefits our local businesses. The University benefits our City. San Luis Obispo also benefits the University. Our local businesses attract students. Our ideal location, weather, proximity to the ocean, surrounding viewshed, outdoor activities, etc. attract students. If not for these geographic and economic factors Cal Poly would be as popular as Cal State Bakersfield. Cal Poly is not going to pick up the new Warren J. Baker Center for Science and Mathematics and move. Since this is the case, why does our City take such a subservient attitude toward Cal Poly? What positive, tangible outcomes have come from our City Manager's "velvet glove" approach? I maintain that the only reason the City has been invited to sit on Master Plan committees is because of the community outrage exhibited at the CP fait accompli Freshman dorm project on Slack/Grand. If not for the pending lawsuit brought by local residents (Alliance of SLO Neighborhoods, ASLON) when you abdicated your responsibility to residents, you would be sitting on the sidelines just as you have for the past 30 years. I have heard the Cal Poly Master Plan presentation, as presented at the City Council Meeting on January 6th, on three occasions. So far it has been an explanation of the process of what Cal Poly WILL do to advance their agenda. Each time, I walk away realizing that no questions posed by the public have been answered. Dr. Linda Dalton stresses that the public input has been solicited on two occasions. However, there is never a synopsis of what these suggestions, concerns, complaints have been. There is no assurance that public opinion will be considered any more than it has been in the past. Another talking point is that many Master Plan committees have been set up with staff and public representatives but reports from these committees don't give any tangible results from these collaborations. Just sitting at the table talking doesn't mean that you are being listened to. I would hope that the City Council would ask the following questions: • What percentage of students does CP propose to house on campus and within what timeframe • Where will new dorms be built and when do they propose to build them *Will the City take a stronger stance in encouraging and influencing CP to hold growth until a greater percentage of students are housed on campus • Where will the proposed hotel/convention center/events center be built *Will enrollment be held to present levels until adequate on -campus housing is provided I am encouraged that the City has been invited to sit on so many of the Master Plan Committees and I ask that the City use these seats to encourage and influence CP to: • Hold growth until a greater percentage of students are housed on campus • Use REITS to bring more on -campus housing on line faster Neighborhood Wellness and the SPEEDY creation of more on -campus housing should be the first major goal of the City Council. Without a proactive position toward Cal Poly you will be the City Council of Isla Vista North, formerly known as San Luis Obispo, the Happiest City in America. Linda White co-chairman Monterey Heights Neighbors