Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-05-2016 Item 8, SchmidtCOUNCIL MEETING: ITEM NO.: To: Maier, John Paul Subject: RE: Madonna/Froom Project AIR 0 5 2016 From: Richard Schmidt [ Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 9:16 AM To: E-mail Council Website Subject: Madonna/Froom Project Dear Council Members, While it's touching to see all the form -letter -like Astroturf correspondence favoring development of the Madonna/Froom project, these letters simply amplify what's obvious about this hugely -costly front- end buy -in senior housing project: It's mainly a place to house rich people from out of town, not to provide the sort of accommodations most local seniors, like myself, can ever afford to call home. (Note that several of your correspondents state they are looking at such rich people's enclaves far and wide, not just here, which further proves my point about the sort of occupants this is intended for.) If this is approved, it will be entirely consistent with the previous actions of this council — approving things that wreck the local quality of life to benefit campaign -contributing developers and their well-to-do out of town purchasers. However, that's not the main reason I write. THIS LAND IS ARGUABLY THE MOST DANGEROUS PIECE OF GEOLOGY IN OUR TOWN, AND SHOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED. 1. Froom Creek emerges from Froom Canyon at the rear of this property. This particular creek system supports an active alluvial fan that shoots across then spreads along the level portion of the property. All but one of you have lived in SLO for such a short time you have no memory of an actual flood (as contrasted with the pipsqueak events of the 1990s that your equally short-memoried staff refer to as floods). When Froom Creek floods, it shoots huge quantities of boulders, rock, debris from up canyon, silt, and unbelievable quantities of high -velocity water across the flats straight at the auto park area, which has been badly damaged in the past. This thick soup is powered by energy you cannot imagine. Everything in its immediate path will be destroyed — and if developed as planned, that means cars, landscape, site development and BUILDINGS! The Madonnas seem to want you to believe some rinkydink unengineered earthworks at the mouth of the canyon will hold back the creek's onslaught. That's nonsense — the active alluvial fans emerging from canyons east of LA have shown nature has no respect for rinkydink, engineered or otherwise. And even if "engineered," that's still nonsense: Nature will always overpower the creations of puny human minds. You simply cannot hold back this type of natural force. It will prevail. This is DANGEROUS PROPERTY — don't allow it to be developed. If you do, against all common sense, please erect a brass plaque with your names on it so the relatives of those killed in the inevitable disaster will know who to blame and sue. 2. Earthquake Country. City planners seem ignorant of, or at least indifferent to, the fact this property is seismically active. There's a significant fault that goes through it near the base of the hills — part of the whole San Andreas-Hosgri fault complex that destablilzes western California as a whole, and our county, including Diablo, in particular. Geologists have recently concluded these parallel faults act as one, and that a quake originating on one can jump to another, which means this fault could deliver quite a huge jolt. Why would you develop right atop an earthquake fault zone? This is just plain stupid. It's the sort of thing that makes the public ask, when the inevitable happens, "What where they thinking?" One doesn't need to build right on top of an active fault. We've got plenty of better places to build. Again, only a lunatic or greedhead would contemplate developing this site given this geological reality. And now this too has been called to your attention. In conclusion, this particular piece of land should not be developed. It actually has great civic value just as it is. As Neil Havlik has pointed out in an excellent statement far calmer than mine, this land has incredible value as open space to protect wetlands, species of concern and views cherished by all but those who profit from destroying them or those taking campaign contributions from those who profit from destroying them. The city should take steps to see that this remarkable habitat area remains just that. (You have money to give for preserving land in Pismo Beach. You have money for this, you have money for that. You have money to plan protection of this parcel. You also have $4.5 million of leftover Measure Y funds Mr. Ashbaugh's creative mind wants to use to subsidize slumlords. Wouldn't preserving this property be a much better use?) You have the resources, non-financial and financial, to protect this land. You have the power. The people have told you, whenever asked, that they want you to preserve our open spaces, hillsides and views. The only question is whether you have the vision and the will to do the will of the people. The further this goes down the entitlement path, the more costly doing the right thing will become. Halting work on the specific plan is the proper place to start doing the right thing. Sincerely, Richard Schmidt