Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-14-2016 Item 22, SmallTTT11\4 NO: ZZ_ To: Maier, John Paul Subject: RE: Funding for Potential Neighborhood Park-North Broad Area From: Camille Small[ JUN Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 1:33 PM To: E-mail Council Website Subject: Funding for Potential Neighborhood Park-North Broad Area Dear Mayor Marx and Council, You will receive many letters stating the details about residents' need for a park in the North Broad Area. You will read enough facts upon which to rest your wisest decision. There is no need to repeat the 'facts' here. What I would like to state are some 'truths'. The 'park' subject resurfaced at the time 71 Palomar was under consideration for development and some residents may mention it in their letters. Please understand most of us are painfully aware this particular property is not currently available. I ask that you not sidetrack your deliberation by bringing it to your discussion. I ask specifically that Council member Christensen not lecture residents about why the City can do nothing about 'Palomar'. That particular location would have been glorious, don't get me wrong! 'Glorious' for residents in the area, 'outstanding' for residents throughout the city to show visitors and 'heart-warming' for many just to know it is there! If there is another more special site in this City, I would be interested to know. The Jack House pales by comparison (no need to compare the current state of the house). If your heart didn't "skip a beat" on your first viewing of the Sanford house/grounds, I am sorry. I am sorry for residents in San Luis Obispo on several levels. Sorry that we have an administration that fails to put residents first. Sorry we have a Council that does not openly/ repeatedly 'demand' Cal Poly build more housing. 'They plan to" isn't good enough. We know you do not have control of them. You do have control of the 'press' which they seem to care about. They apparently care little about what is happening to many SLO neighborhoods. You may care, but many actually wonder if you do. Builders say they plan to build 'family' apartments or 'workforce' apartments. One doesn't need a degree in Planning to see many are student rentals from their formation. Shame on the City for adding more. Money for a park will last far longer and do more good for all residents than expensive software that doesn't even have good reviews. It is important you note information on the ERP indicates the need for training and retraining. Wouldn't you consider this a possibility of spending much more money over time. Consider the attrition rate of City employees. A park in "perpetuity" can do much more good than a software system that is short- lived. Residents need a sign they are important. I Please read my comments as frustration and a feeling of a hopeless future for San Luis neighborhoods. Cal Poly students will continue to benefit the economy (i.e. merchants) Cal Poly will not take its business and move out of town. We need existing neighborhoods where families want to live. They will be able to afford them when student rentals do not drive rental/ sales prices. We could have a normal town .... if enough decision makers stand up for us. With concern and asking for yours, Camille Small San Luis Obispo