HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-24-2016 PC Correspondence - Item 1 (White2)Lomeli, Monique RECEIVED
Subject: 22 Chorro Meeting: PC 09-a L4- [La AUG 2 3 2016
Item: _ _ 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
From: Linda White[
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 8:50 PM
To: Marx, Jan; Davidson, Doug; Ashbaugh, John; Christianson, Carlyn; Carpenter, Dan; Rivoire, Dan; Codron, Michael
Subject: Fwd: 22 Chorro
The following was sent to the advisory body on 8/22/2016 at 2:30 PM for the planning commission. As of 8:45
PM it has not appeared in the correspondence section of the PC. Can you please see that it is added to the
correspondence?
Thank You,
Linda White
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Linda White
Date: Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:35 PM
Subject: 22 Chorro
To: advisorybodies@,slocity.org
Planning Commission
22 Chorro St.
You may take this letter with a grain of salt since I have given up on SLO. I no longer attend ARC, PC, or CC
meetings. I realized after three years of engagement in city activities that no one listens to the permanent
residents or abides by the Zoning Regulations, overlays, Community Guidelines, LUCE, etc.
You are able to justify any and all builders wants with exceptions to the rules. You decrease parking, increase
height, increase density, etc. The city staff colludes with the developer to get the project passed. The advisory
committees just follow the staff recommendations lending to the illusion of open government. What a waste of
everyone's time.
Why don't you just tell the permanent residents that you are going to continue to approve any and all
developments, large or small because the city needs the income stream from building fees?
You ignore a five year drought telling us that we have plenty of water and yet I see our lakes drying up and fires
raging in the county. I pay more for less water so that you can continue to approve development. Why don't
you just tell the permanent residents that you can't be concerned with water shortages because you must
continue the income stream from building fees to meet the bloated city staff payroll and expenses?
You run scared if a developer threatens to sue the city. All the permanent residents want is for the city staff and
committees to enforce the present guidelines and stop giving exceptions to height, side setbacks, density, etc.
Just follow the rules in place. If you can't do that, just be truthful that the city needs the income stream to stay
afloat.
Occasionally, I hear about a project that is so egregious that I have to comment. 22 Chorro is a great example. I
agree with every specific comment that has been made against the 22 Chorro project.
Please be honest with those idealists who still attend meetings and tell them that complaining is a waste of their
time, no matter the strength or truth of their argument. The city needs the revenue from the construction fees
and you will accommodate that need no matter what is placed in front of you.
Disappointedly yours,
Linda White
Lomeli, Monique
Subject:
RE: 22 Chorro
From: Linda White[
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 2:35 PM
To: Advisory Bodies <advisor bodies slocit .or >
Subject: 22 Chorro
Planning Commission
22 Chorro St.
Meeting:_- VO,
Item:
RECEIVED
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AUG 2 3 2016
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
You may take this letter with a grain of salt since I have given up on SLO. I no longer attend ARC, PC, or CC
meetings. I realized after three years of engagement in city activities that no one listens to the permanent
residents or abides by the Zoning Regulations, overlays, Community Guidelines, LUCE, etc.
You are able to justify any and all builders wants with exceptions to the rules. You decrease parking, increase
height, increase density, etc. The city staff colludes with the developer to get the project passed. The advisory
committees just follow the staff recommendations lending to the illusion of open government. What a waste of
everyone's time.
Why don't you just tell the permanent residents that you are going to continue to approve any and all
developments, large or small because the city needs the income stream from building fees?
You ignore a five year drought telling us that we have plenty of water and yet I see our lakes drying up and fires
raging in the county. I pay more for less water so that you can continue to approve development. Why don't
you just tell the permanent residents that you can't be concerned with water shortages because you must
continue the income stream from building fees to meet the bloated city staff payroll and expenses?
You run scared if a developer threatens to sue the city. All the permanent residents want is for the city staff and
committees to enforce the present guidelines and stop giving exceptions to height, side setbacks, density, etc.
Just follow the rules in place. If you can't do that, just be truthful that the city needs the income stream to stay
afloat.
Occasionally, I hear about a project that is so egregious that I have to comment. 22 Chorro is a great example. I
agree with every specific comment that has been made against the 22 Chorro project.
Please be honest with those idealists who still attend meetings and tell them that complaining is a waste of their
time, no matter the strength or truth of their argument. The city needs the revenue from the construction fees
and you will accommodate that need no matter what is placed in front of you.
Disappointedly yours,
Linda White