HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-18-2016 Item 20, Small (2)October 17, 2016
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
COUNCIL MEETING: k.61 l0 2-ou.
ITEM NO.: 2�
V
OCT 18 2016
I respectfully submit thoughts on 22 Chorro: SLC CITY
This housing is NOT "AFFORDABLE HOUSING". Please refrain from calling it that;
please correct people who call it that. Word games are very disingenuous. The public readily
sees through the verbiage.
There are to be (at this point) ONLY FOUR 'studios' priced as "affordable". No one can call
the project, as a whole," affordable housing." That would be a blatant lie. (The studios' affordability
will not be known until a rental price is established.)
Developments like this actually CAUSE RENT INCREASES.
Note: If this is designed like Icon, it will likely be $1,000 per bed. 2 beds per bedroom and two bedrooms
per unit:
$4,000 for a 2 bedroom apartment that will likely have a very small kitchen,
tiny living room, limited storage and extremely limited parking is expensive, even by San Luis
Obispo standards.
Anyone on Council approving such developments is simply not representing the desires of most of the
long-term resident constituents who will be here longer than short-term itinerant residents. We love
and wish to protect our city. Views of the Morros are extremely treasured by us and they are protected in
word in the General Plan. You are charged with protecting them in practice. Ignoring the General Plan
and the Land Use Element, simply stated, means you would be abdicating your responsibility. The
wording is not at all `ambiguous'. Taller buildings are allowed on the North side as there are apartment
buildings on adjacent streets. More stories are not allowed on the South side of Foothill because it would
not be compatible with existing—not because someone just neglected to write "South" side down.
Most of the residents of the Northwest section of town use the Foothill/Chorro intersection and will
unequivocally testify that it is problematic. No traffic study has been done and none needs to be done
if you are responsible in turning down this development which is clearly not applicable in this location.
You cannot find cause to permit more than two stories. Perhaps a different developer with a different
business would find this site appealing. There is nothing about this developer's proposal or motives
that is appealing to the majority of residents you represent.
Thank you for providing guidance and protection during the term you are in office. When appropriate,
a serious discussion needs to take place regarding the plans that are coming from our City Manager and
the Planners under her. I assure you it has nothing to do with the building slowdown from 2008 and the
subsequent increased percentage allowed. There are serious problems that have existed long enough
for the general public to be acutely aware. Please work with us toward a reasonable solution. Thank you.
With respect,
Camille Small