HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-25-2017 PC Correspondence - Item 3 (C. Smith)meeting:
RECEIVED
em: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Cox, Rebecca
From: carolyn smith <
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:18 AM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
To: Advisory Bodies
Subject: Planning Commission - 01/25/17 - San Luis Ranch Draft EIR Input
Chair Stevenson and Commissioners,
I have lived in the Laguna Lake area for 37 years. I am very concerned about the multiple large
projects being proposed in the southern portion of the city which now include: Avila Ranch, San Luis
Ranch, and, soon to be before you, John Madonna's Senior Complex plus an additional 275
residential units off of LOVR adjacent to Home Depot.
If you look at all three of these projects in a vacuum, you will miss the cumulative effect on traffic, air,
and loss of ag land that these large projects will create. While the individual Draft EIR's explain each
individual project's significant unavoidable impacts (which are very similar), what they don't do is
consider the total effect of the two or even the three projects. I realize the Madonna Senior complex
Draft EIR is not before you at this time but since it is going through the city process, I believe it should
be considered (if nothing else in the back of your mind) when you are reviewing and discussing the
traffic and air quality impacts from San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch. Since San Luis Ranch proposes
to place all of the traffic for the first phase of it's project onto LOVR, the Madonna project should be
considered in terms of how it will affect traffic on LOVR.
Our city has prided itself in our air quality, even going as far as banning drive-through restaurants and
banks due to its negative impacts from idling vehicles. As part of the mitigation methods to the
horrendous traffic impacts from these two projects, it is being proposed that longer queue lines be
added for turning left and right at numerous negatively affected intersections. This will result in
vehicles idling for longer periods of time while they wait through several light cycles to get through the
numerous heavily impacted intersections. This flies in the face of our long term city goal
of reducing our carbon emissions. We have banned smoking in public areas, plastic bags,
Styrofoam containers, and soon plastic bottles at public functions. We are promoting solar panels,
water saving plumbing features, insulated glass and other energy saving building materials on new
construction, all in an effort toward reducing our energy consumption. Yet, this project, as Avila
Ranch, will produce enough traffic to cause violation of the Clean Air Act. How does this fit into our
city's goal of reducing our carbon footprint? Allowing these two projects to be built will cause
carbon emissions that are harmful to residents' health. Therefore, reviewing the Draft EIR for each
of these projects in a vacuum will be a disservice to existing residents, particularly in the southern
area of the city, and destroy their quality of life.
Further, I am very troubled that our City has over -ruled our County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). As
noted in the Draft EIR, this project is being proposed to be built pursuant to the California
Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (CALUPH) which provides for different safety zone designation
and density than the current ALUP. The City (using a paid consultant whose report is disputed by Cal
Trans and the Airport Land Use Commission) made up safety zones based on the CALUPH which,
according to airport commissioners with whom I have spoken, is primarily used in most cities as a
baseline in determining safety zones. The local Airport Commissions (when there is one in place) or
area experts when there is no commission, then use the topography, weather, and other conditions to
create safety zones based on the unique conditions to the area. As the Draft EIR indicates, there
have been three accidents in the vicinity of this project, and in 1994, a jet crashed in the area --now
vacant ag land --where this project proposes to build housing, killing four people on the plane. My
husband, a firefighter at that time, responded to this crash and aircraft debris was strewn for
hundreds of yards from the crash site. He believes that if there had been homes in the area, there
would have been significant injuries, loss of life, and property damage. While the other aircraft
accidents were not directly on this project site, they were under the same flight path and not far from
this project. History tells us it's just a matter of time before there will be another aircraft crash --
particularly since the airport is expanding. Three historic accidents on and in proximity of this
proposed project should be considered a significant unavoidable impact. It is not designated as such
in the Draft EIR since it is not looking at this project site realistically but through the vision of the City's
development driven LUCE. The LUCE Committee itself did not over -rule the ALUP, despite being
urged to do so. I believe they didn't because they didn't want to be responsible when there is a
significant loss of life from a crash at this project site. The City didn't seem to be concerned about it
and at one point I heard a city staff member say, "accidents happen." I wonder if that city staff
member (or his children) would live in this project and gamble on there not being another crash in the
future. I believe the City's frantic desire to build more housing is ignoring significant dangers and this
is definitely a significant one. The Draft EIR is utilizing the city's irresponsible gambling of human
lives to minimize this danger. I hope you will not allow that and request that the Draft EIR include a
scenario of potential loss of lives and property when there is another crash at the site of this
project after the proposed build out. Please note that the Airport Land Use Commission has not
yet made a conformity determination on this project.
Thank you for your consideration.
Carolyn Smith
SLO City resident