HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-2017 Item 16, CroughCOUNCIL MEETING: RECEIVED
[TEM NO.: APR 0 3 2017
From:
Sent: Saturday, April 1, 2017 9:28:37 PM
To: E-mail Council Website
Cc: Pease, Andy; Harmon, Heidi; Gomez, Aaron; Rivoire, Dan; Christianson, Carlyn
Subject: 4/4/17 Appeal 71 Palomar
April 1, 2017
Dear Mayor Harman and Council Members
We are the resident homeowners of 633 Luneta Drive directly across the street from the proposed 33 -unit
apartment complex at 71 Palomar. We are writing to ask that the City Council uphold the appeal, deny the
project as currently configured, and insist upon a design that is compatible and respectful of the historic
resource.
The problems with this project are many but we can highlight a few significant issues:
1. Do not clear cut 55 of the 59 trees on the site (some of which are truly magnificent and over 100 years
old) just to squeeze in additional rental units. We need to explore alternative, financially viable, low
impact designs that preserve the urban forest and are compatible with this unique local resource.
2. Do not move the historic Stanford House from its place of prominence. We have an obligation to
protect and preserve our designated historic and cultural resources and we cannot allow this important
resource to be desecrated by moving it from its place of prominence and possibly risking its destruction
during an unnecessary move.
3. Do not significantly alter the topography, as you will fail to preserve the natural and cultural resources
of this significant site.
4. Do not destroy the habitat of the significant resident wildlife (e.g., Raptors, Red -Tailed Hawks, Red—
Shouldered Hawks, White -Tailed Kite and over 20 additional birds listed on the Federal Migratory
Treaty).
5. Significantly reduce the scale and massing of the project to protect the integrity and the prominence of
the historic resource. CEQA allows the City to protect its historic resources.
6. Provide adequate on-site parking for the eventual number of people that are projected to reside on
site. The project as currently configured is expected to house approximately 146 residents with 63
parking spaces which is unacceptable given that the neighborhood parking situation is already severely
impacted and the Circulation Element requires the City to ensure that parking is adequate.
7. Make sure that the proposed development does not negatively impact traffic safety. The local
neighborhood has several dangerous intersections that may be negatively impacted by a project of this
size The Council should order a traffic impact study and carefully study the results before approving
this project.
In summary, we don't understand how this project has made it to this stage in its current configuration. There is
no doubt in our minds that given the many issues raised by this proposal both here and elsewhere that the
Council should uphold the appeal and that a full Environmental Impact Review (EIR) is required before
proceeding any further. Upon the conclusion of the EIR, the project should then be sent back to the relevant
advisory bodies. Thank you so much for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Peter and Diane Crough
San Luis Obispo CA.