HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-2017 Item 16, SmallCOUNCIL MEETING: y" /-1- 17
RECEIVED
ITEM NO,: JG ,. APR 0 4 2017
From: Camille Small <
Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 3:34:00 AM
To: E-mail Council Website
Subject: 71 Palomar plan disturbs permanent residential neighborhoods
Dear Mayor and Council:
What a sad affair. Some of us whose hearts are torn for residents having
to face off -campus dorm sites just cannot take any more.
Many who have suffered one defeat after another trying to defend and uphold some
semblance of normal life for permanent residents see that decision makers don't really care.
Negative impacts have altered life for
many and I have been disturbed by it, along with many others. Perhaps those who fail to
understand this have not met widows who lived in their homes for 40 years and felt forced
to move when they didn't want to when the influx of students with noisy lifestyles became
too much to tolerate.
Michael Codron has reportedly referred to the residents I work with as nimbys. If we have
been so labeled, I suggest use of this negative term is inappropriate for an out -of -towner
referring to caring residents whose only goal is to oppose developments which threaten the
fabric of healthy neighborhoods.
There are those on Staff and on Council who prefer to support developments that clearly
benefit only developers. Because Cal Poly
has been seriously negligent by increasing enrollment without providing adequate housing,
students are forced to find housing in a limited market. They are targeted for high rents.
The developer of 22 Chorro and 71 Palomar apparently cares nothing for the residents of
San Luis Obispo who are subjected to the negative impacts. We care for these residents
even if we do not live near them. We wish Staff did. We wish at least Council did.
Don't use erroneous logic to justify your thinking. Those with limited information like to say
that students who move into these developments will "move out of R-1 homes" and
presumably vacate homes for families and professionals. This happens to be the mantra of
builders and you should be able to figure out that with enrollment increases every year,
hundreds of new students will move into the R-1 homes. It seems ill advised to tout
builders' propaganda when there is ultimately no truth
in it. One hundred students in 'Chorro' and 150 in 'Palomar' is a drop in the bucket when
compared to dorms of 1,000 plus that Cal Poly could build. That Cal Poly should build.
That Cal Poly owes the residents of their host city. We have had the misfortune of not
having strong City Councils like Santa Cruz has. Santa Cruz City Council was able to act
on behalf of their residents.
There is n o t h i n g right about these dorm -like buildings in the city --especially when they
abut residential areas.
Especially when they abut residential neighborhoods!
Final thoughts to leave with you:
• This developer found a property with an historic house and huge trees.
• He should be expected to build what fits on the site with the house and trees in tact.
• As a city we do not owe a developer maximum profit.
• As city residents we deserve a city manager and planners who consider the negative
effects on the people who live here.
I am out of the area for some time and will not attend the Council
meeting.
Submitted with hope,
Camille Small