HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-07-2017 PC Correspondence - San Luis Ranch (Smith, C.) Meeting: Pt, U J • l'�
From: carolyn smith <
item: i
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 10:01 PM
To: Advisory Bodies RECEIVED
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting - June 7, 2017 - San Luis Ranch CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
JUN 0 7 2017
Chair Stevenson and Commissioners:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TRAFFIC: I have lived in the Laguna Lake area for 37 years. With the addition of the To osa
residential units, Home Depot, Target, Costco, and the other commercial developments, the traffic on
the major arterials in the Southern part of the city, LOVR, Madonna Road, and South Higuera, have
become increasingly worse. Even after the completion of the 101 interchange improvements, traffic
still backs up on LOVR and Madonna Road for much of the day. It used to be that traffic was
congested primarily during commuting hours, but now, much of the day traffic is very congested.
While traffic models are being used to determine traffic impacts from this project, one would have to
be in denial not to recognize that the realistic traffic on these arterials is far worse than is being
portrayed. Traffic volume meters should be utilized (not during the summer months when students
and residents are gone) to determine actual traffic counts. When Costco was built, it's my
understanding that the traffic models were more than 30% low in estimating traffic from that project.
That has resulted in some of the traffic congestion impacts from which we are now suffering in this
part of the city. We can't afford to make that same mistake, as it will only worsen an already bad
traffic situation.
Therefore, the discussion at the last Planning Commission meeting regarding the Prado Road
overpass/exchange was very concerning to me. If 200 residential units are allowed to be built,
without the construction of the Prado overpass/exchange, the vehicles from these units (a minimum
of 400- 500+ additional vehicles) will all exit and enter the project from either LOVR and/or Madonna
Road. Since those two arterials are already severely congested, the additional traffic will tip us over
the edge to gridlock at numerous intersections. The Final EIR notes that traffic congestion at
numerous intersections will be a significant and unavoidable impact. While longer queuing and
additional left and/or right turn lanes are suggested, that is very pitiful mitigation for those of us who
have to use these arterials on a daily basis. Waiting to turn through several signal cycles, with idling
cars ruining our air quality (another significant unavoidable impact), should not be desired or
acceptable. Our city has banned drive-through restaurants to avoid the damage to our air quality from
idling vehicles in lines. Why would we now welcome idling cars in long turn lanes? This seems rather
hypocritical. Furthermore, if you consider the cumulative traffic impacts from the planned Froom
Ranch Senior Complex plus additional 200+ residential units, with its vehicles also entering and
emptying onto LOVR, the traffic congestion and air quality deterioration will be overwhelming! Even if
you're an advocate for more housing, destroying existing residents' quality of life and sacrificing our
air quality should not be our goal.
Additionally, the extreme congestion on Madonna Road and LOVR has caused drivers to cut through
neighborhood streets in order to avoid congested intersections. Despite what you might have been
told, this is actually occurring on a daily basis on Oceanaire, as drivers avoid the Madonna/LOVR
intersection. As congestion gets worse, more neighborhood streets will become unfortunate victims of
this practice. Our neighborhood streets were never meant to accommodate such significant traffic
which is dangerous for families living along those streets and is contrary to our Circulation Element
which states:
"1.7.3. Manage Traffic: San Luis Obispo should .... S. Protect the quality of residential areas
by achieving quiet and by reducing or controlling traffic routing, volumes, and speeds on
neighborhood streets."
Consequently, to adequately and effectively manage the increased traffic from this project, there
should be nothing built until the Prado Road overpass/extension is fully funded and shovel ready.
Finally, the uncertainty of the funding source for the overpass should cause serious concern to this
Commission about whether or not it will ever actually be built. If I correctly understood what was said
at the last PC meeting, if for some unforeseen reason the overpass is delayed or cannot be built
(economy downturn or other unknown circumstances), this entire project could be built without it.
That is shocking to even imagine! Have we learned nothing from the delay that occurred with the 101
interchange improvements, where residents had to endure ten years of terrible traffic congestion,
while commercial development was built, until the improvements were finally made? You are being
asked to "trust" that it will be built but there is no certainty that it will be built. Should we be
gambling on the hope that there will be sufficient funds to build it? If the funds are delayed or don't
come through, what will happen? Will the citizens of SLO then be forced into a no -choice situation of
having to approve an additional tax to pay for the overpass, since we have placed ourselves in a
precarious legal position with the developer? These are serious questions that should be considered
and not dismissed with vague assurances.
PARKLAND: I was very surprised and disappointed that this commission reduced the size of the
parkland. I don't understand why this was recommended. A project of this size, with families living in
it, should certainly be given enough parkland so residents won't have to travel to a park. While
Laguna Lake park is nearby, it's necessary to cross a very busy Madonna Road which will not only be
dangerous for children riding bikes or walking, but will also add to traffic congestion as pedestrians
will be pushing the walk buttons, holding up traffic. This already occurs at Oceanaire and Madonna by
pedestrians and bikers going to school, and/or walking or biking to Laguna Lake Park, which causes
serious traffic back up at that intersection. Requiring residents of this new project to do the same will
only add to the traffic backup. Additionally, parks are important to create a sense of community and
often neighbors congregate and meet each other while their children are playing in a park. There are
play dates with children at neighborhood parks, birthday parties, family celebrations, picnics, and
neighborhood gatherings and barbecues. Kids meet their friends at their neighborhood park to shoot
hoops, ride skate boards, bikes, and play football. An inadequate park area will deter this type of
community interaction and since these homes are going to be very close to each other, having a large
parkland area will provide residents with a feeling of openness and space within their neighborhood.
Therefore, I urge you to return the full five acres of parkland to this project.
TREES: I also urge that you require the retention of as many of the mature trees on the property as
possible. Our city is well known for its lovely trees, however, we seem to be willing to cut down trees
for development without regard for their beauty, their importance to wildlife habitat, and their
absorption of carbon dioxide. It will take 30 or more years for new trees to provide the extensive
benefits of the existing mature trees on this property. Therefore, please save the trees and don't allow
them to be destroyed for the sake of building. If we continue to foster a cavalier attitude of removing
trees for development, will we be able to look back sometime in the future and say we did the right
thing? Or will we regret destroying our urban forest, after it's too late?
I understand the cry from those who want to be able to purchase a home here in SLO, but while we
may need and want more AFFORDABLE housing, there should be no urgency to rush this project
through. This is a large project that will significantly affect those of us who currently live here and
those who will purchase the homes in this project. Therefore, careful consideration should be given to
assure that we get it right. Once this project is built, it will be too late to correct any mistakes and we
will all have to live with the result.
Thank you for your service and for your careful consideration of this project.
Carolyn Smith
SLO Resident