HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/1/2020 Item 2, Allen-Barker
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Jennifer Allen-Barker <
To:Advisory Bodies
Subject:1144 chorro st public comment
I have strong concerns about the request to allow this building 25’ above the current allowed height.
I’ve lived in slo for over 30 yrs, and have been a pedestrian , so my experience is as a pedestrian and
transit user (I cannot drive so I go where I can walk to or take a bus to.)Already, with other structures
being allowed to exceed planning, I’ve noticed a diminishment of cooling breezes, with resulting
increased temperatures while walking around downtown. Also, with height exceptions being allowed,
the pedestrian view of the surrounding hills we are famous for and enjoy, are blocked. I don’t want slo
to have the atmosphere of any community in the central valley (flat, storefronts on the sidewalk and no
distant views). Loss of the pedestrian views of the hills, fewer breezes, increased temperatures all
diminish the downtown use experience.
I haven’t seen documents on this proposed project, but last I read about it, some of the residences were
for low income people, which is good, but they truly need to be for low income people, who work in the
community. Also, parking for each unit needs to be included. While we have a pretty good bus system,
for the size of our community (thanks to cal poly funds) it is not good enough to rely on as a means to
get to work year round or at off peak hours. A busboy at The Graduate who gets off work late in the
evening or early AM, can’t use the bus to get back to downtown by bus, nor can he afford Uber to get
him home. Additionally, when the students are out of town for a holiday break (including all of summer)
the bus system offers fewer routes, shorter hours and less trip frequency. Again, someone living in one
part of town but working at another part of town cannot rely on the bus, if their hours aren’t 9am-5pm,
m-f. As a pedestrian, who cannot drive, my use of the community, access to services and employment
have been limited by lack of bus services at times, or have been complicated by a change in services due
to absence of cal poly students, esp when childcare is involved. It’s important that renters with low
incomes have the same ability to have their vehicle transportation for work, child care, errands, doctor
appts, groceries, etc. Stop and think about how you would accomplish everything you do if you didn’t
have access to a car, and can’t afford Uber or taxi. The fee in lieu of parking doesn’t benefit the
residents in the downtown area. It benefits daytime workers and tourists and shoppers. Yes, we need
more parking for all of those functions, but excluding a group of residents in that area from the ability to
park, or expecting them to walk blocks from their residence to get to/from a street parking location is
unfair, esp if carrying a child, groceries or late at night when it would be unsafe.
Do we need 30,000 sq ft of commercial and business added to the downtown area? Look around. Store
fronts are empty.
I understand that a project in the location can’t be stopped, but an exception to the height doesn’t make
sense.
Jennifer Allen-Barker
Sent from my iPad
1