HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-22-2017 ARC Correspondence Item 1 (Smith)
From:
Sent:
To:
MEETING:
ITEM NO.: I_
carolyn smith <
Sunday, May 21, 2017 10:12 PM
Advisory Bodies
-2,-ter 7
UPi
SLO CITY CLERK
Subject: ARC Meeting - May 22, 2017 - Study Session of 1035 Madonna Road - San Luis Ranch
Dear Commissioner Wynn and Commissioners:
I am unable to attend Monday's meeting but would like to weight in on this project.
1. LAND USE INCONSISTENCIES: This project does not adhere to Land Use Element goals
and policies such as:
"GOAL 4. MIXED -INCOME HOUSING
Preserve and accommodate existing and new mixed -income neighborhoods and seek
to prevent neighborhoods or housing types that are segregated by economic status.
Policies: 4.1 Within newly developed neighborhoods, housing that is affordable to
various economic strata should be intermixed rather than segregated into separate
enclaves. The mix should be comparable to the relative percentages of extremely low,
very -low, low, moderate and above -moderate income households in the City's
quantified objectives. "
I have attended most of the "pre meetings" and Draft EIR meetings on this project and
commissioners, both at the ARC and the Planning Commission meetings, expressed concern that
this project does not mix housing types per the Land Use Element Goals and Policies. As far as I
can tell, this project has not changed much since those meetings. It continues to segregate the
housing types with the higher density homes adjacent to the busy arterials and the commercial
development with the lower density and single-family housing adjacent to the open space. I
hope this Commission will require the developer to change this project to better adhere to these
goals.
2. BUILDING HEIGHTS: It appears the heights of single-family and muti-family buildings in
this project are above what our zoning code allows in new developments. Height limits should be
adhered to in this project with no variances allowed. With significantly reduced front and side
set -backs and small lots, taller buildings can create a "canyon" like feel in a large project.
3. PARKLAND: Since the developer has decided not to provide any safe route to Laguna Lake
Park amenities for the residents in this development as requested at previous meetings on this
project (such as a foot/bike over or under -path) more park space in the project should be
added. If these homes are expected to be inhabited by families, the park space in this project is
insufficient.
4. SMALL LOTS/LARGE HOMES: Many of the homes in this project are on very small lots,
however, some of the homes being built on them are rather large, taking up nearly the entire
lot. This means there will be very little space in between homes with minimal front yards and no
back yards. While some families won't mind living in this type of home, many will prefer to live
in a more traditional single-family home on more traditional sized lots with a front and back yard
where their children can play and families can socialize within their own homes (BBQ's, family
celebrations, birthday parties, etc.) There should be more of these types of homes in this
development to attract our workforce families to purchase them. There is a large demand for
student housing in SLO and there is a concern that a large number of the homes on small lots
will be purchased by investors for student rental purposes.
S. TRAFFIC: While traffic issues may normally not be under the purview of the ARC, it is
important to note that the commercial uses and the higher than normally allowed residential
density of this project will produce significant unavoidable traffic impacts to the surrounding
neighborhoods and areas per the Final EIR. This is contrary to Goal #7 of the LUE which requires
that new development should:
"maintain, preserve, and enhance the quality of neighborhoods, encourage
neighborhood stability, and owner occupancy and improve neighborhood appearance,
function and sense of community."
Additionally, #7.1 indicates:
"7.I. Within established neighborhoods, new residential development shall be of a
character, size density and quality that respects the neighborhood character and
maintains the quality of life for existing and future residents. " [emphasis added]
The additional traffic congestion created by this dense development will forever negatively
damage the quality of life of the adjacent neighborhoods as well as the entire area
neighborhoods due to significant traffic congestion. While some commissioners on the ARC have
said they "have no problem with the density of this project," please realize that this large of a
development adjacent to existing neighborhoods, will result in severe consequences to the area's
quality of life. I have heard residents express that they will sell and move from their home, if
this development is built prior to any road infrastructure improvements being completed such as
the Prado Road extension or interchange (which, incidentally has never had a comprehensive
EIR). Since that requirement is not currently included in this project, without it, the traffic
impacts from even the first phase of this project on surrounding neighborhoods will be severe.
Many of us moved to San Luis Obispo for the slower pace with reasonable traffic, small-town
atmosphere. The density of this project will destroy that atmosphere and will significantly
diminish existing neighborhoods' quality of life, contrary to the LUE policy #2.1 which states:
"2.1 Neighborhood Focus. The city shall preserve, protect, and enhance the City's
neighborhoods and strive to preserve and enhance their identity and quality of life
within each neighborhood."
While our city desires more "affordable" housing, our existing neighborhoods need to be
considered and quality of life preserved.
Therefore, please require the project to (1) adhere to our LUE with regard to mixing the housing
types within the project, rather than segregating them by economic status; (2) that the heights
of the buildings adhere to our zoning regulations; (3) that more parkland be preserved in the
project for recreation of residents living in the development; and finally (4) reduce the density of
this project, possibly choosing a combination of Alternative Project #3 and #4 designated in the
Final EIR, which will preserve the historical farm structures and trees, and reduce the density,
thus reducing the traffic impacts on adjacent existing neighborhoods. Additionally, the Prado
Road extension should be required to be constructed in the first phase of the development.
Carolyn Smith
37 year Laguna Lake Resident