SANTA CRUZ SENTINEL OPINION PAGE MAY 28, 2017 |
Nobody wants ‘projects’ along traffic conduits |
High density, ghetto-like “projects” are planned everywhere |
in the county along our main traffic conduits, no less. |
These are uniformly opposed by the residents yet |
the politicos keep passing them citing state law and requirements. |
Well, if Santa Cruz can ignore federal law on immigration, |
they can certainly ignore the state fiats as well. |
The only people who support these things don’t intend to be here |
when the damage is all said and done. They’ll be retired on their |
own 5 acres someplace else. |
— Pureheart Steinbruner, Aptos |
---------------------------------------------------- |
SANTA CRUZ SENTINEL OPINION PAGE MAY 26, 2017 |
UC Santa Cruz needs more housing on campus |
Why doesn’t UCSC build apartments up at the university for the |
students to live in? So many other colleges do this. |
There are many acres of land up there. I understand that |
it’s all environmentally protected, but can’t they give up |
some of it for buildings? |
If the students were allowed to live at the university, |
our traffic would be less everywhere in the county and |
the housing costs would work itself out. They could build |
nice, low-energy apartments. The university community |
would be better off and Highway 1 traffic would ease up. |
— Kris Kirby, Aptos |
---------------------------------------------------- |
SANTA CRUZ SENTINEL OPINION PAGE MAY 22, 2017 |
Planning Commission not listening to community |
After attending the May 18 Planning Commission meeting |
it is apparent to me that: |
1. The General Plan is not being followed or enforced. |
2. There is a serious lack of professional unbiased conduct, |
accountability and sensitivity to existing community desires, |
needs and concerns among members of the Planning Commission. |
3. Developers are moving rapidly with the help of the |
Planning Commission to push through the building of high |
density projects in our communities that will turn a big |
profit for them and leave our communities with adverse |
traffic, pollution and overcrowding problems to name a few. |
The Planning Commission staff use a lot of “nice” and |
“fuzzy” terms in their presentation like “community benefits, |
” “affordable housing,” “input from the community.” |
In reality when I look at the actual details it is really |
“community sacrifice,” “market rate housing” and “ignore the community.” |
— Drew Lewis, Santa Cruz |
---------------------------------------------------- |
SANTA CRUZ SENTINEL OPINION PAGE MAY 22, 2017 |
Traffic study no longer relevant to Corridor Plan |
If you travel on our streets, you know that traffic |
is a problem. The Corridor Plan, part of the Santa Cruz City |
General Plan, has proposed several areas which would allow |
high density zoning, multi-use housing (five stories, up to |
65 feet) on the streets where we have |
heavy traffic — Soquel Avenue, Water Street, Ocean Street |
and Mission Boulevard. The plan used a traffic study completed |
in 2009 to project how traffic will be impacted for high |
density housing. In 2009 we were in a recession, traffic |
was reduced. Traffic patterns have changed significantly |
since 2009. Today after 3 p.m. these streets are gridlocked. |
How will high-density housing impact already congested local |
streets? In order to have a truly meaningful housing plan that |
addresses realistic traffic concerns, the current Corridor Plan |
should not be further considered until a new updated traffic study |
is made at peak traffic times. |
— Lin Florinda Colavin, Santa Cruz |
---------------------------------------------------- |
SANTA CRUZ SENTINEL OPINION PAGE MAY 18, 2017 |
Keep the small-town qualities that we love |
The Santa Cruz Planning Commission and City Council are |
heading down a path that threatens to destroy the very |
small-town qualities that make our community such a desirable |
place to live and visit. The proposed Corridor Rezoning plan |
incentivizes high-density developments up to 65-feet tall that |
will increase traffic, overwhelm infrastructure and violate |
principles in the general plan. We can do better. |
Instead of mimicking growth models of more affluent |
Bay Area neighbors, Santa Cruz should reject the excesses |
of the Corridor plan. Lets protect family-friendly neighborhoods |
and limit buildings along our already impacted avenues to lower, |
medium-density projects. |
We need a plan that values our classic beach town — with its |
historic buildings, businesses and neighborhoods — not one |
that favors untenable development. It’s time to transition |
away from models that pursue prosperity through expansion |
and instead plan for a sustainable future, compatible with |
the carrying capacity of this small county. |
— Debora Bone, Santa Cruz |
---------------------------------------------------- |
SANTA CRUZ SENTINEL OPINION PAGE MAY 16, 2017 |
We don’t want our town to be San Jose-by-the-Sea |
Will we lose the Santa Cruz we know and love? Will the |
city’s push for high-density rezoning on the “Corridors” |
Soquel Avenue, Water, Ocean and Mission streets pave the |
way for massive, unaffordable development and drive out |
our homegrown small businesses as has happened in other places? |
Worried about increased traffic and parking congestion, |
higher rents, more noise, less sunlight, impacts on water? |
If you don’t want our historic seaside town turned into |
San Jose-by-the-Sea, if you want rezoning which enhances |
our historic neighborhoods and small businesses, show up |
this Thursday May 18 for the Planning Commission meeting |
7 p.m. at City Hall. Oral Communications is allowed at 7 p.m. |
— Isabelle Scott, Santa Cruz |
---------------------------------------------------- |
HOME | CALENDAR | ISSUES | POSTERS | CONTACT | LINKS | LETTERS |
---|