Front Page  »  

Caltrans tells SLO to rethink building homes near airport

March 25, 2015
Jan Marx

Jan Marx

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has warned the city of San Luis Obispo that it should reconsider its plan to allow the construction of high-density housing near the regional airport.

In December, the city council voted 4-1, with Councilman Dan Carpenter dissenting, to override the airport land use commission, which sets limits on development in the city’s southern edge. The council vote cleared a major hurdle for developers such as Gary Grossman, who seeks to build high-density housing in the area.

Last week, an attorney representing the aeronautical division of Caltrans sent a letter to San Luis Obispo Mayor Jan Marx asking the council to reassess its improper decision to overrule the airport commission. Previously, both the airport commission and the Caltrans aeronautics division threatened to sue the city over its plan to allow high-density developments near the airport.

The Caltrans letter states that the city’s plan violates height, noise, safety and density regulations pertaining to development surrounding the airport. The letter notes that the Santa Monica airport could be closed due to complaints from residents about noise, safety and pollution.

In response, City Attorney Christine Dietrick told the Tribune that the Caltrans letter contains numerous inaccuracies and a misrepresentation of the law.

During last year’s election season, Grossman gave maximum allowable contributions to the campaigns of Marx and Councilwoman Carlyn Christianson. The developer also donated $5,000 to the county bicycle coalition, for which Councilman Dan Rivoire serves as the executive director.

Grossman is currently trying to develop the 131-acre property owned by rancher Ernie Dalidio. Sources have told CalCoastNews that he has already spent several million dollars on the proposed development, and that he needs approval for high-density development in order to make the project more financially viable.

Don’t miss links to breaking news, like CCN on Facebook.


Loading...
Subjects:                                     
Related:


39 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

State law requires that San Luis has plans to house its share of the growing state population and it must be in certain price categories. Where do we want the homes built? If the original Dalidio Project had be done, there would be no problem. It is a good location for commercial development. We would have enough sales tax money and property tax money to balance our city budget. And, there would be a Prado Road Bridge across 101.


0

You brought up two, very different points that, in your mind at least, are somehow connected; Yeah, if the original Dalidio Project had been done, it would have been completed by now, it would have been a commercial development, and there probably would have been an overpass built (even though the city would have been on the hook for most of the cost for it) – I don’t see what having had the commercial development completed has anything to do with providing housing though. If you mean “… there would be no problem.” as in there would be no problem now because building homes there would not have even been considered, then yes you are correct. If you mean that by building the original Dalidio Project we would somehow not have an issue with the lack of housing in SLO, I do not get that connection at all, which seems to be part of your assertion by mentioning that state law requires that San Luis have housing for our share of the growing population. What am I missing?


0

Maybe Dalidio site is a stupid place for ANY development. There have already been 2 plane crashes there in recent times. What if one had been on top of a Walmart? How is that better than on top of houses? The writer who suggested Grossman turn over Dalidio for permanent open space has a good point, but didn’t mention why — the safety issue.


0

How about change a stupid state law? Why should population increase (projected, by the way, not a fact) be apportioned equally everyplace? Aren’t some localities more appropriate than others? Should more rural areas like ours be treated the same way as large cities? Why not concentrate future growth in larger cities? Your gloss on stupid state law misses a lot.


0

Just like in most crimes all you have to do is follow the money. Grossman “donations” to SLO City Council = approved housing in probably one of the most dangerous locations in the city.

CalTrans is not going to disappear on this one and I hope they don’t. There is a history of housing around airports and they are not good neighbors. But in the end we taxpayers will pick up the tab to cover the incompetency of Jan Marx’s friends.


0

OMG! If Grossman got his development approvals because of a $300 political contribution, perhaps I should ask what I can get for donating $25?


0

You can “buy” a Congressman’s vote for as little as 25k. It’s a very interesting how our brains make us believe we now owe something to someone if they give us even a trinket. Hence, people feel obligated to buy a new car because the dealer “gave” them a stadium seat cushion.


0

Close the airport and develop the land. The airport is pretty much worthless except for a few private plane owners who keep their planes there.


0

That is one of the most idiotic comments you have ever written! The airport is vital to many businesses here in SLO and brings in millions of dollars of revenue.


You’re just a cheap son of a gun so you drive to some other airport to travel. Not everyone can do that, maybe some have more money than time or in poor health so they have to pay the extra money to fly out of SLO commercially, charter, or even private aircraft (gasp!).


Santa Monica City Council is itching to close their airport and develop the land that has been an airport since the 20’s like in SLO, despite the fact that research has shown how much money is generated by that important airport. The little industry we have here in SLO is no different.


I can imagine you as an angry government worker, if you don’t like it and it does not benefit you directly lets get rid of it.


0

The other issue for Santa Monica Airport it that it is very close to both Torrance and Hawthorne airports and Long Beach Airport is just down the coast.


0

Yes, HHR is close to Santa Monica but it’s often a 30+ minute drive in thickening LA traffic. Airports are there, usually happen to have been their FIRST, so those who bought close to them should have to live with it. I have. Quieter jet engines make it actually QUIETER than when those airport-objectors bought close.


Our own airport is a vital transport and economic link and once gone for houses, is gone forever.


Finally, I like bashing the incompetent Marx as much as the next person, she’s such a clumsy and inept politician, but how about backing her on rejecting Caltrans, the country’s most stupid and overbearing state trans agency. (Guided at most levels by “visionaries” like Chuckie Cesena and Lisa whatz-er-name). How about backing Marx on this one, for some LOCAL CONTROL of our zoning and land use? As to accidents, just because a Learjet cartwheeled a quarter of a century ago isn’t enough to require gigantic and underused safety zones around an airport. Airplanes wiping out houses is vanishingly rare. GO airport, GO Dalidio!


0

LOL! Let me clarify. As a airport for getting commercial passenger flights it is worthless. The other points you make are spot on. I should have been more specific with my criticism.


0

I don’t find it worthless. Every time I travel eastwards, I hop a flight to Phoenix, and get there far faster and for no more cost than a bunch of transfers like in the old days: SLO or SM to LA, LA to Dallas, Dallas to wherever. Where do you travel that it’s “worthless?” Or do you just stay at home and bake your mind in the trivia of this little place?


0

I like your response, but maybe the dunderhead has a point. Close the airport. That makes SLO unattractive to businesses. Businesses move out. Fewer jobs here means less traffic congesion on 101 at rush hour, less need for houses to house people who otherewise might work here. Seems like a clever way to solve the whole problem: no airport, no jobs, no housing demand.

Voila, problem solved.


0

You don’t get out much, do you?


0

Couldn’t disagree more, the SLO airport is extremely handy when we are fortunate enough to snag a ticket at a rate that makes not driving to LA an easy call to make.

I wish we were able to utilize it each and every time we fly.


Almost sounds like you have a dog in the hunt…


0

And when does that happen? Never. the last time it was cost-effective NOT to drive to LAX or SFO was about 2008/2009. Nowadays it is easily $250 or more per ticket and even then the connections are ridiculous. SLO-LAX-SFO and THEN you get on the flight to wherever you need to go. MAYBE you get a flight to PHX that will get you a 4 hr layover and a flight to your destination.


0

I NEVER have a 4 hr layover in PHX. I always have to scramble to get to my next flight.


0

The connections in Phoenix are generally excellent. Your comment shows you don’t know about that because you don’t do it.


As for an extra $250 for flying to LA? Maybe if your destination is LA, but if it’s not, and you have a ticket on the same airline to say New York, the “extra” cost via LA will be maybe $10 or $20 or maybe nothing at all. Now how is it ever cost effective to drive to LA, deal with the time and traffic and the horrendous security checks there (that’s another thing about our little airport — good security, but it doesn’t take hours to get through it) and the ridiculous cost of parking your car. You must not travel much.


0

This project is “dirty” from the inside out. Dig deep, it’s dirty.


btw….does anyone remember back to around ’91 or so when a Lear 45 came in too low on a foggy IFR approach with an inexperienced owner/pilot in the left seat? He hit the top of the big Eucs right off Madonna Rd and the jet cartwheeled and exploded as it careened through the farm field (proposed housing) with parts nearly making it to the 101. I was on scene just as the first fire truck arrived. It was quite a sight watching bodies burn in the field.


Yeah…they should build a TON of house under the IFR flight path. Seems intelligent.


0

This is so “Marxist”….ignore the experts and go after the potential tax revenue. It’s what’s wrong with SLO.


0

Same problem AG’s mayor Ferrara had- – -power trip!


0

Exactly!


0

The city needs the new potential tax revenue to keep feeding the gravy train of outrageous salaries, benefits and pensions for public employees, they need to keep the pyramid going until they are long gone and then when it does collapse it becomes someone else’s problem, they would have already gotten theirs.


0

it’s what’s wrong with the country


0

“In response, City Attorney Christine Dietrick told the Tribune that the Caltrans letter contains numerous inaccuracies and a misrepresentation of the law.”


Oh my gawd; do we really have to listen to the most incompetent city attorney ever tell us that a state agency has fumbled on the law? Here’s the thing, Ms. Dietrick; you just might be correct (in this instance, at least), but your track record is nothing to write home about. My bet would be on Caltrans having it right and you being wrong, again.


Most likely, we will see another outsourcing of legal expertise to address this issue, and once again, we will probably see that Caltrans is correct, that Ms. Dietrick doesn’t know anything about the issue she is commenting on, and that the city is in the wrong, completely, and the taxpayers will be asked to bend over again (to take it “in the shorts”). Sheesh.


0

As a resident of AG, speaking from our recent experience, it wouldn’t be the first time a city attorney gave their council bad advice.


Tim Carmel is never going to get out from under the Steve Adams $$$debacle$$$.


Ms Dietrick and Tim Carmel should get together.


I would trust the word of Caltans over that of the SLO city attorney any day.


0

Don’t forget the city of Paso’s Iris Yang. Her competency as an attorney matches Dietrick’s.

#waterratedebacle


0

Actually Dietrick and Carmel have gotten together. She got Carmel’s firm to teach the city council about the Brown Act, presumably because she couldn’t do it herself!


0

But she still gets a pay raise every year from the council, and has an outrageous “car allowance” (ever wondered why people who make so much need car allowances?). Council eats out of her hand no matter how much trouble she gets them into. She even had to get an outside consultant to teach the council about the Brown Act! Now why can’t any city attorney at least be up to speed on that?


0

And, if built, the new residents would complain about the airport noise. Even if we had the water.


0

Thank you for bringing up the water issue. I thought we were in a drought? But what ‘s 1500 more homes between friends, huh?


0

SLO and their bogus antiquated permit application continues to be exercised at the expense of North County water rights. Yes they divert the Salinas River via Santa Margarita Lake and water conduit. They will the promote ordinances and bad press for the owners downstream. This is an open, adverse and notorious taking so don’t yield your rights away. Use what is yours and let the local rule makers/takers test the courts for your act of not being a negligent property owner.


0

Tune in to KVEC 920 AM at 5:30 pm today to hear and discuss the potential of litigation against our fair city. I will be Dave Congalton’s guest.


This issue also raises the question of substantial development—up to 1,500 homes—and related water, traffic, noise, air, and other impacts.


0
1 2