The Daily post has an article about the Planning Commission meeting on Monday night July 30th. You can read the article here:
- Daily Post Article on July 31st “Transit Village Draws Protests“
This project is a great example of why public transportation agencies should not get involved in the real estate and community planning business. There has been no dialog, or concept of cooperation between Samtrans, Legacy Partners, and the community most impacted and affected by the false and deceptively named “Transit Village Development”. The fabrications and falsehoods that pose as conclusions in the final EIR document are breathtaking in their disregard of valid and well reasoned community concerns.
I’d like to ask:
- Why is a public transit agency’s Railroad Right of Way Property, designated for rail expansion, being given away to a private developer for an giant apartment complex?
- Why is this public ROW property being given away when that same property will be needed for construction and staging of the HSR and Caltrain electrification projects?
- Why is this public land being given away to a private developer so that road closures and eminent domain of our properties can occur in our community?
- Why is this public ROW land being given away to build a monstrosity of a complex whose size has never been seen before in this community?
- What are the financials behind this giveaway?
- Where are the provisions ensuring that Railroad right of Way remains ROW in the future?
- What guarantees does the city have that the ROW is used for its intended purpose?
Why would a private developer agree that the buildings just built be torn down when this occurs? They won’t.
San Carlos and East Side Residents will be impacted by the closure of Old County road and the likely eminent domain of properties in our community, destroying the foundation and fabric of our lives so that SamTrans and Legacy can make their money.
Instead of actually addressing the communities issues and concerns in the EIR, SamTrans and Legacy spent their money on hiring a cadre of lawyers bent on word-smithing subjective rationalizations as to why our views are insignificant, why further sound studies are unnecessary, and why the loss of our quality of life is irrelevant.
SamTrans and Legacy Partners have proven in this document that our issues and concerns are meaningless, that soundproofing apartments from Train Noise is far more important than addressing slap back noise from the trains to our homes. The EIR ignores sound buildups of specific frequencies by the additional reflective surfaces and angles. That the views of the West Side Hills are more important than the loss of east side residents views. That their right to make a profit comes before the loss of east side residents sunlight and the removal of solar powered rights for our homes
How does the EIR come to the subjective conclusion that our views of the West Side Hills are insignificant? Is it because our views of the hills do not have the impact and grandeur of Yosemite National Park?
Rest assured that the marketing brochures for this development will tout the great views of the West Side Hills as an allure for the people contemplating living between the busiest street on the peninsula and the sound of 100‘s of trains whizzing by everyday.
How does a transit agency rationalize moving parking away from the Train platform for current commuters so that even fewer current residents take the train? Why does the document rationalize away the legitimate concerns that more commuter’s will park on our streets because the development will make it so?
I’ll tell you why it’s because their “right” to make a profit trumps everything.
The EIR is the city of San Carlos’ document – when one peruses through this document one wonders who was being representing? Surely not the citizens of San Carlos especially those living on the East Side. Every issue we have brought up has been rationalized away by compartmentalizing the specific issue and ignoring the cumulative impacts.
I can give you numerous examples as to why this document needs to thrown out, but we don’t have the time for that this evening. What I can say is that this “my way or the highway” approach has to stop and the only way I can see this occurring is by starting all over with community involvement and dialog from the get go with a new developer.
It is up to this Planning Commision – to do its due diligence and see through the fabricated conclusions of this document and protect us. The future fate of our community is in your hands.