‘Runaway development’ won’t solve housing crisis

Two recent Letters to the Editor pointed out that perhaps Workbench is playing the city and there is no push-back from our Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator and I would add the California Environmental Quality Act analyst. This exploiting game is played in part on the “Density Bonus” field which doubles the units built based on a “housing crisis.”

The members of the City Council and the mayor would be wise to pause all this runaway development and ask why the monstrosity on Laurel and Front is around 17% full after several months. And, ask why there is commercial space planned for all these buildings when existing commercial spaces are emptying out in our fair city. Now an eight-story Swenson Project is going up on Front Street, adding 276 apartments.

Workbench has proposed two projects on Mission Street, one on River Street and one on Soquel Avenue, the Clock-Tower Center and more. Will these hundreds of proposed apartments solve our “housing crisis?” There is only so much load a city can environmentally support! Let common sense prevail.

— Joan Bare, Santa Cruz

Loophole could allow housing ‘debacle’ near park

Santa Cruz County needs affordable housing, but recent moves by lawmakers in Sacramento have created a loophole for one local developer to abuse our planning process and circumvent all restrictions on density, fast-tracking a project almost nobody wants.

The state recently established mandates for housing with which the county has complied, but due to missing a deadline by one day it has allowed one outlandish development application to come forward through the “Builder’s Remedy” loophole. “The Haven,” a 157 unit project, is proposed on a 40-acre Graham Hill road property across from Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park. The project would turn an environmentally sensitive site into a visual and environmental debacle — all to obtain a small number of affordable housing units.

Additionally, this project depends on the SLV Water District annexing the site and supplying all 157 units. In recent years, SLVWD has had considerable difficulty supplying water to its existing base.

There are far better ways to reach housing goals. The people of Santa Cruz County should be making these decisions, not politicians in Sacramento.

— Jack DeStories, Scotts Valley

Housing approved without needed infrastructure

I have been a resident of Santa Cruz since 1971. When I moved here, my father, an award-winning city planner and architect, attempted to get a job so that he could live closer to my sister and me. Despite the fact that he was willing to work for pay well below his grade, the authorities said he was “over qualified.”

Even in 1971 you could see that without a train to access the Bay Area or local public transportation, as Santa Cruz grew, it would choke on cars.

Now the cowardly powers that be are approving hundreds of new housing units in the city of Santa Cruz without demanding alternatives to our primitive transportation system of roads which are already overtaxed.

The “affordable” housing that is being built will rent or sell for unattainable prices, because of the cost of construction and no one who can afford to live in it will be able to get to work on our town’s clogged arteries.

We are in trouble. Our city planners and county supervisors have abandoned us.

— Anina Van Alstine, Santa Cruz

‘Soviet-like’ apartments taking over downtown SC

I am shocked each time (and far less than ever before) I go downtown. There are new, absolutely hideous Soviet block prison-like apartment blocks taking over the downtown area. Who thinks these are either attractive or a good idea? They couldn’t be uglier and more depressing.

Welcome to Eastern European Soviet architecture.

— Ken Shelden, Santa Cruz

Low-income housing shortage ‘did not exist’

Santa Cruz is building housing, with a large percentage of low-income units. As a low-income housing provider I can say there is now a shortage of low-income renters. Two years ago, a dozen applications, now 30 days to get one. We will soon have empty units waiting for imaginary renters. Built for a perceived shortage that did not exist.

— Chelsea Wagner, Soquel