Letter 8

Steven Marx

October 1,2004

8-1 The commenter states that the [parking structure] location on the corner of California Boulevard

violates the principles of the Master Plan, particularly regarding alternative transportation.

Response: The location of the parking structure and its proposed size are generally in line with the Master

Plan. The Master Plan balanced the loss of parking through redevelopment, with the need for

replacement parking, expanded parking, and alternative transportation. The parking structure has been

increased in size, and thus this new EIR has been prepared, in part, to analyze any impacts from a

structure that could be 1,000 spaces large, as opposed to the 700 spaces structure considered in the Master

Plan EIR. As noted by the commenter, the Master Plan did emphasize alternative transportation as a cost

effective means to reduce the need for parking. Alternative transportation must continue to be an

important component of the University's striving for sustainability and environmental excellence. The

comment is appreciated.

8-2 The commenter states that the University ought to make parking permits for people living near

the University prohibitively expensive, and/or by refusing to issue permits to first year students.

Response: The University is currently pursuing on-campus housing, parking fee increases, lotteries, and

other measures to reduce parking demand on campus. The ability to implement a high fee is highly

speculative based on the political history of CSU fee increases. The comment is appreciated.

8-3 The commenter states that the project is not warranted given the costs.

Response: This is the commenter's opinion and it is noted for the benefit of the decision makers. As

noted in the DEIR, the University has identified a need for this project. The Cal Poly Master Plan

identified several issues relating to the existing conditions for parking (page 192):

• Full occupancy of parking lots during peak times.

• Inconvenient access to surface lots extending too far from the campus instructional core.

• Safety in reaching distant lots, especially in the evening.

• Land valuable for other purposes consumed by surface lots.

• Visual obtrusiveness of lots and structures.

The Master Plan solution was to have three structures on campus for student, faculty and staff

commuters. These would be located at each of the three main entrances to campus. RRM Design Group

has identified the most cost-efficient parking structure footprint in the conceptual plans.

Reducing structure size would result in a net deficit in parking in the campus instructional core based on

the analysis in the traffic study. This would result in less parking available around Mustang Stadium

during events compared to existing conditions and would not meet the project objective of providing

parking proximate to the southwest portion of campus. This alternative would result in cumulative

impacts to campus parking and traffic in that it would undermine the parking strategy of the Master Plan

campus land use plan.

The DEIR identifies extensive rationale and criteria supported in the Cal Poly Master Plan at pages 3.0-2

et seq.