*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
8 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] The combined total for diameters of the trees proposed for removal is 176 inches. Twenty-five percent of that total diameter is 44 inches. Therefore, twenty-nine (29) native oaks measuring 1.5 inch caliper would be required for mitigation replacement on site, if all trees recommended for removal are approved by the city. Replacement trees shall be native California oaks endemic to the Paso Robles area. The species proposed for removal is valley oak (Quercus lobata) therefore it is the preferred species to plant back on site. Exceptions can be made by the City regarding the native oak species, but must be approved prior to planting.
Because valley oaks have a large mature size and require unrestricted root-space, planting the trees in a grove in the openspace adjacent to the existing wooded area at the south end of the parcel would be ideal. See Appendix A – Photographs - Photo 20. The trees shall be planted 30 feet on center.
Automatic irrigation shall be provided at approximately 10 gallons per tree on a weekly basis, May through October for the first 5 years after planting in order to establish the trees.
I have also provided an International Society of Arboriculture tree planting diagram in Appendix C. It is consistent with the City’s Standards and Specifications Section 8 - Appendix L. Note that tree stakes shall remain on trees no more than 2 years. Wire fencing may need to be installed around the trees to prevent deer from entering the mitigation area.
Conclusion and Recommendations:
Trees 1-3 were in fair condition and viable, however proposed new curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements including the main driveway entry to the property will not allow the retention of these trees.
Trees 4,5,7,8,9 and 10 had poor health and structure or were growing within or adjacent to proposed building footprints.
None were of high enough quality to be retained and therefore did not warrant the adjustment of building plans.
Tree replacements are required for all approved oak trees removals that are six (6) inch diameter and larger. Twenty-nine (29) native oaks at a size of 1.5 - inch caliper would be required for replacement if all trees recommended for removal are approved. Planting the trees in a grove adjacent to the existing wooded area at the south end of the parcel would be ideal.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
9 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Sincerely,
Rodney D. Thurman
ISA Certified Arborist PN-2684BUM
ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualification
Appendices: Photographs, Site Map, Tree Planting Specifications, Glossary of Terms Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
10 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Appendix A- Photographs
Photo 1 - Panorama view looking south into lot from Creston Road.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
11 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 2 - View of Trees 1-3 along Creston Road. New driveway entry planned for area.
Tree 1 Tree 2 Tree 3
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
12 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 3 - View south of Tree 4 from Creston Road.
Tree 4
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
13 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 4 - View south of Tree 4 trunk growing into fence. Trunk is not structurally sound.
Tree 4
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
14 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 5 - View southwest of Tree 5 - Note drought stress indicated by dead branches and sparse canopy. Tree is outside property line.
Tree 5
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
15 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 6 - View south of tree 6 – A mature valley oak that was badly burned in a June 2020 fire. The tree is alive but in very poor condition.
It is not safe to retain in a housing project.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
16 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 7 - View of Tree 6 trunk on north side – 4 of 4 primary stems were badly burned and starting to decay. The tree is not safe to retain in a housing project.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
17 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 8 - View south of Tree 7 Photo 9 - Tree 7 with included bark indicated by arrow.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
18 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 10 - View of Trees 8 & 9 - Note dead branches indicating drought stress.
Tree 8 Tree 9
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
19 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 11 - Trunkof Tree 8 withincludedbark.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
20 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photo 12 - View of Tree 9 - Note drought stress Photo 13 - Trunk of Tree 9 with included bark . indicated by dead branches and sparse canopy.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
21 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected]
Photo 14 - View of Tree 10 - Multi-stem tree Photo 15 - Trunk of Tree 10. with included bark.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
22 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Photos 16 -19 Below - Examples of non-native trees on site
Photo 16 - Pines Photo 17 - Almonds
Photo 18 - Elm Photo 19 - CaliforniaPepper
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
23 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected]
Photo 20 - View of open-space above existing oak woodland at the south end of the parcel.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
24 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Appendix B - Site Map
Black cirles indicate tree locations. Tree numbers are called out on map. See page A2.0 of plan set for full scale version.
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
25 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Appendix C - Tree Planting Diagram
Exhibit G
*Denotes glossary term – Appendix D
26 1343 Bishop Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Tel: 805 234 8760 Email: [email protected] Appendix D- Glossary of Terms
• Canopy- Collectivebranchesandfoliageof a treeorgroupoftree’scrowns.Aggregateorcollectivetreecrowns. • CriticalRootZoneor CRZ- The International SocietyofArboriculture (ISA)definesCriticalRoot Zone(CRZ) asan areaequalto 1-footradiusfromthebaseofthetree’strunkforeach 1 inchofthetree’sdiameterat4.5feet above grade (referred to as Diameter at Standard Height or DSH. • Diameter atStandardHeightorDSH- Diameter oftrunkmeasured at 4.5 feet above groundlevel. • Drip-line- Area beneath the tree delineated by the outer edge ofthe tree canopy. • IncludedBark- Barkthatbecomesembeddedin a crotch(union)betweenbranchandtrunkorbetweenco-dominant stems. Causes a weakstructure.
Exhibit G
Exhibit H
City of Paso Robles
Notice of Exemption
To: Office of Planning and Research From: City of Paso Robles 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 1000 Spring Street
Sacramento, CA 95814 Paso Robles, CA 93446
[email protected]
805-237-3970
County Clerk
County of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
File
Project Title: Montage Condos (PD24-07, MOD25-09, OTR25-04, Tentative Tract Map 3254, P24-0100) Project Applicant: Stephen Ross representing Montage Development, Inc.
Project Location – Specific: 420 Creston Road, APN 009-541-010 and 009-541-011 Project Location - City: Paso Robles Project Location - County: San Luis Obispo Project Description: The project is a Development Plan for 24 residential condos including one unit deed restricted for a very-low income household. The project also includes a request for a fence height modification, a permit to remove 10 oak trees, and a 1-lot tract map for condominium purposes.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Paso Robles Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Montage Development, Inc.
Exempt Status:
Ministerial (Sec 21080(b)(1); 15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption. Class 32, Infill Development; CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 Statutory Exemptions. State code number:
Reasons why project is exempt: The project meets all requirements of a class 32 exemption and does not meet any exception to a categorical exemption.
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, the project does not meet any of the exceptions to a categorical exemption:
a. Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
The project qualifies for a Class 32 exemption and avoids the oak woodland and seasonal creek at the southern edge of the property. There are no resources of hazardous or critical concern designated or mapped on the property
Exhibit H
b. Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.
The cumulative impact of residential development in the City is mitigated through the payment of development impact fees that address demands on the City’s transportation, fire, police, and recreation infrastructure. In addition, the project is required to annex into the City’s Community Facilities District 2005-1 to address its ongoing impact on fire, police, and recreation services.
The impacts of the build out of the City of Paso Robles were analyzed and mitigated to the maximum extent possible by the EIR of the 2003 General Plan Update. The general plan anticipated development of the site for multi-family development. c. Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.
There are no unusual circumstances relevant to the impacts of the project, which is designed to avoid biological resources associated with the seasonal creek and related oak woodland at the southern edge of the property.
d. Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.
The site is not within or adjacent to a scenic highway. e. Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
No hazardous sites are listed within 1,000 feet of the project in the Department of Toxic Control’s EnviroStor database.
f. Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
No historical resources are located on the property, which is undeveloped but disturbed. Aerial photographs from 1941 show the site was partially developed with a single-family residence near Creston Road at that time. In 1971, the site was partially developed with two single-family residences near Creston Road.
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, the project is categorically exempt from CEQA as an infill development because:
a. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
The property has a General Plan land use category of Residential Multiple Family, Low Density 8 units per acre (RMF-8). The purposes of the RMF-8 category include providing low density multifamily developments where each building has only 2-3 units; permitting clustered housing in environmentally sensitive areas; and providing housing in close proximity to schools, shopping and other services including public transit. Each building has 2 units, which are clustered on the flatter portion of the site and away from an unnamed seasonal creek and oak woodland on the southern edge of the property. The site is located near schools and shopping centers. Creston Road is an arterial road. The site is on the City’s transit route that runs hourly on Creston Road in
Exhibit H
each direction. The site is zoned R2, which corresponds with the RMF-8 land use category.
Consistent with both the general plan and zoning ordinance, steeply sloping and oak-covered areas of the lot are excluded from the developable area of the site. The developable area is 3.1 acres and has an average slope of 9.8%. The maximum site density is 6.5 units per acre due to the slope. Twenty units are allowed on the site by right. A state density bonus of 4 units (total of 24 residential density units) is allowed in exchange for the applicant deed-restricting 1 unit for a very-low income household.
Land Use Element Policy LU2I is to “[e]ncourage infill development as a means of accommodating growth, while preserving open space areas, reducing vehicle miles traveled, and enhancing livability/quality of life.” The project would fill a vacant lot along the second most traveled arterial street in the City without impacting the adjacent oak woodland and seasonal creek.
b. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
The property is within the City, is 4.32 acres in size and is surrounded on all sides by developed sites including Creston Road to the north, Ferro Road to the east, and Capitol Hill Road to the west. The project avoids any impact to the seasonal creek at the southern property line. No jurisdictional permits from state or federal agencies are required to accomplish the project. c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
The project includes removal of 10 native oak trees on the site (7 of which are in poor or very poor condition) but avoids a seasonal creek at the southern edge of the property, which connects with the Salinas River approximately 500 feet west of the site. The project also avoids impacting a relatively intact oak woodland surrounding the drainage, which has limited value as habitat and as a local wildlife corridor.
d. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
The project is 24 residential units. The traffic impact study prepared for the project indicates “the Project would generate 160 average daily trips (ADT), 10 AM peak hour trips and 12 PM peak hour trips.” The expected trips are below the threshold of significance for traffic impacts established by City policy. In addition, the proposed project is expected to have a less than significant impact on vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
The project is residential in character. The development will be subject to the City’s Noise Ordinance; no significant noise effects are anticipated.
The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District has determined that a low-rise apartment project operational in 2027 would need to include more than 88 units to have a significant greenhouse-gas impact and more than 192 units to have a significant ozone-precursor impact (CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 2023). A 24-unit project falls below the thresholds of significance for all air quality metrics of concern in the region.
The project will be required to comply with the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Post-Construction Stormwater Requirements, which will result in a project that does not have significant impact on water quality.
Exhibit H
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
Water, sewer, electrical, and gas services are available to the site. The General Plan anticipates its development, and public utilities and services (including water, sewer, and solid waste) are designed to accommodate build-out of the General Plan.
Lead Agency Contact Person: Katie Banister Phone: (805) 237-3970 Associate Planner Email: [email protected]
Signature: Date: February 4, 2026
Signed by Lead Agency
Date received for filing at OPR:
Signature: Date: Title:
Date received for filing at OPR:
Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21110, Public Resources Code Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code
1010 Marsh St., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 546,8208 • FAX (805) 546,8641
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of San Luis Obispo,
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident
of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk
of the printer of the New Times, a newspaper
of general circulation, printed and published
weekly in the City of San Luis Obispo, County
of San Luis Obispo, and which has been
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by
the Superior Court of the County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, under the date of
February 5, 1993, Case number CV72789: that
notice of which the annexed is a printed copy
(set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been
published in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on
the following dates, to-wit:
fr,,bv-v{,.,( r lO\
in the year 2026.
I certify ( or declare) under the the penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at San Luis Obispo,
lj of_L.Cl.,<:J..a.;=-4--'
Patricia Horton, New Times Legals
Adm.m&PcrlODd'•NTMGAdaw/NfMGOfu/BUSINESS/PublicNoti«JProofofPub Proof of Publication of
NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Paso Robles City Council will hold a Public Hearing to consider the following project:
Project Description: Development of 24 residential condos 112 duplex buildings) on a vacant property. The project includes a state affordable housing density bonus, fence height
modification, subdivision map, and oak tree removal permit for 10 oak trees (P024-07, DTR25-04, MOD25-09, P24-0100).
Applicant Stephen Ross, Montage Development Inc
Location: 420 Creston Road (APN 009-541-010 and 009-541- 0ll)
CEOA Determination: The project is exempt from
environmental review as a class 32 categorical exemption for infill development projects pursuant to the State's Guidelines to lmplement the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15332
Hearing Date: The City Council will hold a Public Hearing on March 3, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. at the Norris Room, Centennial Park, 600 Nickerson Drive, Paso Robles, CA 93446.
On February 10, 2026, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the project. On a vote of 6-0 (Marlow absent), the Commission recommended the City Council
approve the project
The public has the option to attend the meeting in person or to participate remotely. To participate remotely, residents can \ivestream the meeting at www.prcity.com/youtube, and call (805)865-7276 to provide live public comment via telephone.
The phone line will open just prior to the start of the meeting.
Written public comments can be submitted via email to
[email protected] or US Mail (submit early) to the City Clerk, 1000 Spring Street, Paso Robles, CA 93446 provided that the comments are received prior to the time of the public hearing. Comments received prior to 12:00 noon on the day of the meeting will be posted as an addendum to the agenda. If submitting written comments, please note the agenda item by number or name. Comments on the proposed application must be received prior to the time of the hearing to be considered by the City Council.
Challenge to the application in court will be limited to issues raised at the public hearings or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearings.
Copies of the project staff report will be available for review on the City's website (www.prcity.com/meetings) on the
Friday preceding the hearing. If you have any questions, please contact tho r.omm11nity Development Department at pla•[email protected] or (805) 237-3970.
February 19, 2026
Attachment 3
CITY OF EL PASO DE ROBLES
“The Pass of the Oaks”
1000 SPRING STREET • PASO ROBLES, CALIFORNIA 93446 • www.prcity.com
AFFIDAVIT
OF MAIL NOTICES
CITY COUNCIL NOTICING
I, Marci Reynoso , employee of the City of El Paso de Robles, California, do hereby certify that the mail notices have been processed as required for the March 3, 2026 public hearing for P24-0100 / MOD 25-09 / OTR25-04 / PD24-07 on this 20th day of February in the year 2026.
City of El Paso de Robles
Community Development Department
Planning Division
Signed:
Marci Reynoso
Attachment 4
Attachment 5
1000 SPRING STREET • PASO ROBLES, CALIFORNIA 93446 • www.prcity.com
CITY OF EL PASO DE ROBLES
“The Pass of the Oaks”
AFFIDAVIT OF SITE NOTICES
FOR CITY COUNCIL HEARING
I, Katie Banister , employee of the City of El Paso de Robles, California, do hereby certify that a site notice at least 11 inches x 17 inches in size has been posted in a prominent place at 420 Creston Road for the March 3, 2026 City Council hearing for Development Plan 24-07, Site Plan Modification 25-09, Tentative Tract Map 3254, and Oak Tree Removal Permit 25-04 (P24-0100), on this 18th day of February 2026.
City of El Paso de Robles
Community Development Department
Planning Division
Signed:
Katie Banister
1 From: Warren Frace
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2025 8:14 PM
To: Katie Banister
Subject: Fwd: 420 Creston
FYI
Warren Frace
City of Paso Robles.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Mary < >
Date: June 22, 2025 at 6:23:52 PM PDT
To: CDdirector <[email protected]>
Subject: 420 Creston
[You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hello Mr. Frace,
I live on Ferro Lane and would like to lodge a public comment about the proposed development at 420 Creston Road. My comment is related to the parking provisions. Based upon what I read, there will be 2 garage parking spaces per unit and 14 guest spaces. In as much as these are 4 bedroom units it is somewhat likely that there will be more than 2 drivers in a dwelling. This is based upon the fact that more young people are staying in the family home for longer periods of time. Even if only half the families have 3 vehicles you can see how quickly the extra spaces will be used up causing an overflow to parking on Creston Road and possibly Ferro Lane and Capital Hill. If only one family had a medium sized gathering you can see how easily parking will be an issue. On Ferro Lane where most places only have one parking garage/carport per unit we have a continuous parking issue. I’m concerned that this problem will be exacerbated by the new development. I am in favor of increased affordable housing but I think this project’s proposed density may be more than the neighborhood can comfortably accommodate.
Thank you for your consideration of my concerns.
Mary Alvarado
Sent from my iPhone
Attachment 6
1 From: Mary < >
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2026 4:06 PM
To: Planning
Subject: Public comment 420 Creston
[Some people who received this message don't oŌen get email from . Learn why this is important at hƩps://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdenƟficaƟon ] [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
I am wriƟng as a potenƟal neighbor for the proposed development at 420 Creston Road. I live on Ferro Lane.
I have reviewed the site plan from the agenda of June 2, 2025.
My concerns are related to the plans for guest parking. Each dwelling has 4 bedrooms. Typically we would expect that there would be 2 drivers/household. Unfortunately in this economy that is not the case. Many households have mulƟ generaƟonal families as residents. If teens or young adults live with parents, as is oŌen the case, there would be more cars than the alloƩed 2/dwelling. Since there are only 14 overflow/guest parking spaces you can see how it could be nearly impossible for a guest to find a parking space. Should a family host a party of some sort that would create more parking issues. Since the recent construcƟon on Creston road with the welcome addiƟon of a leŌ turn lane and expanded bike lane there are no streetside parking opƟons.
I have visited the Experimental StaƟon density development and parking is a nightmare.
While I recognize the need for more housing I feel that we have to be pracƟcal in design to meet the needs of the current demographics in our area. It might require fewer dwellings be built so that more parking and open space is available.
Mary E. Alvarado
Sent from my iPhone
Mary E. Alvarado
Attachment 7
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Faith Wells >
Sunday, February 8, 2026 7:27 AM
Planninq
Concerns about Creston Condo Project
Some people who received this message don't often get email from Dear Planning Commission,
. Learn why this is important
It has come to my attention via mail notice that there is a hearing to accept the development of 24 4 bedroom condos at 420 Creston Road. This concerns me deeply as a home owner at. Elm Court, which is directly across the street from the proposed development. I am writing to ask you to reject this development for many reasons but the biggest being the traffic impact.
This portion of Creston Road is one lane each direction. Currently this section of Creston Road is already impacted during morning, evening and mid-afternoon. Each weekday morning this area from South River past Elm Court is backed up with traffic from school drop off and those going to work. This backup happens without the current and ongoing construction. How is this area supposed to absorb the potential 61 + additional cars that will be added when the proposed 24 condos are built Trying to get out of Elm Court, a one way street is already difficult and quite scary. I've owned this home since December 2008 and have seen many accidents. My parents were rear-ended in this area and their car totaled due to the traffic issues. Yes, the new middle turning lane helps but with an additional 61 + cars the impact will be immense as people already do not watch for cars or pedestrians within this stretch of Creston Road.
In addition to the extremely large capacity of traffic impact from this, I fear these additional 24 condos will lower the home prices within this area of town. This area has seen quite the turn around and adding 24 condos will not help the values of homes.
Please, I ask you to vote no and to not recommend this project to move forward. Or if you would please work with the developer to lower the number of condos built. The impact of traffic alone on this two lane road will be a total mess as it is already a mess.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of rejecting this project.
Thank you,
Faith Wells
1 Attachment 8
2 ~~~~~~
Faith Wells
Attachment 8
From: Michael Massey
To: Council; City Clerk
Subject: Item Q1 - 24 Units Creston Road
Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 7:26:09 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Dear Mayor Hamon and Members of the City Council,
I am writing to respectfully urge you to support the item on tonight’s agenda to approve the proposed 24-unit housing project in Paso Robles.
Our community continues to face a significant housing shortage. Families, young professionals, service workers, and even long-time residents are struggling to find attainable places to live. Every thoughtfully planned housing opportunity makes a meaningful difference.
While 24 units may not solve the entire challenge, it is exactly the kind of incremental, practical progress our city needs.
This project represents smart growth. It adds housing within our existing community footprint, supports local businesses by helping employees live closer to work, and strengthens the overall economic vitality of Paso Robles. Approving well-designed, appropriately scaled projects like this signals that our city is serious about addressing housing needs in a responsible and forward-looking way.
Delaying or denying projects that meet our standards only compounds the housing shortage and drives up costs for everyone. We need to send a clear message that Paso Robles welcomes solutions and is committed to being part of the answer.
I respectfully ask you to vote in favor of approving the 24-unit project tonight. It is a practical, positive step forward for our community.
Thank you for your time and your service to Paso Robles.
Sincerely,
Michael Massey
Paso Robles Citizen
Massey, Michael
Q1 - Public Comment