Dear Petaluma Senior Planner Alicia Giudice,

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Dear Petaluma Senior Planner Alicia Giudice,"

Jessica Holmes
5 years ago
Views:

1 From: twojoynts Sent: Friday, March 31, :14 AM To: Giudice, Alicia Cc: MarciaJoynt; Subject: Davidon Impact on Surrounding Area Dear Petaluma Senior Planner Alicia Giudice, My husband and I bought our home on Kelly Creek over 30 years ago and have worked to clean the creek in back of our place of brush, garbage and trash from the old city dumping. We founds remnants of cobblestones, pieces of City Hall, other large stones etc that must have been hauled here years ago to the edge of town at Grossland Way. The city has grown and D Street, which is the egress for our small development of homes on Grossland/12th St, has become busier and busier these last few years. More people drive their children to school, more high school aged children have their own cars, more cars and drivers in general have made the street very busy at certain hours of each day. Now the off ramp from 101 at San Antonio has made traffic denser, especially at evening commute times when D St Extension is used as a way to skirt the slow down of traffic on the freeway. There are times where we cannot make a left hand turn out of our corner and wait to exit making a right turn as traffic on D backs up at the Eighth St stop sign. There are times in the morning and afternoon that I watch children have to make a run for it to cross D to get to the high school. There is a crosswalk at 8th and at Sunnyslope but many blocks in between which kids don t want to walk to cross. The creek behind our house is now classified as a PRIVATE creek, and we all do our best to keep it clean without any sort of partnership status, homeowners agreements etc. We cleaned it out and let our children play in it when they could gather tadpoles, look and listen to frogs and muck around as young children should do, with supervision. We keep it trimmed back, free from debris, and don t pour chemicals into our creek. We don t know when the city decided it was a private creek, but it is. When Victoria was built, we watched chemicals in our creek come down on Friday nights after 5. Many of us called the fire department who said things were being poured into the creek or storm drains. We noticed the creek changed from a winter spring creek to an all year creek. The City did mitigating work to stem flooding and rerouted most of the water, but water still flows downhill down D Street to our corner

2 at Grossland and turns and flows into the drain in front of our house, under our driveway, and back under our garage in a pipeline and into the creek. The City replaced their pipe a couple of years ago, but water still pools where Grossland turns and goes to 12th St. Records from the Water department will back this up. Water flows down hill. It flows into our private creek. With Davidon homes, MORE water will flow. Much MORE water. Storm water runoff flows downhill to D St and flows along the streets and into the gutters or storm drains. Two storm drains on our street carry water under our garage to the creek. We chose to live on a creek, not a DITCH. We cleaned it up, keep it clean. Now we will have MORE runoff water from Davidon Homes. Traffic must move down D to downtown. With Davidon homes, MORE traffic will move. Much MORE traffic. I ve read the EIR and the mitigations. I m not sure they address the concerns of those of us downhill from the development, below Sunnyslope. Sprinkler water, runoff, and ground springs are not mitigated. Our private creek will be impacted without any oversight from the city. The traffic moving down D will stop at Sunnyslope. Will stop at Eighth. Will stop at Sixth. Will back up at the BLVD. Will stop at the drawbridge. Will stop for the Train. Will have more cars. The water from anywhere from 23 to 66 homes will flow supposedly away from the creek and flow into the storm drains that already spill out and run down our street. There are natural springs that will open up as they did during construction of Victoria.

3 But, THE MOST IMPORTANT fact of all is that Petaluma will lose the land immediately next to Putnam Park that will never be able to be replaced. The crown of our city will be gone but for the few fortunate enough to be able to purchase their piece of treasure. Let s not do this. As two former educators in town, we implore the City to work to keep as much as possible of this land for public use. Marcia and Tom Joynt twojoynts@comcast.net 5 Grossland Way Petaluma, CA

4 From: john sheehy Sent: Saturday, April 1, :44 PM To: Giudice, Alicia Subject: Old Scott Ranch Dear Ms. Aguidice, I am a lifelong Petaluma, who as a boy spent time on the Old Scott Ranch. I believe that the ranch should be preserved to retain some of Petaluma's historical heritage at the western of D Street, and ultimately purchased to be folded into the Helen Putnam Regional Park. It should not be developed into a housing tract. best, John Sheehy John Sheehy 7045 Toma Lane Penngrove, CA Desk Mobile sheehy@vbbn.com

5 Elaine Daly, MFT 1300 Sunset Drive Petaluma, CA Re. EIR on Davidon Project April 2, 2017 Dear Alicia Giudice, Senior Planner, My name is Elaine Daly and I received my Bachelor s Degree in California Natural History and Wildlife Conservation in Since then I have studied migratory birds, native plant restoration, wetland mitigation and spent many years teaching environmental education and nature awareness. The EIR covers many important components of the development plan on Kelly Creek which lend me to believe that more studies need to be done and, ultimately, that this piece of land should be preserved. To begin, Native grassland habitat, a sensitive natural community by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, has been destroyed in most of coastal California. To restore a non-native grassland to it would take 50 years to establish native clumping grasses. An already established Native grassland is important for the integrity of the land, as it prevents erosion, allows for other native plants to succeed and creates habitat. Disturbing those grasslands would have long term, negative impacts on the integrity of that landscape and its inhabitants. Eucalyptus trees, although not considered forest land by CEQA standards are known to be habitat for many migrating songbirds, resident birds and seasonally for monarch butterflies. Many studies show they are critical habitat for many species. Petaluma has such little wooded environments that this stand of trees is important to protect. The wildlife in Petaluma has highly restricted movement as due housing developments and private pasture land that is fenced off. Most of the larger mammals in our area are very limited in their movement, including deer and coyote. Both of these animals are important animals for the balance of the ecosystems. The natural food web has gotten disturbed due to fences and developments that block wildlife corridors. It says in the DEIR that larger mammals take advantage of the extended space of the Kelly Creek watershed. Petaluma wildlife already has restricted movement and minimal habitat, so it is important to preserve this habitat. In addition, if larger mammals don t have big enough areas, or corridors to travel on the genetic biodiversity goes down and the animal lose their genetic diverisity.

6 Additionally, although the EIR shows that the Red Legged Frog is unlikely to breed in Kelly Creek, we need to do ongoing studies to ensure that this is 100% true. If they are even likely to breed there, the land should be protected and under monitoring during mating season. Since, there is a presence of Red Legged Frog on the property, the conversation need to be about restoration and creation of habitat to ensure that this indicator/endangered species continues to survive. Please consider halting the development and making a plan based on a long term vision both for animals, plants and people. Sincerely, Elaine Daly, MFT Elaine Daly, MFT

7 Elaine Daly, MFT 1300 Sunset Drive Petaluma, CA Re. EIR on Davidon Project April 2, 2017 Dear Alicia Giudice, Senior Planner, My name is Elaine Daly and I received my Bachelor s Degree in California Natural History and Wildlife Conservation in Since then I have studied migratory birds, native plant restoration, wetland mitigation and spent many years teaching environmental education and nature awareness. The EIR covers many important components of the development plan on Kelly Creek which lend me to believe that more studies need to be done and, ultimately, that this piece of land should be preserved. Additionally, something that is difficult to measure scientifically is the quality of life of people. Since the beginning of time, people have lived in close relationship to the land. Petaluma has very limited open spaces for people to walk and connect to the natural world. This is an incredible piece of land that is already connected to Helen Putnam and would be a gift for thousands of people for generations to come. Developing this land is a short term gain for a just a few people. If it is turned into park land it can offer more land for education, wildlife conservation, enjoyable sunsets and hearing birdsongs. Please consider the significance and the importance of saving this piece of land and making it available to the public. Sincerely, Elaine Daly, MFT Elaine Daly, MFT

8 From: Erin Chmielewski Sent: Sunday, April 2, :42 PM To: Giudice, Alicia Subject: EIR for the Davidon Development Dear Alicia Giudice, The EIR for the Davidon Development covers many important components of the development plan on Kelly Creek which lend me to believe that more studies need to be done and, ultimately, that this piece of land should be preserved. Additionally, something that is difficult to measure scientifically is the quality of life of people. Since the beginning of time, people have lived in close relationship to the land. Petaluma has very limited open spaces for people to walk and connect to the natural world. This is an incredible piece of land that is already connected to Helen Putnam and would be a gift for thousands of people for generations to come. Developing this land is a short term gain for a just a few people. If it is turned into park land it can offer more land for education, wildlife conservation, enjoyable sunsets and hearing birdsongs. Please consider the significance and the importance of saving this piece of land and making it available to the public. Sincerely, Erin Chmielewski

9 From: Sent: Sunday, April 2, :50 PM To: Giudice, Alicia Cc: Saunders Steve Subject: Development on D Street Hello Ms. Giudice, We're writing to express our concern and consternation about the proposed housing development at the west end of D St. We believe this development would be truly detrimental to the historic value and attraction of Petaluma. Our town is becoming a "destination" exactly because of it's friendly, small-town atmosphere, it's many beautiful historic homes, and the gorgeous surrounding countryside, including the beautiful red barn on the property in question. Wildlife on the property would be displaced forever, and, as you must know, this development would greatly exacerbate traffic on D St. which is already far too congested for a residential area. Petaluma is a lovely place to live, to raise children and to grow old. Let's not ruin the historic part of the town which gives Petaluma it's reputation. Please, please, please, use your influence to help block the development of the west end of D St. Sincerely Judith Macer & Steve Saunders 1 Highland Rd. Petaluma

10 From: Sandra Rozmarin Sent: Monday, April 3, :54 AM To: Giudice, Alicia Subject: Davidon development near D St. and Windsor Dear Alicia Giudic Do we really have enough information about the development plan on Kelly Creek? I don t think so and recommend that more studies should be done. The land in question can be enjoyed by so many people in the future if it is preserved for education, wildlife and recreation. Our green spaces are already limited, we should not be further limiting same. This land should be park land. Let s take the long view here. Please consider the significance and the importance of saving this piece of land and making it available to the public. Sincerely, Sandy Rozmarin 40 Augusta Cir. ss.rozmarin@gmail.com (707)

11 From: Sent: Monday, April 3, :59 AM To: Giudice, Alicia Subject: Scott Ranch - Davidon Homes West Petaluma Project Alicia Giudice I wanted to add my name to the list of people asking you to notify the chain of command of my disapproval for this project. I am a bit more informed about the Scott Ranch Property than most as I live in the Pinnacle Heights Development RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET from the Scott Ranch. There is no way this area can handle the traffic from 63 additional houses. I don't care what the Environmental Impact Reports tell you or the city. D street is a 2 lane road already impacted and falling apart due to overuse. If you think I am uninformed come sit on my lawn any morning or Friday afternoon. The land on that hill is unstable and floods. The Victoria Development has continuous flood problems. I suggest you check with there HOA if you think I am, again, uninformed. Petaluma is known for responsible growth. This is simply a way for a development company to make a profit, leaving a town worse off than when it started. Thank you for your time. Steve Finley 2 Tilden Lane Petaluma

12 From: Rebecca Vasile Sent: Monday, April 3, :33 PM To: Giudice, Alicia Subject: Please preserve Petaluma Dear Alicia Giudice, The EIR for the Davidon Development covers many important components of the development plan on Kelly Creek which lend me to believe that more studies need to be done and, ultimately, that this piece of land should be preserved. Additionally, something that is difficult to measure scientifically is the quality of life of people. Since the beginning of time, people have lived in close relationship to the land. Petaluma has very limited open spaces for people to walk and connect to the natural world. This is an incredible piece of land that is already connected to Helen Putnam and would be a gift for thousands of people for generations to come. Developing this land is a short term gain for a just a few people. If it is turned into park land it can offer more land for education, wildlife conservation, enjoyable sunsets and hearing birdsongs. Please consider the significance and the importance of saving this piece of land and making it available to the public. Sincerely, Rebecca -- Rebecca Vasile Founder

13 From: Jessica Umphress Sent: Monday, April 3, :18 PM To: Giudice, Alicia Subject: Davidson Development EIR Dear Alicia Giudice, I understand that the Planning Commission is meeting tomorrow to discuss the EIR for the Davidson Development in Petaluma. As a Petaluma resident (address 125 Glacier Court, 94954), I would like to express some concerns about the EIR and this project. The EIR covers a lot of territory for the development plan on Kelly Creek, but for me it raises many more questions that make me think that more studies need to be done and that, ultimately, that this piece of land should be preserved rather than developed for housing. Additionally, something that is difficult to measure scientifically is the quality of life of people. Petaluma has very limited open spaces for people to walk and connect to the natural world. This parcel in question is an incredible piece of land that is already connected to Helen Putnam and would be a gift for thousands of people for generations to come. Developing this land is a short term gain for a just a few people. If it is turned into park land it can offer more land for education, wildlife conservation, enjoyable sunsets and hearing birdsongs. What Petaluma does not need is another high-end housing development sprawling into the west county, eating into the open spaces there, further degrading those natural communities, and creating more privilege for a few but less access for the many. Please consider the significance and the importance of saving this piece of land and making it available to the public. Sincerely, Jessica Umphress

14 Dear Ms Giudice and the Petaluma Planning Commission, I write this letter in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Report submitted for the Davidson/Scott Ranch Residential Subdivision. After reading the document, I have several concerns that I d like to address. For context, I live near the proposed development on Windsor Drive, and though it may seem hypocritical to oppose housing that resembles the Victoria subdivision, Victoria was approved decades ago when horizontal stratification of housing into scenic, rural zones was a normal practice. Today, due to its location, scenic value and topography, Victoria would be equally scrutinized. The biological and cultural resources of the Davidson/Scott Ranch property are vast. Urban sprawl into areas of enduring quality and memorable character, such as the Davidson/Scott Ranch, will permanently mar the D Street gateway to Petaluma and deprive greater Sonoma of gorgeous rolling green hills that give our region its iconic look and appeal to tourists and residents alike. The project applicant s key objectives for the proposed project are to: promote and maximize new housing opportunities within the urban growth boundary thereby discouraging urban sprawl; Let s be clear, this development is the very definition of urban sprawl. And one cannot argue that it s located inside of the Urban Growth Boundary when you re simultaneously saying scores of other General Plan provisions shouldn t apply. You can t pick and choose the rules you want to follow. By all objective measures, this property is rural and thus this development should be considered sprawl and own-up to the negative implications that comes with that moniker. Specific to the substance of the DEIR findings, here are a few key areas that I think fail to capture an accurate depiction of the situation that will occur if this development comes to pass UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS This section of the DEIR concludes that almost all service system buildout has a Less than significant impact. Impact UTL-2: Development of the proposed project would not require the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. (Less than Significant) Impact UTL-3: Development of the proposed project would require the construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems. The construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems would result in significant environmental effects. (Potentially Significant; Less than Significant with Mitigation)

15 It ll certainly require new infrastructure, massive reshaping of the hillsides and drainage networks while adding cost to everyone who lives in Petaluma. In fact, just this week, the City of Petaluma issued a letter to its citizens informing them of the need to increase rates for water and sewer services for the next FIVE years. On top of that increase, we ll need to subsidize this development? No thank you. It s ridiculous to assume this project will cover the costs needed to invest in appropriate water delivery and wastewater systems as the DEIR seems to suggest. It ll be paid for by all of us in perpetuity and we re already being asked to spend more and more money in fees for the next five years. TRANSPORTATION I agree with the report in its conclusion that impact on traffic throughout the region would be Significant and Unavoidable. However, I feel that it does not adequately explore the negative impact this development would have on downtown Petaluma. The Petaluma River presents significant difficulties to any proposed housing development, particularly on the west side of Petaluma. The river creates choke points that result in massive back-up and gridlock at heavy commute times as well as on weekends. The huge influx of vehicles significantly degrades the quality of life for all residents of Petaluma, by reducing the charm that makes the town so special. D Street has become a thoroughfare in its own right. And this development simply adds more people and more cars without streamlining or mitigating the significant problems we re facing with our cross-town transportation corridors. The DEIR aptly describes Windsor Drive as, a cut-thru street for non-residential traffic attempting to bypass congested arterial streets. This project will contribute more traffic to Windsor drive, which is attempting to be a walkable community in its own right. The steady stream of speeding cars, heavy trucks, and more residents will result in a degradation of that community in terms of quality of life. PUBLIC SERVICES One of the main reasons for not supporting this project as articulated in the DEIR is how blatantly it fails to help any situation our town is in. Take the entire Public Services section, for instance. The DEIR states that Fire, Police, Schools, etc literally every service listed, is not impacted by this development. Which is exactly why it isn t worth pursuing. This project is going to destroy an entire scenic area, raise utility fees for all the people of Petaluma to support expanded infrastructure, cause massive disruption to the transportation grid, and sequester the area in loud, diruptive construction for years to come. And for what? For a Walnut Creek developer to make money and an extremely small handful of people to buy a luxury home. People who could afford to live in this proposed development could just as easily afford any other house listed on the market today. The DEIR notes the population pressures coming to Petaluma in the coming years and this development is a drop in the pond to addressing those issues, yet building on this property deprives citizens of so much lasting beauty and scenic/wildlife resources.

16 Based on the General Plan and the number of housing units in 2016, the City of Petaluma is expected to add 5,366 new housing units by The project would add 63 to 66 homes to the housing stock of the City, and would account for 4.2 percent of the City expected increase in housing. This is a beneficial impact as it would assist the City in meeting its RHNA goals. This section from Impact Sciences has a bias connotation. We need 5,366 new homes and they re selling this project like the 66 additional units are actually helping the situation. We could put seven times the number of houses in a fraction of the land in the middle of town without contributing to sprawl and damaging the iconic look and feel of Sonoma County. HELEN PUTNAM REGIONAL PARK Finally, nothing in this DEIR assesses the negative impact on the Helen Putnam Park itself. It s referenced only marginally. Let s be clear. We have ONE regional park in our area. Only One. There isn t any mitigation that can be had here. We can t ruin the viewshed, create noise pollution and degrade drainage here, knowing that there are still five other open space areas you can recreate in, because there aren t. This is it. It s all the people of Petaluma have. Let s not make it an island in a sea of development, but rather surround the park with lightly populated, large lot housing consistent with our General Plan. Areas surrounding the park should gradually transition into more densely populated Urban areas, not be surrounded by walls of housing. In the end, I m not a scientist, but I am highly suspicious of any document that pretty much reads Less than Significant Impact across the board. That simply isn t realistic, especially when the land in question is a scenic riparian zone with diverse topography filled with wildlife. Thus all findings should be questioned. Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. Best, -Dustin Clark Petaluma, CA

ADDENDUM TO BIOLOGICAL SCOPING SURVEY REPORT, BOTANICAL SURVEY AND WETLAND DELINEATION

ADDENDUM TO BIOLOGICAL SCOPING SURVEY REPORT, BOTANICAL SURVEY AND WETLAND DELINEATION FOR AVALON INN (APN 069-241-27 & -04) 1201 & 1211 NORTH MAIN STREET FORT BRAGG, CA MENDOCINO COUNTY prepared for: