HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 5FLate6 12/07/2009
From: Crump, Katie
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 9:33 AM
To: Padovan, Deborah
Subject: FW: Letter re: Dutra revised permit
Attachments: Letter to City Council.pdf; ATT00001.txt
For the binder
-----Original Message-----
From: Brown, John
Sent: Monday., December 07, 2009 8:55 AM
To: Crump, Katie
Subject: FW: Letter re: Dutra revised permit
-----Original Message-----
From: David Yearsley [mailto:dmy@sonic.net]
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 8:04 PM
To: Dave Glass; Michael Healy; Mike Harris; Teresa Barrett; Pamela Torliatt; David Rabbitt;
Tiffany Renee
Ce: David Yearsley; Brown, John
Subject: Letter re: Dutra revised permit
Dear City Council members;
Please consider the attached letter when speaking for Petaluma to the Sonoma Co. Bd. of
Supervisors regarding Dutra's revised permit application.
i
- _ -___
_-
1Frie;nds of ~l~el'etal:~,r~:~ P. , ~.r
G'cleErrta~`~v ~rzrz' G'r~nser~.1cr
Petaluma City Council
l l English St.
Petaluma Ca.
Re: Dutra Materials -revised project
Dear Council Members;
This letter addresses the revised application for Dutra Materials proposed asphalt plant at Haystack
Landing on the banks ofthe Petaluma River. Even with. the lowered production, reduced silo size and
the elimination of crushing facilities we oppose the location. of this 'facility and ask you to remain
steadfast in your opposition.and speak against it with one voice to the Board of Supervisors.
The plant and would create negative impacts of traffic, smell, noise, and visual aesthetics in a critically
sensitive area. Haystack Landing is at the gateway to the City of Petaluma and Sonoma County for
both land and water-borne visitors. Even with reduced silo heights and elimination of the crushing
operations the plant would generate a large increase in truck traffic, disturbing smells, loud sounds and
unpleasant visual. images. As the first thing travelers see upon exiting the greenbelt corridor from
Merin County, an asphalt batch plant at the proposed location would have a negative impact on most
traveler's perception of Petaluma: and Sonoma County and discourage people from leaving the freeway
or using the nearby marina facilities, hotels and:river trails.
The barge offloading operations, situated at a narrow bend in the River, would continue to create a
hazard to navigation; especially at low tide when draft is restricted near the river's banks. The County
and the Coast. Guard have. an obligation to keep th.e channel safe and passable for all watercraft. Other
large craft need safe access the. river channel tqo.. Upstream parcels, like the former Pomeroy property,
that are zoned. for river dependent industry could easily bring additional large commercial boat traffic
to town. Likewise the tourist industry looks to the river for access to Petaluma. Large sail boats like the
Scow Schooner "Alma"; paddle wheelers like the former "Petaluma Queen" and visiting tour boats
need to be able. to navigates this section of the River safely aY all times and- tides.
Wildlife disturbance is another factor still not adequately mitigated. The bright lights that would be
used for nighttime operations have been proven to have a definite negative impact on wildlife. The
Dark`Sky Society (www.DarkSk S~t~org) has documented,the negative effects oflight pollution.
Ducks Unlimited (D.U.) has also documented the negative effects of artificial light and loud noise on
waterfowl'in their pamphlet #15 on Wildlife Disturbance Factors. The fact that the proposed site for
this plant is next door to a heron rookery and less than 10.0 yards from Shollenberger Park, a popular
walking trail and noted wildlife sanctuary, is cause for concern.
P.C~. 13c~:~ =#125 * ,l'ettlk~~na Cr~1 X34955 • (f)7'} 7(, y i iSt~ • dm~F(%~as~z7ic.rzet
z:~v:~rt~;~rtr,~.~cr~t'~ir:~a~tia(r~,~ztarizaEr:ct~
~_-_ _ --
Fri4nt" s of pie Pe.~+.Iuina [:i1 ~r
C:el~~hr~zte rand Cojz.sc~rut~
The most compelling reason to deny the permit for Dutra Material's asphalt plant at the proposed site
is that it does not produce.. enough positive benefits for the people of Petaluma or Sonoma County to
offset its negative ,impacts. The County would Abe making zoning changes within Petaluma's UGB
without City support, :..and those changes would.have a negative impact on the County's only
commercial waterway connected to the: Bay. T,he, new plant: would' mainly benefit the business
requesting the permit. River users, visitors to Eetaluma and;the people ofSonoma County will all pay
the price. I ask you to do what is right'.:for loca'1 residents and the Petaluma River. Strongly oppose this
permit application and ask Dutra to find a less environmentally sensitive area for their asphalt plant.
Sincerely;
David Yearsley -Executive Director
1'.C). 13i-r~ ~~~~ a t'etalun~<~ C.!1 ~34s~5~ d (707j 7f~~ "77.t~ • d~ntir(~?~sc~faia,.net
r
f.::w ~t~., frzendsr:Ttlxc~~~rt~z~+r;.frrzrr ue*. ~ar4