HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 3.A 03/16/2009 Late DocumentsFrom:
Borba, Irene
Sent:
Thursday, March 12, 2009 2:57 PM
To:
Cooper, Claire; Padovan, Deborah
Cc:
Moore, Mike
Subject:
FW: 30 W elRose
This came to me and it is for Mondays Council meeting regarding 30 West EI Rose.
Irene Borba
Associate Planner
From: Raymond Johnson [mailto:rayvs@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 2:40 PM
To: iborba@petaluma.ca.gov; Borba, Irene
Subject: Fw: 30 W elRose
Can't remember which e-mail address gets to you so I tried both. Share with anyone as, who knows, the Counil
may decide I need a new endeavor
Thanks
Ray
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Raymond Johnson <rayvs@pacbell.net>
To: pain torliatt <ptorliatt@aol.com>; teresa4petaluma@comcast.net;
tiff@tiffanyrenee.com; mthealy@sbcglobal.net; mike4pet@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 3:43:13 PM
Subject: 30 W elRose
Madame Mayor and City Council,
daveglass@comcast.net; david@davidrabbitt.com;
Unfortunately due to a prior commitment in Los Angeles I will be unable to attend what is, I hope, the final
meeting on 30 W elRose nest Monday.
I want to commend you on hearing all of the individuals during public comment at the last meeting. The 30 W
elRose project began prior to my joining SPARC so their is a significant history. In the interest of your
valuable time I will not recreate the project evaluations nor will I laud the valuable addition of Dr. Andy and his
wife as people and dental assets. The project was evaluated on not one, but two General Plans. There were
countless SPARC meetings and evaluations the net result being both staff and SPARC approval. This was by no
means a hasty judgement but, indeed, a well vetted and discussed conclusion. If I were paid by the hour - or at
all - this would have been a lucrative endeavor
Regardless of feelings and opinions, I think: their are significant issues both as proper and precedent setting. The
applicant was first evaluated on the old General Plan. I -le was approved. Subsequently it was decided to
reevaluate on the new General Plan. This required some minor changes and it was approved again. Once again
we are back at the appeal stage. Put yourself in the shoes of the applicant (or future applicants). If you are told
you can have something - not once but twice - you spend the money, make the plans and prepare to move on.
Then NO!!
I have the utmost respect for the neighbors and Scott Stegman but I feel the only possible solution would be to
throw out the General Plan and evaluate each project individually, both objectively and, perhaps more
importantly, subjectively. Also rezone all of Petaluma primarily eliminating mixed use so there can be no
debate - residential or commercial. In addition delete infill from any consideration as it causes too many density
concerns.
In lieu of that, I hope you will consider the message that the 30 W elRose project sends to applicants. You may
be approved once, twice .... six times but that is meaningless. The process has just begun. Is this a question of
ethics? Perhaps. Propriety? Probably. But definitely a red flag to any and all applicants.
I wish you the best on Monday, I will be there in spirit
Ray Johnson
ravvsnnacbel1.net
707 364-8149
From: Lucille Battison [lucyb4u@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 4:19 PM
To: Barrett, Teresa; - City Clerk; King, Fran; 'Glass, David Councilman'; 'Harris, Mike Councilman';
'Healy, M Councilman'; citymgr; Moore, Mike; Pam Mayor Totliatt; 'Rabbitt, David
Councilman'; 'Renee, Tiffany Counciwoman'
Subject: 30 W. EI Rose Building
Madam Mayor, City Council, Thursday March 12, 2009
This is a follow-up to my comments at the last Monday's lengthy meeting. It was so late and my three minutes was not
quite enough to voice my concerns. So I take this avenue to add to those comments:
1) As I stated that night, 1 did not receive a sinole message to a meeting with the applicants and I live right across
the street (corner of Hayes and Belle View)...I only heard of it the day of that one meeting (the fourth meeting). I
feel if you, the council (city/SPARC) at that time, had notified ALL the neighbors in the immediate vicinity NONE of
this would be going on and the applicants wouldn't have spent so much money trying to get this building in where
it is totally out of place, location -wise, space -wise, safety/traffic-wise and architecturally inconsistent with this
neighborhood community.
2) 1 haven't heard anything about the ground beneath the building being able to support doubleftriole the weiqht of
what is there now. I heard that that ground was "fill" when it was first built and the codes at time were/are
inconsistent with today's. I know the structural engineer gave the building the o.k. but was the oround tested? My
concern here is if, (worst case scenario), we have a major earthquake and the ground underneath becomes unstable
and gives way because of this added weight and the building slides down onto the neighbor's homes. It could be a
disaster waiting to happen... and a case for lawsuits against the city.
3). 1 would like to ask each of you this simple question: "If YOU lived in these homes where this proposed huge
building wants to be built at "your back door" would you say, "O.K., go ahead and build it. I don't mind".? This is a
YES OR NO question... what is your answer? None of you live here in this immediate neighborhood so it is easy to make
a judgment on someone else's neighborhood. It's not in your back yard,
I have witnessed some level-headed thinkers on this council which encourages me. (Who I voted for hoping for a
better city government). I can only hope that wisdom will prevail and is not swayed by wealthy/selfish projects
such as this. I don't see it bringing in so much tax revenue and jobs (short term) that it would off -set the property value
loss and safety of the neighbor hood.
Thank you for taking the time to consider my additional remarks.
Sincerely,
Lucille Battison, EI Rose/Hayes Coalition
From:
Jean [ivyl234@sbcglobal.net]
Sent:
Monday, March 16, 2009 3:24 PM
To:
- City Clerk; ptorliatt@aol.com
Subject:
30 West EI Rose
I'm writing to express my support for the 30 West El Rose project. I've been following the issue, particularly
because I live in the neighborhood. I'm hoping you deny the appeal and let that tired old building be
rejuvenated and viable again.
This area is mixed use and the medical offices are great neighbors. My backyard neighbor is a medical facility.
I would welcome the 30 EI Rose project remodel. 1 hope the project is approved!
Thank you for your consideration.
Jean Howery
6 EI Rose Drive
Petaluma
1