Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 1.A-Attch5 04/25/2011
Pi1hC�MP"N r tT From: agolt@ comcast . net, [ma i Ito: agolt @comcast,net] Sent Tuesday, March 22, 20117 PM To: daveglass @comeasf net; counci ,Imemberkear,.ney @me.corri mike4pet @aol.com; healy mike; council memberalbertson @gma,iIxom; tiff@tiffanyrenee.com Cc: info @deercreekvillage.com; CDD Subject: Deer.Creek Village DEIR Dear Mayor and City Council, Although we live outside the city limits we are very much impacted by your actions! We need a lumber company in town! We spend; as much on our company's gas bill now as we used to spend on the lamb "er! Please make . the construction industry more cost effective by bringing,a Lowe's to our town! If we spend less on construction; the homeowner can have a less expensive home! Think of the many benefits a Lowe's would mean to Petaluma's economy! We encourage your swift acceptance and approval of this plan! Ken Goltermann 1060 Skillman Lane Goltermann, Construction, inc po box 409 316 Petaluma Blvd. S Petaluma, CA 94.952 - - - -= Original Message---- - From.' mat'thew. danielczy'k@ yahoo., c mailton m atthew_danielczyk @ya'hoo.com] Sent Wednesday, March 23, 2011 12 :157 AM To: CDD Subject: Community Development feedback form Below :is the result of your feedback form. It was 'submitted by ( matt'hew danielczyl<(@yah'oo.com on Wednesday, March 23, 2011 at 02:56:31 First Name: Matthew Last Name: Danielczyk Live in: yes comment: yes services: I oppose the proposed Deer Creek development: businesses are closed all over town. There is plenty of existing, underutilized retail space. Deer Creek will harm Petaluma. more :'trails, bike lanes, transit- oriented development less: "Deer Creek Subject:: Project Updates - Deer Creek Please respond: yes Submit: Submit �I From: 'Annie Van Maaren" < avanmaaren` @. yahoo: com <mailto:avanmaaren @vahoo.com Date: March 25, 2011 10:35:25,AM PDT' To: < counctiinembeekearney @me.com< mailto :councilmemberkearney @me.com Cc: '"Melissa Abercrombie "' < oldeastpetaluma @yahoo.com< mailto :oldeastpetaluma @yahoo.com >>, < daveglass@com cast. net <ma1Ito davegl ass @com cast. net », < dfarrrner @ci:petaluma.ca us< mailto :dfarmer @ci.pe.taluma.ca.us >>, < citvm'kr @ci.Petaluma.ca.us< mailto citymgr@ci.petaluma.ca.us », < mil<e4pet @aol.com<mailto mil<e4oet @,aoLcom >>, < rrithealy @sbcklobal. net <mailto:mthealy@sbcgloba1. net >>, < teresa4petaIuma@ comcast: net< mailtoaeresa4petaIuma @comcast:net >>, < tiff@tiffa pyre nee. com <mai Ito aiff,@tiffanyrenee.com > >, < chrisalbertson @.comcast.net< mailto :chrisalbertson @comcast.net Subject, FW: EverMay garden center - Small Business Owner Petaluma Dear Mr: Kearney: Firstly, 1'd like to congratulate you:o,n your appointment to the Council. I wish you much success in your position, and I look forward to all of'fhe positive contributions I'm sure you will make. I'm forwarding you a letter that psent to the President of the Chamber. It's,been,a couple of weeks, and I still haven't gotten a response. In these dire economic times, it is imperative that the negative fiscal impacts, to existing businesses in Petaluma as a result of the Lowes shopping center are being considered. I reiterate, WE NEED A LUMBER YARD, and we desperately need the tax revenue from a Lowes shopping center, but the Lowes discount 25,000 sq. ft. garden center ''IS going to hurt the EverMay garden center, Cottage Gardens and,the Rose Garden. Serious attention needs to be given to the economic impact Lowes will have, and I haven't seen or heard any consideration whatsoever. At one point, there was quite a chatter of how a Borders in the Lowes center would devastate Copperfield.'s, but not one word about how local nurseries will be affected. Please review the situation: prior to the Aprill.deadline to implement the EIR. Thanks in advance, and again I wish you much success. Regards, Annie Van Maaren EverMay'garden center From: Annie Van Map-rep [mailto:avanmaaren @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, March 14, 201112:16 PM To. ' pact @petalumachamber.co' < rrmailto :'pact @ petal umachamber:com >' Cc: "DaniellaE @petalumachamber:com< mailto:' DaniellaE @petalumachamber.com >' Subject',EverMay garden center - Small Business Owner Petaluma 1 Dear Ms. Pellegrini: You were quoted in the Press Democrat on March 10th, 2011 saying in reference to the Deer Creek shopping center that the project would not take away from other stores' sales because "we do not have any businesses in town that would do .what a Lowe's would do." My husband and I own the EverMay garden center. We are, one of three nurseries in Petaluma, not including OSH. I am speaking on behalf of the Rose Garden and Cottage Gardens. A 25,000 square foot discount garden center at Lowes will have a devastating, negative impact on all three businesses. I am not saying that Petaluma doesn't despe rate ly need a lumberyard and the tax revenue, but please do your homework,before publicly making such uneducated statements. We love being a small business in Petaluma, and after only 6 years in business we have a wonderful customer base. But in this economic climate, a bargain is a bargain, and Lowes retail price for plant material undercuts our wholesale cost. We just can't compete on that level. I haven't seen the EIR yet, but hopefully in your position you have, and will conduct a serious, thorough assessment of the negative impact'a 25,000 square foot garden center will have on all of us. Sincerely. Annie Van Maaren EverMay garden center 301 Wilson St. Petaluma, CA 94952 707 - 762 -8187 Hines, Heather From: Jensen, Deanna on behalf of CDD Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 6:46 AM To: Hines, Heather; Bradley, Geoff Subject: FW: Deer Creek Village Project ........ ..__.__ . _.... _. From: Audrey Tambellini [ mailto :atarribellini @yahoo.com]. Sent: Sunday, April 03, 20119:57 AM To: CDD Subject: Deer Creek Village Project We believe Petaluma should expand to allow -more shopping choices in town: I for one am tired of driving up 101 every time I need to go to a big store., for lumber ete. I waste gas and pollute the air driving up over that hill. I know it is "cute" to think of Petaluma as ,ajsmall quaint town but grow up! we need jobs, better shopping choices, and to: save energy'and time. Please except the Deer Creelc Project. Yours Truly, Audrey Tambellini 1 5-5 Hines, Heather From: Glenn Mantoani [mantoani @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 20112'11 PM To:. Hines; Heather; Brown, John; daveglass@com cast. net; - City Clerk; CityCouncil Subject: Deer Creek Village'Shopping Center Fellow Petalurrans, When we moved into Park Place some thirty five years ago, we knew that the land across McDowell would someday be developed. 0 p ur city has grown and with more peop.le'comes more commercial "development. As concerned residents, we aslcyourcareful consideration of the' following: 1) The traffic on McDowell, Rainier and even Maria is already highly ,used. 2) The traffic on McDowell will surely impact the accessibility to our Hospital. 3) The'air pollution will be higher than,acceptable- standards. 4) There will be increased noise;levelsfor, the Hospital and the people along McDowell, across from :the. project., It is already too noisy. We would invite you to come to our home and.sit in the back yard to hear what we hear every day. A sound would certainly help the residents. 5) The site is presently zoned as "Mixed- Use ". Petaluma's General Plan requires that "Mixed-Use" be pedestrian oriented. The General Plan also recognizes the need to reduce the traffic impact on McDowell. Please help us mairitain our quality of life in our wonderful city. We are not asking to have the project thrown out, but we are asking that the project adhere to Petaluma's General Plan. We are asking that this project be designed as a walkable; mixed use. project. We would also askthat the City, build a sound wall along McDowell where the existing fences are falling down. There is precedent, as the City paid for sound walls on Caufield and Washington Streets. This will help in two ways. It will help maintain a reasonable noise level for residents and it will assure that people traveling to and from the project will not think of our City as a blighted eyesore. . We also ask that there be no overriding considerations. Thank you for your consideration, Glenn & Trish Mantoani 628 Cascade Court Petaluma 707 763 -6512 Hines, Heatfler From: Jensen, Deannaon 6:ehalf of CDD Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 6 :54 AM To: Hines, Heather; Bradley, Geoff Subject: FW: "Deer Creek Village DEIR" From Simonetti Charlene 'mailto :CMSimonetti @mactec.com] Sent: Wednesday; April 06., 20114:49 PM To: CDD Cc: info @deercreekvillage.com; daveglass @comcast net; mike4pet @aol,com Subject: "Deer.Creek Village DEIR" Indeed the East Side of beautiful Petaluma is, in a desperate need for thel premier Deer Creek project. It is not only an enhancement.to the vacant.prime piece, of property; personally it is.a'no brainer' ito be handed the opportunity to create hund'red's of'jobs and increase the sales tax revenue for the City of Petaluma. We,should be thankful that som;eorie has the interest in this economy. Mostvof us have to, travel a significant distance to obtain home imprcivement items and if developed as displayed in the architectural drawings; how nice to have a pleasant place toJust enjoy. The other plazas on the East,side have no, ambiance, just storesi and parking lots. And a Farmer's Market too, what can one ask for.... My husband and I are definitely in support of this project arid certainly hope that everyone else agrees. It's time; we need it. By the way, where is our Target? e`a m&t , te semeotem 1927 Buckingham Lane Petaluma, .CA 94954 1 5� /- J/ C el, T ke- 19-nl(e d -- ,` s 4 + r a- Wk 11 /- h , e ss ! �a ►- --1� cl z ve CL d s� l? e u °r neh::s L `-� h I ; v �� Y-) Cerei Hines, Heather From: Glenn Mantoani [mantoani @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 2:11 PM To Hines Heather; Brown John; daveglass @comcast.net; - City Clerk; CityCouncil Subject: Deer Creek Village Shopping Center Fellow Petalum'ans, When we moved into Park Place some thirty'fiveYears ago; we knew that the land across McDowell would someday be developed. Our`city has grown and with more: people comes more commercial development. As concerned residents, we ask care'fuNconsideration of the following: 1) The,traffic on McDowell, Rainier� even Maria is already highly used. 2) The added traffic on McDowell will surely impact the accessibility to our Hospital. 3) The, air pollution will be higher than acceptable standards. 4) There will be increased noise levels for the Hospital and the people along. McDowell, across from the, project. It is already too noisy. We would invite you to come to our home and sit in the backyard to hear what we hear every day. A sound`wali,would certainly help the residents. S) The ite is presently zoned as "Mixed= Use ". Petaluma's General Plan requires that "Mixed -Use" be pedestrian oriented. The General Plan also recognizes the need to reduce the traffic impact on McDowell. Please help us maintain our quality of life in our wonderful city. We are not asking,to have the project thrown out, but we are asking that the project adhere to Petaluma's General Plan. We are asking that this project be designed as a walkable mixed; use project. We would also ask'that the City build a sound wall along McDowell where the existing fences are falling down. There is precedent, as the City paid for sound walls on;Caufi_eld and Washington. Streets. This will help in two ways. It will help maintain a reasonable noise level for residents and it will assure that people traveling to and from the project will not think of our City, as a blighted eyesore. . We also ask that there be no overriding considerations. Thank you for your consideration, Glenn & Trish Mantoani 628 Cascade Court Petaluma 707 763 -6512 'I Hines, Heather. From: Jensen, Deanna on behalf of CDD Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 6:54 AM To: Hines, Heather, Bradley, Geoff Subject: FW: "Deer Creek Village DEIR" I.........,..., ............. 1 1-1111 .... ...... F ... . . ...... .. I—— ... I ....... ...... .... I - From: Jeannette [mailtb:jennalz@tbmtc)gt-.net] Sent: Friday, Karch 25, 2011 7:52� PM To: CDD Subject: "Deer Creek Village DEIR" Hi, My husband, Klaus and I are so, happyto hear that we will hopefully be getting 8 LoWes in town. We have to drive to Rohnert Park every other weekend , - nd because there's always something thing We need thatwe can't get in town. We just had to 99 to Rohnwt Park to Home Depot tofind'anoutdoor patio fan. We tried OSH but they only carry indoorfans. We ended up at Lowes where we found a fan We liked. This is just one example of not being able to buy what we* need in this town. It's really terrible wheri you ithink oUthe resources I I ost in all 1hose trips. First of all, the tax•money Petaluma is losing. Secondly the impact on, using up precious, fuel resources and the extra pollution ca by having to drive furtherthus adding to,global I warming. If you -ad that by all the..other residents of Petaluma I'm'sure the be staggering! As far as the other-projects they Wa add.. I believe we have enough workout places in town, I know of at least five. Unless the one theyvaritto put up has an indoor IYO91,4ewould notJoin. An indoorpqol Would definitely be a reason to join though. More restaurants? Don't we have enough here in Petaluma, and eyen the best ones are just trying to stay 7 afloat in this economy. More offices? What'dbout,all the empty office buildings all over this town? Even in the downtown, you see more storefronts. that are unoccupied than not. I say we those offfices before we start building more. A care facility for the elderly? If it's not one ofthose.overpriced ones that no one but.1 rich can.afford, I I say yes. How about Lowe°s giving a,perdentage their profits help,that tobecome a reality. Ma teaching home where people could go and get experience to be. a CNA, have 'the high school kids 9 p o and help to get extra credit. I'm for Lowe's, and I really hope that becomes a reality, but could we thinkof other stores that could kee ' 'therbUsiness and sales taxes here? Why not combine Lowe's with;a Sam's? We have Costco's in the other towns, Why nota�Sams Club? We go out of town for Costco as well'. I wouldn't mind becoming a Sam's Club member. What'do you think? Jeannette and Klaus Ziegler, 1528 Baywood Drive, Petaluma, Ca 94954 c =� i Jennifer Pierre comments-on the Draft EIR for the p"roposed'Deer Creek Village Project: Project Obiectives The second bullet on page III -34 under objectives states that the:project would 'satisfy the substantial . demand for regional and neighborhood retail, office, fitness, and dining experiences...' With a 40% office vacancy in the City, as well as vacancies in retail spaces, including the EIR's own cumulative conclusions related to Regency and Deer Creek developments, what is the basis for this objective? The project objectives dictate the alternatives that are evaluatedand'although the current alternatives do provide,a range of options as�well as how substantially the project would need to be modified to minimize significant and unavoidable impacts, alternativesthat.have.been developed to meet the current objective may result`in unnecessary impacts to,the City.. For example, if office is no longer an objective, how would' elimination of'office space at the project affect traffic? FEIR should more thoroughly explore the cornbinations land uses that are actually needed In the City and how they could be applied at this site to reduce significant impacts (not necessarily to below the threshold). Overall Traffic Circulation The lR identifies several`significant:impacts, some of which are mitigated WITS levels. However, the EIR does not appear to include a.description,of how the implementation,of.the mitigation measures in combination with existing conditions plus,; ;project would change the current' traffic circulation. For example, does the signalization of Professional Drive /McDowell affectWashington /McDowell or other intersections? How does this signalization interact with the proposed extension`of the turn lane pocket? Does the addition of traffic in thisarea result in changes in traffic patterns on other north /south trending roa&s9ch as Sonoma Mountain Parkway or Maria Drive? The impacts described are very compartmentalized to show what happens at each intersection, but the full picture of how the project, including its proposed mitigation, would'affectthe regional circulation patterns should be included in the FEIR. Specific Traffic Comments Please explain why peak pm was selected as the basis of comparison. Given that most of the traffic is generated from a home improvement store, it seems that a weekend peak.hourcould have been more appropriate or thatuse of weekend peak hour in addition to the peak pm hour would have been informative of the.2 types of traffic changes that could occur. Figure IV.13 =5; section .13 appears to indicate that existing southbound traffic on McDowell is 917 trips and northbound traffic is 1100 "trips during pm peak hour. Table IV:13713 estimates that the project would result in a net addition 0985 pm peak hour trips. Even assuming that the pass -by reduction of 28%!s accurate, this mpresents,a nearly 30% increase in total traffic in the From a project -level �(I and'cumulative perspective, this impact is significant. The EIR does conclud.0hat it is significant. However, with the mitigation such as signalization of "Professional Drive, how does this change overali patterns? Additionally, in some instances, the impact is concluded to be significant and unavoidable. There. is no substantiation that there is no. feasible mitigation. No analysis is provided as to the types of mitigation that could be implemented and why those measures are not feasible. For example, does the construction of 'Rainer mitigate impacts to Wash I hgton Would removal of residential uses along McDowell from Washingtonto'Madison to allow for widening reduce the impact? How 'does the signalization of;Professional Drive reduce the impacts at this intersection to LTS? There is no demonstration of the outcome to demonstrate an acceptable LOS. Does the removal of parking on Lynch Creek Road result in an impact (page IV.B -41)? Please ensure that the provision of 'safe and accessible pedestrian facilities along the project's frontage' during temporary blockages is included in the MMRP. Does-the design of the extension.of the eastbound left turn pocket from McDowell to Washington (as described in Impact TRAFFIC3a) reduce the impact of ° the project? It'is not demonstrated how this currently planned improvement would actually affect the proposed project impacts. Was it designed to accommodate .the.increased'trafficvolurnes generated frorn`the project? If not, the design should be re- evaluated to.determine if additional improvements need to be made to mitigate the project's effects. How , does the proposed Washington Street interchange affect the:projectimpacts, especially related to Impact TRAFFIC 3b? WhyWould' left turns be allowed onto the Rainer termination? 'Why does the Rainer connection to Petaluma Blvd N result in a significant impact on site access? Why does the prohibition to turn left (west) to use the Rainercrossing mitigate this effect? Mitigation Measure TRAFFIC 8b essentially forces westbound traffic to Washington and Corona, two of the intersections that would experience significant and unavoidable traffic impacts (and are already operating below acceptable LOS) instead of allowing that`traffic to use Rainer crossing. To be consistent with GP policy 2 -P -92, Lynch Creek Way should be extended through the project area to connect to Rainier at a. more western location than is currently proposed for connection to Rainier. Describe how this would affect the need for Mitigation Measure TRAFFIC -8b Doestruck access come from north, south, or both? What is the assume split ?'How does shift in this split =change the potential' impacts of the project? Regarding truck accessb a Lynch Creek why isn't the investigation called for in Mitigation Measure TRAFFIC 8c already, completed to determine the. actual impact and improvements that need to be made to accommodate the 'full roadway width?' There are no standards outlined in the mitigation measure and implementation of the potential improvements could result'in additional impacts that are not described in the DEIR. How are Impacts TRAFFIC,8c and 8e related? 8c is requiring an investigation to ensure adequate roadway, while 8e is stating that the impact to circulation is LTS. Impact TRAFFIC 10 describes.the'need wo upgrade existing stops to.shelters'to serve the needs of the project'related transit trips.' Is this mitigation? Is this being provided full' cost by the applicant? Under Impact TRAFFIC 11a,.does th 'e..4` sentence mean'to granitetrails on the, northwest portion, instead'ofthe southwest'portion as currently stated? Does Impact TRAFFIC 12 account for the gridlock that,is. expected to occur during the pm peak hour? Is the signal at Maria Drive completed1unded? If not, should it be as part of the cumulative impact mitigation? Air Quality Impacts_ How does Mitigation.Nleasure AQ -1 mitigate et significant NO,, emissions? What are they mitigated to? To be consistent with GP policy 4 -P -15 and to comply with mitigation outlined for GHG emissions, the major anchors should be designed'in a way that building:orientation is in the south to southeast direction and to the extent possible, groundcover should'be used in lieu of pavement. All ofthe measures outlined in GP policy 4 =P -16 should be incorporated• Tito. Mitigation AIR -1. The,discussion of GHG.under Impact AQ -3 states,that emissions were 'assumed'to occur in 2011 through 2014' but table IV.0 -7 shows construction emissions for only 2012 -2014. Have all of the GHG emissions been accounted for in the analysis ?' What does the * mean in Table IV.0 -9? Why doesn't Mitigation Measure.AQ- 4 , reauire the use of electric landscape equipment, instead of encourage? Why doesn't'it specify, the percentage of - parking spaces thatwould provide.electric vehicle charging`stations? Other 9 Regp' "rding, growth-inducing/in.direct. it is not clear how the project would change regional circulationpatterns. Forexampie, w'ill,people avoid McDowell and chose alternate routes? If`so, to what extent and what are the resultant impacts on these roadways? Curnulative1mpacts to retail /urban decay from closure of retail seem to suggesfthat,because - the project does not overlap with'downtown businesses, there would 'be a LTS +effect. However, besides'the proposed home improvement store, all other proposed uses of the project overlap with downtown'. and other, businesses throughout the City, including uses that are already in surplus (office; grocery). The =selection of Alternative?C.as:the environmentally superior alternative'is not justified. Alternative B provides, similar reductions'in the magnitude of significant and unavoidable traffic impacts and still meets:the:general project objectives. The EIR needsto fully discloseany impacts that are peculiar to thenprojectthat were not disclosed in the General Plan EIR: F'or example, the potential flooding /drainage issues, potential for presence of 6-0 underground pipelines and other infrastructure, and presence of -endangered or other special status species needs to be analyzed. Additionally, description and analysis of the potential for groundwater recharge in this area needs to be included in the FEIR,(GP policy 8- P =20). Describe in more.detail how Alternative B was developed., Describe how modifications in the office/ retail /restaurant (not including major anchors) could be adjusted to reduce traffic impacts. Related to the first comments about objectives, these additional uses need to be justified. and there needs be a clear delineatiowof how these uses specifically relate to the increase in traffic. Describe the process for determining potential mitigationfor significant impacts and how the conclusion that many Were not feasible `was reached. Proieet Design /Features Creel( buffer should be extended beyond the minimum required 50 feet. To be consistent with GP policy 4- G =1 -G, additional native plaritings.should be incorporated into the buffer zone. Additionally, benches and;other features should be installed in this area, consistent with GP policy 5 -1 To be consistent with GP policy 4- P- 17'and to avoid future issues with McDowell capacity, the entire project frontage should be moved west to allow additional buffer @long'McDowell with room for extensive tree plantings to buffer noise and TAC emissions the project. Howjdoes GP policy 5 -P -11 relate to development impactfees? How does it relate to additional potential obligations for developers ofthe proposed project? GP Figure 5 -2 depicts a Class-11 bike lane on the project frontage along McDowell. Hines, Heather From: mgfashionart @comcast.net Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 3:31 PM To: citymgr; -'City Clerk; councilman albertson; teresa4petaluma @comcast.net; daveglass@comcast:net; mike4pet @aol.com; mtheaiy @sbcglobai.net; council memberkearney@me.com; tiff @tiffanyrenee.com cc: Bradley, Geoff; Hines, Heather Subject: Request 'a reschedule of Deer Creek DEIR hearing date of April 18th. To: Mayor Dave Glass Memberslof the Petaluma City Council City Manager John Brown RE: Public comments on the DEIR for Deer Creek Village Dear City Manager John Brown, Mayor Glass, and Members of the City Council, I am requestiig that you please reschedule the date of April 18th, the date of the Deer Creek DEIR hearing before the. City council, to another had sent this request out, in an e- mail, and in a .phone call last Friday, also with e- mail to the City Clerk's office,, who promised to put it in your packets,.befd;re the Council meeting of this last Monday. However, it was not addressed in your meeting. Would you b ' so kind as to move the DEIR hearing before the Council to another night, other than April 18th? It J the beginning of Passover at sunset that eve.. Further, I hope you will take into consideration That it is also the week of Good Friday and Easter. Many interested parties are either in Jewish religiotl s ritual that eve. or deep ;in Easter preparation including preparation for loved ones coming and others leaving town to meet with family. We would .be' o grateful of the respect afforded by the City, of it's religious. community. My family Would be so a preciative too, as I am considering pulling out of the rituals of the week, to meet your date. My fam,l has both Jewish and Catholic members. Imagine my dilemma. Getting the D'EIR for Deer Creek to consider.all impacts and comments of the public, and agencies, bef re critical decisions are made and momentum built in direction, is important to all parties involved. Let's please give an .opportunity for all parties to weight in on the DEIR, whether they are For°it, Opposed to it, or in Neutral. Impacts are impacts. Let's all put our heads together for the most tl orougl ly planned, best outcome, possible superior mitigation's, etc., for all involved. realize, the "no project`' alternative may currently be only way to remove the multiple "significant and unavoidable" impacts., and to save the politicians that ran their campaigns on "improved traffic mobility from �cornmitting political suicide by approving this project, in its current design and the 'impacts built into it: (No spin could remove the political career ramifications due to the public realizing the. traffic impacts of project, in its current design, of an, "F?' LOS at freeway and various intersections, and new qups, reality.) On the other hand, ,maybe some brilliant mitigation's of changes withi` the project, with everyone's best thoughts to what the best land use is there, and therefore., feasibly not create. gridlock, fand not have to sacrifice other environmentally sensitive e lements that:' ar S & U, ,m ay be po Eve ryone n eeds to take a co ncerted focus, a nd the time necessary, to doll up their sleeves, sharpen their pencils, and - brainstorm the best scenario, in an effort not to degrade Petaluma. Please, can tf1is date be rescheduled? I look forward to your response of a possible reschedule, as soon as is possible, from your governing body. Thank you forj your time and kind consideration. Sincerely, Mb Glardon Gi 5 -I G NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM,,364 SACRAMENTO CA 95814 (916) 653-4082; (916) 657-5390i- Fax March 23,2011 Heather Hines City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA'194952 RE: SCH# 2004092093 Deer Creek Vill - lage; Sonoma County. Dear Ms. Hines: M A-mill RECEIVED MAR 2 9 2011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPIvIBJTDEP/ARTNIEW The'Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has reviewed theNolice of Completion (NOC) referenced above. The California Environmental Qualit�, Act,(CEQA) states that any project that c a causes a substa n adverse change in the significance of an historical resource,, which' includes archeological resources, is significant,eff6ct preparation of an E I R - (C EQA. Guidelines 1 , 5064(b)) To comply - with - this provisio ' n th I ell.dad agency is required to assess whether the project will have an adverse impact on historical resources within the , area - of tproject effect (APE), and. if'so to mitigate that effect. To adequately assess and mitigate project= related impacts to archaeological resources, the NAHC recommends the following actions: * Contact ihe appropriate regional archaeological Information Center for a record search. The search will determine: ■ illta part or all of the area project . cte I ffect'-(APE) . .�has b . be . n previously . surveyed for cLiltu ral resources. • I lfany known cultural resourdes been recorded on or the,APE. ■ 11fithe probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE. ■ 1 1 1fa survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present. ✓ If an archaeological inventory survey is the. final stage is the.preparation of a-professional report ling the findings and recommendations of the records�search and field survey:, ■ The final report containing site forms, site,significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native,American,human and associated funerary . ob . jects shoul 61 e in I a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public 'disclosure. ■ The final Written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate regional archaeological"Information Center. ✓ Contact the Native American Heritage'�Commissioh for: ■ A Sacred Lands File Check. USGSI 1 min ute:,quadr-a rif-ghe hanie,Aowrishimirange and section. required. ■ A list of appropriate Native American,contacts foe consultation concerning the project site and to assist in the mitigation Measures. Native American Contacts List attached. ✓ Lack of surface evidence of ardh6did resourcesid6es , !ribt preclude their subsurfaceiexistence. I ■ Lea6agencies should include in7their mitigation plan provisions for the identification, and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeolo&4 resources, per Californiei'Erivirohniental Quality Act QA) §1 5064.5(f). in areas of identified .arc dha6blogidal sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and axulturally affiliated Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all ground-disturbing activities. ■ Und•qgencles should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in 9onsultdtion with culturally eiffiliated Native Americans_ ■ Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains in their mitigation plan. Health and Satty'Code' §7050.5, CEQA §1! 5064.5(e), and Public Resources 9 Code §5097;98 Mandates the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human rema in .9 location other than a d cemetery... Sincerely ':K*, sanch&� Program Analyst cc: State Clearinghouse �n Native American Contact List Sonoma County March 23, 2011 The Federated 'Indians of Graton Rancheria Gene Buvelot 6400 Redwood brive,.Ste Coast Miwok Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Southern Porno coastmiwokC aol.com' (4,15) 895 -1 163. Home (415) 259 -7819 Cell Ya -Ka -Aura t' 7465 Steve Olson Lane Pomo Forestville CA 95436 Coast Miwok info 9 yakaama.org Wappo (707) 887 -1541, The Federated'`Indians of Graton Rancheria Greg S`arris, Chairperson 6400 Redwood:'Drive, Ste Coast Miwok Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Southern. Porno coastmiwok@aol.com 707 -566 -2288 707 -566 -2291 -fax Suki Waters P.O. Box 53 Coast . Miwok Jenner CA 95450 Pomo (707) 865 -2248 This list is current only,as of'the.date of this document. The Federated Indians of'Graton Rancheria Frank Ross 100 Cielo Lane, Apt 102 Coast Miwok Novato + CA 94949 Southern Porno miwokone @yahoo.com (415) 269=6075 Distribution of this list does; not relieve any person of the statutory responsibility ` as defined in Section 7050;5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Sdction 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. . This. list. is - only_ applicable_for_contacting_locaf Native America ns with regard. SCH# 2004092093 Deer Creek Village; Sonoma County. � 18 Hines, Heather, From: Jensen Deanna on behalf of CDD Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 6:46 AM To: Hines, Heather; Bradley, Geoff Subject: FW: Deer Creek Village Project ....... .. I ................ ... . ...... . .......... . ..... ........... ....... ..... . ..... .... ..... ...... ,From: Audrey Ta,mbellini [, I Sent: Sunday, April 03, 20119:57 AM To: CDD Subject: Deer Cr'e*ek Village Project We believe Petaluma s'hould expand allow, more shopping choices in town. I for one am tired of driving up 101 - every time I heed to go to a big store. f6t. lumber etc. I waste gas and poll the air driving up over that .hill. I know it is"'cute" to think of Petaluma as,,a small quaint town but grow up! we need jobs, better shopping choices, and to save energy and time-. Please except the Deer Creek Project. Yours Truly, Audrey Tambellini From: Timo; Rivetti' [mailto:timo @timorivetti.com] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 11;37 AM To: CDD Cc: info @deercreekproject.com Subject: Deer Creek Dear council members I`am writing'in support. of this project. I cannot believe that here is a project that .provides jobs, sales tax revenue &.more importantly fits directly into the General Plan provisions that took 7 years to finalize & you have still not approved this. You should be embracing this opportunity: Anyother City would be relishing that a responsible developer would want to spend over $50.mtllton;in their community with the projected $400,000 in annual sales tax. I urge you to pass this ASAP so' we can look forward to a healthy new community 'to shop & dine in east Petaluma. Yours ,Sincerely Antimo "limo" Rivetti f; '1. fZ—A -/ From :. BUTCH SMITH [ mailto ;the.keeper @sbcglobal.net] Sent:,Friday, April 15, 20118:04 PM To: Councilman Chris Albertson; Councilperson Teresa Barrett; CDD; .Mayor David. Glass; Councilman Mike Harris; Councilman Mike.Healy; Councilman 'Gabe Kearney; Councilperson Tiffany Renee; Deer Creek Village Cc: Deer Creek Village Subject: DEER CREEK VILLAGE o ' and t I Y 1 I was employed by the City of "Petaluma for almost-34-years in the Planning and Department of Engineering. In those years, I saw many many businesses that wanted to call Petaluma their home. But always, ithe. City had what theythougl t was. a great reason not to approve'them. Businesses like Costco, (three times) Food for Less, Friedman Brothers, Target, Lowes and even MarineWorld.Africa U.S.A. (They wanted to go where our current Marina was built. But, the City said YES to the Factory Outlet, the Car Dealerships and even a Marina... Seem the people found out real quick that what the Factory Stores were offering was last'years items and seconds, items the main stores couldn't sell... As far as the Auto Dealerships, the people of Petaluma buy most of the vehicles in other cities, not Petaluma Then there is the Marina. It hasn't made the City a buck -since it's creation. So, because there's no dollars coming to the City, the City of Petaluma has NO tax basin.. Something wrong with.Petaluma. The citizens are taking their money to the Cities to the North and South of Petaluma because the City has nothing for the citizens of Petaluma to shop at. The City has always said, "We want to keep the small town flavor to Petaluma" Well, l ou have the Small Town Flavor but ' il t you don't have a "Tax Basin Kee the small town flavor in Y " "" ` y p the downtown Petaluma, but let these proposed businesses come to the Eastside.'When I'started with the City, the staff could review and approved Shopping Centers and 100 -Lot Subdivisions in 6- months. Now, it's takes Shopping Center'and Subdivisioris in 6- years. If they are approved at all. Mayor and City Council, it's time to make a decision on Deer Creek Village, and get that "Tax Basin" the City of Petaluma has never had. It's will be the right move the City as well as the Citizens of Petaluma. Butch Smith, alias "The Kuper" rra'1 Received via email 4/18/2011 To Heather Hines Deputy Planning Manager City of Petaluma Deer!Creek DEIR Comments .r The Hydrology portion ofthe Deer Creek DEIR is full of false and misleading state ents. It. is grossly outdated, with portions, dating back to May 2001 As such it is missing vital data from the 2005 New Year's Eve flood. Data from that flood proves much l of the information in the current Deer Creek DEIR Hydrology study to be wrong. problems with the Hydrology portion of the Deer Creek DEIR Among the many p _ y gy are'': p The comparison of the elevation of the Deer Creek site to that' of the Petaluma River bank is not correct. This. must be corrected. The portion .of the Deer Creek.site indicated as being in the Petaluma River floodplain comes from long- outdated flood maps. The amount of the Deer Creek site that Js actually in the Petaluma River Floodplain has not been determined and must be made for this to be accurate. Overflow of water runoff from';Lynch Creek*and the Petaluma 'River onto the site during high water from heavy.stor,ms'is completely omitted from the report. This must be determined. As the Deer Creek site is the lowest point of elevation east of Highway 101 and it holds perhaps 50 , acre feet or more of water during heavy rains, should this project be built, the increases of flooding are not addressed. This must;.be addressed. ThereCis too much wrong with this hydrology report for it to, have any worth whatsoever. The Deer Creek DEIR must be delayed in order for a new and accurate hydrology study to be done. If flooding isn't an environmental impact, then what is? f David Libchitz P.O. Box 955 Petaluma, CA 94953 707- :763 - 6196 dave94952(@dit.net Cj -7 From::earispurgeon @ comcast.net [mailto :earlspurgeon @comcast.net] Sent:lSaturday, April 16, 20116:40 PM To: CDD Cc: info @deercreekvillage.com Subject: "'Deer Creek Village DEIR" encourage THE PETALUMA CITY COUNCIL to approve the Deer Creek Village Shopping Center. Petaluma residents.need the shopping experience, the jobs and the income it will provide. We cannot continue to cut city employees and ask them to take pay cuts. It' time to put this project on a fast track. Longtime Petaluma resident; EARL SPURGEON i i 5 -�3 Froft,Michele Malman [mailto:michelemalman @sbcglobal.net] Sent: l Friday, April 15, 2011 11:37 AM To: CUD Cc: info @deercreekproject.com Subject: Deer Creek Village DEIR When are the people in Petaluma going to have stores in tlier own town to shop in. Petaluma has money problems but continues to fight good stores from coming in. i We need jobs and slaes tax. Drive around and see all the open office buildings 'i f 5-H, From: thestenros @comcast.net [mailto:thestenros @comcast.net] Sent: Friday, April 15, 20115:40 PM To: CDD Subject: Fw: "Deer Creek Village DEIR" Dear City of Petaluma, am from Petaluma, I reside at 1 Northstar Dr. We n' `ed this development. We need to be Stop having. to go the "FREEWAY" to shop. (p.s. I'm' not yelling). The tax revenue that we give to Rohnert Park is incredible. support this, my husband and my family think It would be a Great Addition. V1 �I! T from us...: we can't wait to stop heading up the Hwy.... Now what's happening with Target too? Since(ely, Stella,; Stuark:rStenros & family 1609I Northstar Dr. Petaluma, CA 94954 i 1 5-2� �, Sent By: CALTRANS TRANSPORTATIO PLANNING; 510 2B6 5560; Apr '18 -11 3:42PM; Page '1 /2 :: r ST AT oF MIEOEiii UB DM _ N T DE,PARTMEX T' OF TRAI{1SI'O)FtTATltON ;T 111 GRAND AVENUE raj P. O. BOX 23660 OAKLAND,CA 94623.0660 i;7' Ffirxyourpowerl PHONE (610) 286.5636 ;;;t;; Be'eneigy offWantr FAX (510) 288 -5559; M 711 ;rt! • April 18, ",2011 :A, SONIOP803 �1�� SON-101.4-76 QOM SCH 2004092093 MS- He adier Hines Cityof'l'e'zaluma 11.EngliSF Street Petaluma; ;CA 94952- 26,30 Deaf Ms Tines; lamer Ci eetr Village - DrA t Environmental !Impacl_Report -, SID ) Thank yotiffor ricludtng >the alrfr►rnta Depart Fnent o: fTranspottaft 'n:(UepaiCtment).in the r the.pr4�pased'project. We Have, viewed "the.application environmental review proses -s.fo c6mspo I l enc.e and :-have . the €olTowirig' comment4: to offer, Highway{,+ penaltortS ;. References to the State s.ecoriutni' Aowntum and,its.impact an th 'rat rc volume (i.e. page 1V,.B- 1)•does.not relieve the responsibility' .:to use curreni traffic data, rns ;: �'uf traffic deta.from 2007: Signal O}idra idi l Please send the SynChra:lfiles • €oi ftttther review. Signal timing sh1be reviewed for all conditions: green times, coordinatidr► queues for each movement, `etc: r Hydraulics f 1. The bydrology study A th ppendiX•P shows-that flow to th'e 54" fuss= culvert .under US Highway ((4)10.1 will inGrease.' Th}y flow, •must be metered `;' k;to existing:flow rates. 2. Please,prov de_ analysis For a 25 =year storm event. f ttt ,i F Prgjeet C' oorribiaitt'on �l The City of Petal.umu ghpuld••be aware of the "various. interchange jiects along U.5 -101, such as the US- 101�/East,Washington interchange, and how these projects t • 111 affcct'this development, Cufttiml l .esources i The Department-is - ia ag'rirernent with the findings in the Cultural sources section of the 'f 7EIR that there are no:.known'sites within St right - of -way (ROW) w • l will he affected by this project. S�hould.prolbq ated ground-`disturbing activities taike jA a as part of chi's pi, ject within the State ROW and therm,is an inadvertent archaeolcigical or banal "scovery, in compliance with GEQA, PRC 5024.5, and`the; Departirccni's Sfund4rd Environrnan {' Rr✓ference (SER) Volume 2 T Galtrans improves moowsy arrom Gaaifi'r aii o, i G-20 Sent By: CALTRANS; PLANNING; 510 286 5560; Apr -18.11 3:42PM;. Page 2/2 Ms. ,Heather Hines /Cr'ty tt5f 'Pdts(lu`ma April 18, 2017 :. Page 2 (http://www.dot.c,a.go.v/ u6ii -6 i within• 50'feet of.the }� d;shall coas�e. The Department's Distrlct�4.Cultuxal'lesouWe Study Office shall•lie rrt, diately'concaeted at (510) •286 - 5618:;. >�aa Should you have any questions regard ng this letter, .please call C6 aery Cepeda•df my at .(510) 286' 5535. Sincerely; ;, i �'(1� ''i7i' • BECKY FRANK District '$ra it nch Chief .. a Federal. 6ants / kail' Coordineiti6iv . -'` •. c: 5cott (S'tate Clsaiyngllouse) a; rik .. ., t• � i � , ' 4 Ug s4 M • =T ' - M . :�1�' "Ca[&an& impmuee mabilily a&ose Cd1ifbe4 , :•'vI From: Ida Luis [mailto :ibl @att.net] Sent: Monday, April 18, 20112:05 PM To: 01) Cc: info @reercreekvillage.com Subject: deer creek village del Hi Petaluma City Council Members, Please,please.,please let us have Lowe's and Deer Creek Village. It would be such a pleasure to shop in Petaluma instead of Rohnert Park and think of the money we would save on gas .... I am so look ng forward to it, Thanks in advance, Ida ,Luis a From: Jane [mailto:browncjane @gmail.com] Sent-: Monday, April 18, 2011 1:01 PM To: CDD Subject: Deer Creek Village DIER I am writing you in support of the Deer Creek Village project. For too long we have let our sales tax dollars go to Rohnert Park; Novato, Santa Rosa or other cities with a Lowes or a Target. Especially now with our city budget in such dire straits we need to be looking for an infusion of tax dollars not trying to keep them from coming to our city. I understand the role of the council in considering the smaller local shops but I do not think that Deer Creek Village is going to be a deterrent to shopping at our local stores. I for one shop local as do many of my friends but many times:;have driven to another city to shop at a Lowes or a Target for items that.are not available here in. our smaller stores. It is time to move Petaluma into a position of welcoming new tax revenues. God knows we need them and we need the jobs even if they are part time. Also the tax revenue will help us keep our city employees on the job and not furloughed due to lack of available monies. Please focus on what these stores will add to our community... not what problems they will cause. There is so much negativity in our city council and.I hope now that there! is a better balance that you will vote to approve this project. Hopefully we will not have a repeat of the Target fiasco where a small group of "NIMBY's" were given $100,000.00 to step aside wonder where that money is going to go ... into their pockets? I certainly have not heard of any particular project they have chosen to fund. Interesting how quiet they have gotten. Thank for listening. Jane Brown y -M Note to File Photo submitted on disk by Mary Glardon at March 22, 2011 Planning Commission hearing on behalf of Janice Cader- Thompson. Photos 1 - 10 dated 2007 and labeled Roll 73. 5-30 Note to! File Photo submitted on disk by Mary Glardon at March 22 2011 Pla nning Commission hearing on behalf of Janice Cader- Thompson: Two photos dated 2008 and labeled Thompson family #3133. S -`� I Note to.,File Photo submitted on disk by Mary Glardon at March 22, 2011 Planning Commission hearing on behalf of Janice Cader - Thompson. Photos 1 - 4 dated 2007 and labeled..Roll 1:13. Note to File Photo submitted on disk'by Mary Glardon at March 22 2011 Planning Commission hearing on behalf of Janice Caller- Thompson. One photo dated 2007' and labeled Roll 92. � 6. ©� J�\. � < .j� ) \,r » �: .m ��$7 <� mow, ��./ . � d Note to File Photo submitted on disk by Mary Glardon at March 22, 2011 Planning Commission hearing on behalf of Janice Cdder- Thompson. i ti Photos 1 — 3.1 dated 2007 and labeled Roll 73. 551 IBM Its PLO ilk. Note to,F Photo submitted on disk by. Mary Glardon at March 22,,2011 Planning Commission hearing on behalf of Janice Cader- Thompson. Photos 1 15 dated December 27, 2004 and labeled "DSL. r�fL; d �� ¢ a cz � \ �• � r �5 7 Z l i, � � �, � a �a - �, �, i � 4 � i 3 � � � � \� \ ,a' �" � � a i �� 1