Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 1.A-Late06 04/25/2011,April 21' 2011 3 Pages City of Petaluma 11 .English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 Attention: Heather Hines Deputy Planning Manager Reference: Deer Creek Village Heather: Recently I had the opportunity to review the DEIR for the.Deer Creek Village project. I was concerned to see areas that were still included in the project, but advised by the developer would be,changed during 'the, public meetingatithe Community Center last year. At time the Rainier Avenue Cross -Town: Connector and Highway Interchange was a factor in the plan. The following area few areas of the DEIR and proposed. Deer Creek Village proposal that do not support the health and safety of *the community surrounding the development area. Noise The DCV, as,,proposed, is to face :a residential area that would impact from N. McDowell Blvd; to Sonoma Mountain Blvd and Washington Street_to Corona. The accumulation of traffic -along N. McDowell Blvd; Professional Drive, Rainier Avenue, Corona, etc during business and non - business hours will significantly increase the noise level beyond what is acceptable for a residential area. * A heavily tree�and vegetation area between 101 Hwy and DCV, between DCV and N. McDowell, and maintaining the plantedtree area dividing north'and south traffic direction on. N. McDowell Blvd is a necessity. Traffic.patterns as shown in the - DEIR will be a, direct.cause of noise and various types of pollution. The main 'entrance should be on Rainer Avenue and Lynch Creek to funnel the traffic through Rainer and divert it off of N. McDowell:, Professional Drive should be for low'traffic•volume use and not be designated for increased traffic noise in a. residential area. Note: Lynch Creek/N. McDowell Blvd has.a 4 -way signal` which would be an, ideal location to have an entrance to DCV. (Noiseleyel should; b designated lower than allowedrto accommodate for future Petaluma populationgrowth, which is�identified as a maximum of 80,000.) Traffic The.increase:' to traffi impact, on VUashington.Blvd,, N. McDowell Blvd, Corona, . Rarniecand Professional Drive will cause,safety�issues. Professional Drive is for specific use. The: use of residents PVH emergency vehicles, school access route, businesses located. on Professional Drive, etc: will be compromised with ,a traffic signal designating this street -as an access route to DCV. ThisVWd "disrupt the current usage of°this road, especially for emergency vehicles: This road cannot accordt odate additional traffic from DCV. A signal at'Professional Drive and N. McDowell Blvd would disrupt the P urrent usage of this road. Note` Lynch Creek/N. McDowell ,Blvd has a`4-way signal which would bean ideal'location to have an entrance to DCV and direct traffic flow away from current heavy traffic areas. The N. McDowell Blvd entrance:to DCV should' be an entrance only'and not include an exit. The entrance should, be similar to. the configuration of the entrance to Petaluma. Town Center on Washington Street`: Pollution Exhaust from vehicles during business and non - business hours will affect the quality of residential life and affect:the health of residents and non= residents. There is. a Wind factorthat would blow`fhe vehicle exhaust1rom the West to he East blanketing eastward ,to Sonorha Mountain Blvd.. Please also consider the odor and 'residue from vehicle exhaust and the affect on the adjacent neighborhood areas. Green Belt * See Noise Hours of Operation/ DCV Signs There are two, hours of operation: business /store hours and delivery/maintenance /employee hours. The hours should. reflect what can be tolerated by a residential area. All delivery vehicles should only use Lynch Creek Way and exit Hwy 101 at Washington Street. No delivery vehicleshould exit at Penngrove /Old / Redwood Hwy and come south on N. McDowell °to DCV: The DCV /individual business signs that face' N. McDowell Blvd and /or contribute to nighttime lighting should have restricted hours., Rainier Avenue Cross -Town Connector /Interchange It was a. surprise to read in the DEIR that theinformation'is based onthe exclusion of the:Rainier Avenue Cross -Town Connector +and Highway lnnterchange. The ori ginal concept of Deer Creek Village was based on the Rainier connector and interchange. How,can Petaluma embrace the project as proposed knowing that there its no firm date for the connector /interchange and the traffic. noise and safety problems that will be The main exit off of Hwy 101 to the proposed ,project is Washington Street. Can this intersection take additional' traffic? The traffic is not,only from potential customers but before and after hour delivery vehicles servicing the DCV businesses. As originally proposed back in 2005, the main. entrance to DCV.was to be on Rainer Avenue10 take 'the Rainer interchange and'101 on /off ramps. This should still be the main entrance requirementoftheAeveloper.- Although there is no evident timeline for the Rainer interchange, when 'it is in place, DCV will be ready for the change in traffic patterns. North McDowell Blvd cannot take the increased traffic an undetermined amount of time: If the, RainerCross -Town Connector /Interchange is not:completed for 1 Q +-years, `imagine the congestion,'traffic:and' pedestrian safety issues, and mounting road' damage /repairs. Is this what you want? Additional Concerns: Did the DEIR address°the following? `Wildlife Habitat Flooding potential�of'the DCV site and the surrounding neighborhood surface streets City of Petaluma's plan for crime prevention at DCV —Other retail sites that include a Lowe's, Home Depot, etc, should be contacted regarding their history of Vehicle and equipment thefts; acid any general increase in crime Has the City of, Petaluma considered advising DCV developers to review alternate layout options? Petaluma, is working toward becoming a pedestrian friendly town and a. design similar to the Outlet Mall, :where the parking is located around the stores, and people can walk safely from store to store ina social atmosphere. Ideally, DCV parking could be located along the frontage of`Hwy 101 to help keep pollution isolated. Lowe's vs Lowe's — Does the City-,of Petaluma understand the reason for having two Lowe's, competing for the same business? Logic` would dictate'that `eventually, Lowe's will close one of the "stores and, benefit frorn the tax advantage. What the history of Lowe's longevityin communities where_ there are multiple Lowe's within 10 (4-/-) of each other. Attractions Since the DCV site can be used for multiple, use, this would be an outstanding opportunity for Petaluma. to.require anon- retail attraction. Wblwere impressed by Ashland; Oregon's'Science Works — Hands- On;Museum. This type of attraction would benefit' the school children °of Sonoma County and bring in visitors.from outside the. area. Retail Leakage:—, Involve ;the people of Petaluma in the process — The current "retail leakage report" is old and out of date A new one' is needed and should be require. With the aging population of'`P.etaluma there: are retail opportunities that are needed. Petaluma does not even have a °fabric store. DCV has been provided lists of suggested types of retail "stores that are lacking' in Petaluma. 'It "istime that all gf'Petaluma be involved ina new ""retail leakage study". Note: I's thelifutu re population of Petaluma being. taken;into account for the. increase in: traffic? Petaluma has:been,designated to a population "cap" of`'80,000.. This is approximately 20,000+ additional people. Is the current "infrastructure,adequate'to support the future? Please considerwhatJs done today, will;affect•all us in the future. Look around you and see the poorplarining that we are currently living with. Do not allow DCV to be one of these. Regards — . an K. V nnucci 112 Muir ourt Petalum , CA 94954