HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 7.A-Attch4 06/07/2004f ®r
Discussion and Determination of the
Location for the Future Interchange (Rainier
Avenue Cross Town Connector
Interchange or Corona Road Interchange)
� �i!
Page 1 of 3
Crump, Katie:
From: Taffy Crescijtcresci @comcast.net]
'Sent: Friday, June:,04, 2004 4:26 PM
To: Ray_Akkawi @dot;ca.gov
Cc: Petersen, Gayle, swilford @sonoma- county.org; Tuft, Pamela; redhawks @sonic.net;
m
mike4pet @aol:co p eta] umamike @aol. com; ptorliatt @aol.com; Bryant @bryantmoynihan.com;
Mayor; Rainieraction'group @comcast.net
Subject: Petaluma Rainier Future Cross -town Connector or Interchange
Importance: High
<! - -[if !supportEmptyParas] - => <!-- [endif] - ->
Dear Ray Akkawi At Cal -Trans
<l - -[if !supportEmptyParas] - -> <l- _[endif] - ->
For the past forty years, a marking has appeared on the City planning maps
indicating a street in the area where Rainier Avenue was eventually located has
always been targeted as a future cross -town connector'. This leads to a major
question: 'If it was always intended to make Rainier the cross -town connector and
now a potential freeway 'i'nterchange, why were Rai "nier and the adjacent Park
Place neighborhood allowed to 'be designed band' built in their present form?
<! - -[if !supportEmptyParas]' = -> <!�= [endif] - ->
Those early maps always showed the future cross -town connector as a straight
street Like East Washington Street, Caulfield Land,, Corona Road and Case
Grande Road. Yet Rainier was built as a street with "dog leg" curves that created
visibility problems when entering .and exiting driveways and at the intersection of
Rainier and Prince Albert Street. And the Park Place neighborhood was built with
a double cul -de -sac of 26 single family homes opening directly off Rainier (Prince.
Albert and Olympic Courts,) and with 56 single family homes positioned on quad
lost along `Raini'er's 'northwestern :length. There home are cluste'red' four to a
shared eas6me'nt and each easement's only entrance and exit in directly on
Rainier.
<! - -[if !supportEmptyParas] - -> <l-- [endif] - ->
Potential solution to the many problems created by Rainier's and; Park Place's
design just seemed to Lead to other problems. For instance, to eliminate the
visibility problems on Rainier, street parking could be prohibited. However, that
would' be''imp ' ossible, s'in'ce Rainier provides the only street parking for the 56
single family home's 'off :Rainier. Cars cannot be parked on the smal'I courts that
open off Rainier since they are technically easements that. provide the only
�g�l
6/4/2004
Page 2 of 3
access to the, quad lot driveways and must always be kept clear for fire lanes
<!__[if !supportEmptyParas] - -> <!-- [end'if] - ->
Parked cars do not present the only visibility problem. The landscaping on the
required :ten -foot setbacks also interferes with visibility. If the landscaping is
ordered removed or severely cut back, ,considerable inconsistency is created
The City required that particular landscaping be installed by the developer20
years ago when the houses were built, and the residents have tended and
nurtured the trees and shrubs ever since. The landscaping provides .tesid.ents
With the only visual and sound buffers (besides simple garden fences) between
their ; homes and the traffic on Rainier. Also, it seems incongruous eliminate
mature greenery an the main street into a larger neighborhood called, after all
"'Park Place" And perhaps on of the most completing reason Js that Petaluma's.
General Plan laments the lack of greenery and trees on our City's arterial's
streets practically begs for them to be added..
[if !supportEmptyParas]-> <1- 4endif] - ->
Just -as the freeway divide east and west Petaluma; 'the; Park Place ne'ighborho:od
would be divided right,down the middle if Rainier becomes a cross -town
connector with a freeway interchange. Neighborhood playmates must cross this
street to reach each other. Half the children in Park Place would; have. to cross
Rainier to reach th ;eir,ne,ighbo'rhood park, Bond Park, and the other half of the
children would have to cross Rainier to reach their neighborhood' school,, Bernard
Eldredge,, the Boy',s and Girls Club and Luchessi Park.
<r - -[if ! - -> <!-- [endif] =_>
If Rainier had truly intended to carry traffic gen=erated by 3000 new- homes,
thousands more pre= existing ones,, , a sho in center and a unior college with an
pp g 1 g
enrollment of 7.000 and plans. to expand, three times why weren't.sound wall
required. when home along Rainier and McDowell Blvd were constructed. Why
weren't more generous setback chosen like the 25 -35 food setbacks along,
Sonoma Mountain Parkway?
<! - =[ !supportEmptyParas] - -> <1-- [endif]- >
Why were homes allowed to be built with Rainier' as their only street .access?
Also,, Why was ,Rainier designed without room for left hand turn .lands.or even a,
lane drown the middle to. make left-turns into and out of between broken double
yellow lines. Ii'ke the lanes on East Washington and North McDowell? A person
exiting from any of , the-56 quad lot homes along'Rainier`Wifl 'have to cross a
ten -foot landscape setback, a pedestrian sidewalk. A parking lane, A bike
6/472004
Page 3 of 3
lane,,,a slow lane of traffic, a fast lane of traffic, and', then merge with a fast
lane; of traffic going. the opposite way! And this is to be accomplished on a
street where traffic often travels 40 to 50 mile per hour round blind curves!
<! - -[if !supportEmptyParas] -> <l-- [endif] - ->
Rainier Avenue is a short street, only four block long. It connects with Sonoma
Mountain Parkway, not at either end of the Parkway, but in the middle. There are
no destinations on Rainier except people's homes. This is why Cal -Tans say,
"Improvements to an existing over- crossing or ne.w crossing or Route 101
with connecting ramps to the freeway that improves local traffic circulation
is not the responsibility of the Department, but rather local agencies such
as the City of Petaluma "...
If you have any clout with the City of Petaluma; please let them know that the
traffic problems that will be created on Rainier Ave for the people that live there
will be extreme. We have lived on this street for the past three years, and have
already been rear -ended by a car going over the speed limit while we were
trying to,, got into our driveway. This will become ia common occurrence
especially due to the number of elderly people that live in these 56 single family
homes along Rainier Ave.
Sincerely ,
Taffy Cresci
Rainier Ave resident
6/4/2004