Fountaingrove Environmental Impact Report - City of Santa Rosa ...

ES082008001BAO_Fountaingrove_publicComments_v3.indd_090408_lho
PUBLIC
HEARING – 13
PUBLIC
HEARING – 14
PUBLIC
HEARING – 15
PUBLIC
HEARING – 16
PUBLIC
HEARING – 17
PUBLIC
HEARING – 18
5. Homeowners are required to build respecting the slope of the land and the existing trees.
The DEIR does not address allowing commercial developers to cut and fill at-will, which is
what the project is proposing to do, again in conflict with City Ordinance 2196.
6. The DEIR does not address the suitability of a massive quasi-institutional commercial
enterprise in the middle of a residential neighborhood and finally the DEIR does not
acknowledge the current existence of 3 huge retirement centers within a one mile radius of
this intended project. It is our understanding Aegis plans on building a second phase to the
Lodge just across and down the street between cluster housing and custom homes. The
DEIR failed to address the cumulative impact of the intended 5th such facility. Additional
large retirement centers would forever change the character of the residential neighborhood.
The City’s general plan does not propose this area to be another Oakmont. Thank you.
Dewey Nelson
I live at 2003 Stonefield Lane. My primary concern with the EIR is traffic and traffic is
covered in detail in Appendix P as well as it’s covered in the Executive Summary in section
3.13. According to the impact report and depending on where you read it there will be an
increase of 422 vehicles or 494 vehicles per day on Thomas Lake Harris Drive and yet with
that increase in traffic the impact report did not evaluate the increase in traffic all the
intersections on Thomas Lake Harris Drive. You can just think about Cross Creek; no doubt
you’ve talked about it. There are over a thousand vehicles per day coming out of there.
Stonefield Lane alone has over 200 vehicles that use that one little intersection to get in and
out. So we need to have a complete study of Thomas Lake Harris, the impact on all the
intersections it crosses probably emphasizing the left hand turns which are the most
dangerous and includes left hand turns into the Lodge as well as out of the Lodge and our
dental office.
Moving away from that, the Thomas Lake Harris intersection with Fountaingrove Parkway
was evaluated and met the requirements for having traffic signals in those two locations.
There is an east and west of Thomas Lake Harris. They were studied but there were no
requirements for traffic signals in Appendix P. I cited some information from both in both
cases from the city engineering and I disagree with both of those items they discussed but I
was encouraged a little bit when I got back to the executive summary and Section 3.1.-3
Mitigation. It states there shall be a traffic signal at Thomas Lake Harris Drive and
Fountaingrove Parkway, but it doesn’t say which one, or both of them. However, I'm
encouraged if I go back in to the Executive Summary little bit and I see table ES-1 Section 3.1
3-1 and it states that if there are traffic signals installed in both of those it moves from
unacceptable to acceptable.
Not noted was the fact that there is a significant increase of traffic when construction starts.
We really need those traffic signals now, immediately when construction starts. We are,
after all, talking about the safety of our citizens.
Ulrike Gantz
I live at 2046 Gardenview Place. Unlike those who live in Stonefield and the Oaks, I live
between Varenna and the proposed Fountaingrove Lodge. For the last 4 years I have been
listening to the intrusive sounds of construction from Varenna, only to learn that this