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

ES082008001BAO_Fountaingrove_publicComments_v3.indd_090408_lho
PUBLIC
HEARING – 26
PUBLIC
HEARING – 27
PUBLIC
HEARING – 28
PUBLIC
HEARING – 29
PUBLIC
HEARING – 30
PUBLIC
HEARING – 31
The reptiles, birds, and mammals which inhabit the woods are also slated for destruction.
Lizards, frogs, snakes, turtles, deer, skunks, rabbits, foxes, squirrels, turkey, quails, hawks,
vultures, crows, warblers, finches, mocking birds, blue birds, chickadees, and many more all
will loose their foraging and nesting sites, and we will loose their presence among us
forever. The report is cavalier to say the least regarding this loss.
It tells us, for example, that no raptor has a high potential to occur or nest at this sight and
only a few cooper’s hawks, white tail kites and long ear owls have moderate potential. But I
have personally identified each of these species on my walks by the woods. Moderate
potential, they are already there. The mitigation suggested for the lost nesting sites for
raptors is to avoid construction activity during the breeding season March 1 - Sept 15, but
that leaves only late fall and wet winter for heavy construction, so the report suggests an
alternative, hire a biologist to find all active nests and create buffer zones to protect them.
But given the narrow shape of the site, adequate buffer zones could completely halt
construction. So the report offers yet a third suggestion, simply cut down all the trees with
nesting potential during the winter. No trees, no nest, problem solved.
Suffice it to say that the Draft Report is woefully inadequate. At the very least this project
requires significantly downsizing to salvage more of our irreplaceable heritage oaks and all
the creatures that dwell among them.
Abe Farkas
I live at 4434 Bally Bunion Lane. The EIR report does not address Impacts 3.1-1 and 3.1.-2
aesthetics visual resources in so far as this project calls for the construction of a 3 story
building in a neighborhood that is comprised of only 2 story homes. The current height
limits should be respected. The sheer 3 story height, let alone and the mass and size of these
buildings, must have a substantial negative impact on the aesthetics of our neighborhood.
Per page 2-7 of the report, the 3 story main building will rise to the height of 49 feet and may
run to some 600 feet in length. Imagine such a structure being dropped into the residential
neighborhood in where you live (shows photo) and then also imagine a 3 story care center
building over looking your swimming pool and being told there will be no significant
impact on your neighborhood aesthetics. Just imagine that.
The report fails to adequately address Impact 3.10-2, noises from operating the building on
adjacent property. The mitigation measure recommended is to place the mechanical
equipment on the roof of the buildings, yet the photos supplied in Figures 3.1-4 and 3.1-7
clearly show sloped roofs with no provisions for any mechanical equipment. Given the near
50 foot height of the proposed building, in addition to the noise this will compound the
negative impacts on the aesthetics that was to have been addressed in Impact 3.1. (shows
photo) You cannot hardly see the brown roof tops unless you are looking at the actual
photo but they are clearly 30 feet or more up in the air, clearly visible.
Next, this report fails to recognize the mitigation measure called for in Impact 3.4-1 loss of
protected heritage valley oaks is inadequate and also it does not protect our aesthetic and
visual resources. Table 3.4-3 calls for 2,107 15 gallon replacement trees, while the data in the
same report states that 45.8 percent of the total development site will be covered with
improvements. Where will these thousands of trees go? I ask this question because the
placement of the building is basically on the zero lot line with three feet or less from the