Embedded Files
People have been writing Petalumans for Responsible Planning with comments about the Davidon Development. Below are samples of what people wrote:
- Please don't ruin this important open space.
- I dread the loss of this pristine environment. Can't Davidon take a tax break and write it off as open space?
- Concern: Impact of higher density population on water demands (soon feared to be water allocations).
- We need more open space for walking/hiking and enjoying nature.
- Concern: Suburban creep into natural rural surroundings.
- Putnam Park is big enough – don't need park facilities to add to traffic.
- Add protection for the existing homes from future landslides and street cracking. If building occurs, don't cut into hillsides to help prevent landslides.
- My main concern has to do with the loss of wildlife. In a very real sense, this is the wildlife's property and our job is to see that it remains their property.
- I want to preserve the open space as much as possible, plus I don't want any further burden on the creek or other aspects of the infrastructure.
- The last thing Petaluma needs is more houses and less open space. Why do we feel that every bit of open land needs to be filled with homes! We already have more people and traffic than we can safely and comfortably handle. Our open space is precious and Davidon and all the builders need to find some place else to make money. They don't care about our city and land at all. This is all about making money. Well tell them to go some place else. Petaluma is not for sale!!!
- We have so little open space as it is. Do we want Petaluma to become like Marin - (especially around the Mill Valley and surrounding areas, where every hill and ridge has been "littered" with development? We are here because we love the small town and country atmosphere and the people who reflect that. Let's not Marin-ize (or Marin-i-cate!) Petaluma or Sonoma County!
- I live one house off of D street. The traffic (starting at 4 am and ending 10 pm) and associated noise are both horrific. The air quality is very poor, the streets are unsafe for pedestrians and bicycles....why in heavens name are we adding more congestion to this fragile area? We have a priceless open space with Helen Putnam Park. Why spoil it? Can't the developer go elsewhere?
- Concerns: lack of architectural integrity, too many house too close together, unimaginative design and layout of the addition. Original research showed that the area could not handle increased traffic, sewage, etc. It is illogical to believe that the assessment made in the late 80s would be any different now.
- I am relatively new to Petaluma, and was heartbroken to hear this land was sold and will be developed. It is a stunning view, and development is ruining the beauty here. What can we do to preserve the visual beauty? The open space is so very important.
- This is a project that I and family are totally against. There is no reason to build out this last remaining open-space area. Buy the land back from Davidon.. Diminishing open space is a primary concern for those of us who purchased homes here FOR the fact of the open space... This is simply disgraceful that there should be any discussion of 60+ homes to be built on this beautiful land.
- D Street cannot be widened. The additional traffic will make it impossible to drive D Street during commute hours. Development of this site should not be allowed due to the traffic!
- Fight Davidon all the way. He will say what every is necessary to get what he wants then will simply say "oops" as he defies agreements made. Plus his developments are ugly, ugly, ugly. This was never the intentions of the Scott family to have some greedy developer destroy Petaluma.
- I love to hike in the area and would be very disappointed to see that beautiful land developed! I am very concerned about the wildlife and domestic animals that thrive on the land. What will happen to the herd of cows? Many people, like myself, love to walk by and see the cows grazing peacefully.
- If any homes are built at all, the number should be no more than 10 --well away from the Windsor street line. Negative effects were declared at their peak in 1989! When the amount of cars per household has doubled in twenty years, how can any rational thinker determine that the addition of 60 some-odd homes will improve the situation in 2012?
- We live on D Street which is already very busy, and fear that an extra 66 homes will increase that traffic dramatically. I also don't believe that the extra cost of maintaining infrastrcuture will be offset by the tax revenue that new residents would provide.
- I use Putnam Park almost every week - it's one of my home running courses. What we don't need in the Putnam Park area is more development, particularly from a bait-and-switch developer.
Google Sites
Report abuse