WRITE A LETTER
Where Do I send my letter?
Send all letters to Greg Wolf, and Joanne Robbins, ask that your letter is forwarded to the appropriate Commission.
Gregg Wolff at: [email protected]
Joanne Robins at: [email protected]
cc: [email protected]
Write a letter to the city voicing your concerns about the project. Here are some of the issues as the relate to the City goals and policies:
Most of the significant environmental impacts cannot be mitigated (according to the final EIR).
The proposed Terrace Project:
- Goal LU-1: Protect the character and patterns of the development of residential neighborhoods: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-1.2: Scale: Development shall be compatible with the scale and pattern of existing neighborhoods: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-1.2: Design: Development should respect the architectural character of the neighborhood: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Goal LU-2: Ensure that the development respects the natural environment of Lafayette...: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-2.1: Density of Hillside Development: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-2.2: Cluster Development: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-2.3: Preservation of Views: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Goal LU-3: Encourage well-designed residential development: NOT
CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-3.1: Design: Development should be characterized by good functional design: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Goal LU-4: Ensure that the semi-rural character of the community is protected by appropriate infrastructure design: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-4.1: Infrastructure Design: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Goal LU-5: Preserve and enhance the open space, scenic view sheds, and
semi- rural qualities around the residential entryways to Lafayette: NOT
CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-5.1: Residential Entryways: NOT CONSISTENT.
Program LU-5.1.2: Prepare a specific plan for the following entryways...: NOT
CONSISTENT.
- Goal LU-13: Ensure that the Eastern Deer Hill Road area near the intersection of Pleasant Hill Road is developed, where development is appropriate, in a manner consistent with Lafayette's community identity: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-13.2: Consider options for development south of the Deer Hill Road and north of Deer Hill Road where adjacent to Pleasant Hill Road: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Program LU:13.2.2: Prepare through a community planning process an Eastern Deer Hill Specific Plan that includes...: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-20.1: Traffic Service Standards: NOT CONSISTENT.
- Policy LU-20.12: Growth Management Implementation: NOT CONSISTENT.
Most of the significant environmental impacts cannot be mitigated (according to the final EIR).
The proposed Terrace Project:
- would increase the risk of traffic accidents on Deerhill Rd due to inadequate site-distance for exiting project driveways.
- would not be transit friendly.
- would not be pedestrian friendly.
- would block views of hillsides and ridge lines, causing a significant impact to scenic vistas.
- would block views of Lafayette's ridge line from State Highway 24, a State-designated scenic highway.
- would be inconsistent with Lafayette’s General Plan policy to preserve visual and functional open space.
- would be inconsistent with Lafayette’s Hillside Ordinance.
- would be susceptible to soil erosion because of the hillside.
- would remove 91 of the 117 existing trees on the site that qualify as protected trees.
- would increase traffic delays for Pleasant Hill Rd, Stanley Boulevard and Deerhill Rd.
- would require a traffic signal at Brown Ave, impacting residents who use Deerhill Rd.
Examples:
Gregg Wolff at: [email protected] and Joanne Robbins at: <[email protected]>
I would like my letter forwarded to the Planning Commission and included in the meeting minutes. I find the EIR insufficient for the following reasons:
Chapter 4.1-40 The EIR currently states that the Development of the proposed multi-family buildings on the west side of Pleasant Hill Road, which is a Route of Regional Significance, is consistent with the existing suburban uses at the intersection and would not negatively affect the visual character of the immediate area. This statement is incorrect for the following reasons:
Additionally, The Project site is located at the Pleasant Hill Road Residential Entryway as designated in the General Plan. The Plan states, “Lafayette’s Residential Entryways should be distinctive and attractive, establish a positive image of the community and reflect the semi-rural residential character of the community.”
Multi-family buildings are inconsistent with Lafayette's General Plan for Residential Entryways; they are not distinctive or attractive, nor do they establish a positive image of the community, and they certainly don't reflect the semi-rural residential character of the community.
Sincerely,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Wolff at: [email protected] and Joanne Robbins at: <[email protected]>
I would like my letter forwarded to the City Council, and included in the meeting minutes. I find the EIR insufficient for the following reasons: Transportation and Traffic - Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Sincerely,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Wolff at: [email protected] and Joanne Robbins at: <[email protected]>
Please make sure my letter and comments are forwarded to the City Council
I wanted to express my concern with the changes that have been made to the Final EIR,
Table 4.11 1-1 General Plan and Policies Relevant to Population and Housing:
The following has been deleted from the Final EIR:
Both Policy LU 14.1 and Goal LU 14 are applicable to this EIR and should be reinstated.
Additionally, I noticed that the following has been added to the Final EIR:
Policy H-2.7.1 Infill Housing: Encourage private housing development on existing infill sites in order to efficiently utilize existing infrastructure.
Since this project is not on an existing infill site, and there are no existing infrastructures to utilize, it appears that this addition has been added at the whim of the developer without appropriate factual basis and should be struck from the Final EIR.
Sincerely,
I would like my letter forwarded to the Planning Commission and included in the meeting minutes. I find the EIR insufficient for the following reasons:
Chapter 4.1-40 The EIR currently states that the Development of the proposed multi-family buildings on the west side of Pleasant Hill Road, which is a Route of Regional Significance, is consistent with the existing suburban uses at the intersection and would not negatively affect the visual character of the immediate area. This statement is incorrect for the following reasons:
- The surrounding area with the exception of one corner gas station entire surrounding area consists of undeveloped hillsides, a demonstration farm, single family residences and schools that service the homes. all single family residents with a few parcels housing schools and church. Policy LU-1.1 Scale: Development shall be compatible with the scale and patterns of existing residential neighborhoods. Multi-family buildings are inconsistent with the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
- Policy LU 1.2 Design: Development should respect the architectural character of the neighborhood.Multi-family buildings do not represent the architectural character of the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
- Policy LU-4.1 Infrastructure Design: Public and private infrastructure should reinforce the semi-rural qualities of residential neighborhoods. Multi-family buildings are inconsistent with the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
Additionally, The Project site is located at the Pleasant Hill Road Residential Entryway as designated in the General Plan. The Plan states, “Lafayette’s Residential Entryways should be distinctive and attractive, establish a positive image of the community and reflect the semi-rural residential character of the community.”
- Goal LU-5 and enhance the open space, scenic viewsheds, and semi-rural qualities around the residential entryways to Lafayette. Lafayette’s Residential Entryways should be distinctive and attractive, establish a positive image of the community and reflect the semi-rural residential character of the community. These Residential Entryways include: Acalanes Road, Mt. Diablo Boulevard from Acalanes Road to Risa Road, El Nido Ranch Road, Glorietta Boulevard, Happy Valley Road, Moraga Road, Olympic Boulevard, Pleasant Hill Road, Reliez Valley Road, St Mary's Road and Taylor Blvd.
- Policy LU-5.1 Residential Entryways: Residential entryways to the City should be distinctive and attractive features of the City’s landscape.
Multi-family buildings are inconsistent with Lafayette's General Plan for Residential Entryways; they are not distinctive or attractive, nor do they establish a positive image of the community, and they certainly don't reflect the semi-rural residential character of the community.
Sincerely,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Wolff at: [email protected] and Joanne Robbins at: <[email protected]>
I would like my letter forwarded to the City Council, and included in the meeting minutes. I find the EIR insufficient for the following reasons: Transportation and Traffic - Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
- Under Existing plus Project conditions, the Deer Hill Road - Stanley Boulevard/Pleasant Hill Road intersection would operate at Level Of Service F [the worst grade on scale A to F] during the AM peak hour, with delay increasing by 9.0 seconds as a result of the Project the Project would increase delay by more than 5 seconds at an intersection operating below the acceptable standard.
- Under the Cumulative Year 2030 plus Project scenario, the peak estimated 95th percentile left turn length for the northbound traffic on Pleasant Hill Road at Deer Hill Road would be 306 feet during the AM peak hour, would exceed the capacity of the existing 250-foot storage lane. This would be considered a significant cumulative impact.
- Under the Cumulative Year 2030 plus Project conditions, the addition of Project trips to Pleasant Hill Road would increase the peak hour peak direction Delay Index by approximately 0.41 for soughbound traffic in the AM peak hour and northbound traffic in the PM peak hour. The Delay Index would increase by more than 0.05 for peak hour peak direction traffic where the Delay Index exceeds 2.0 on Pleasant Hill Road, the result would be a significant cumulative impact.
Sincerely,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Wolff at: [email protected] and Joanne Robbins at: <[email protected]>
Please make sure my letter and comments are forwarded to the City Council
I wanted to express my concern with the changes that have been made to the Final EIR,
Table 4.11 1-1 General Plan and Policies Relevant to Population and Housing:
The following has been deleted from the Final EIR:
- Goal LU 14 Protect the single-family residential neighborhoods north of Hwy 24 from commercial and multifamily development.
- Policy LU 14.1 Continue to maintain the freeway as the dividing line separating the Downtown from the semi-rural, single-family residential areas to the north.
Both Policy LU 14.1 and Goal LU 14 are applicable to this EIR and should be reinstated.
Additionally, I noticed that the following has been added to the Final EIR:
Policy H-2.7.1 Infill Housing: Encourage private housing development on existing infill sites in order to efficiently utilize existing infrastructure.
Since this project is not on an existing infill site, and there are no existing infrastructures to utilize, it appears that this addition has been added at the whim of the developer without appropriate factual basis and should be struck from the Final EIR.
Sincerely,