Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutreece emailMo hannam, Kathleen From: Moghannam, Kathleen Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 14:38 AM To: BOS Cc: Hahn, Paul; Alpert, Bruce Subject: FW: Paradise Summit EIR Board Members, Attached i5 correspondence related to the Paradise Summit hearing--item 5.03 on the.fanuary 25 agenda. Kathleen Moghannam Assistant Clerk of the Board Butte County Administration 25 County Center Drive, Suite 200 Oroville, CA 95965 530-538-7fi43 From: Ted Reece [mailto:TedReece@comcast.reetl Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 8:53 AM To: ]oiliffe, Stacey Subject: Paradise Summit EIR Stacey, We received notice of the public hearing to consider requiring an Environmental Impact Report for the Paradise Summit Project and offer the following comments to the Board of Supervisors in support of the Planning Department's recommendation. Please: submit the following icommenfis fiat he Board's considena~iall` sec{ I~,eece "Re: Pubic Hearing -Paradise Summit - TSM08-006 and PUD08-0001-January 25, 2011 agenda item 5.03 Butte County Board of Supervisors: We support the Planning Department's recommendation that an Environmental Impact Report be required for the Paradise Summit Project and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) not be adopted. We live on Lago Vista Way, which would be severely impacted by the project. While we support the conditions of use proposed in the MND, especially those that would limit traffic on Lago Vista Way, we do not believe that the mitigation measures would eliminate the significant impacts of such a large project. We f > are concerned about the number of houses being proposed by the project and their impact on the rural nature of the surrounding area. We do not believe that the planned unit development designation is consistent with the existing land use in our neighborhood. We are particularly concerned about the impact the project would have on the traffic on Pentz Road, especially if an evacuation were to be needed. We have expressed these concerns, among others, both in writing and verbally to both the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. The MND does not adequately address our concerns and are hopeful that a full environmental impact assessment will address them. We strongly urge you to determine that the MND cannot be adopted and reQuire that an EAR be prepared. Sincerely, fed anrC.Ginda Reece"