 |
|
|
|
|
Letters
Sobrato should dedicate driveway as second road
There are a few basic points I believe need to be clarified concerning the Sobrato development on Bohlman Road on the Sisters of Notre Dame parcel.
The majority of Bohlman Road residents who have given public testimony support Mr. Sobrato's development but vehemently disagree with widening Bohlman Road.
The residents' primary concerns include the loss of our residential fire escape; the loss of heritage trees; the impact on the extremely sensitive riparian environment along this section of Bohlman Road due to erosion and runoff; the significant loss of beauty that exists from the current tree canopy; and a wider road resulting in higher auto speeds.
Many Bohlman Road residents have expressed a willingness to contribute financially to making this section of Bohlman Road a safer road to drive.
The Saratoga Planning Commission has a moral obligation to look out for the interests of the residents it represents. A developer's inconvenience, timetable for profit and sense of fairness in development expenses have no place in the decision-making process.
Mr. Sobrato is a developer who happens to live in Saratoga. His primary goal is to make money, not neighbors.
A developer typically does not micromanage the approval process by shaming planning commissioners into making decisions or by "informing" commissioners what he "absolutely" will and will not do.
Ultimately, buying property, building on that property, or selling that property for profit is a privilege, not a right, even if you are a developer who lives in Saratoga.
Mr. Sobrato's arrogant posturing at the July 12 planning commission meeting underscored his true motivation in subdividing the Sister's parcel. He is a developer seeking to make lots and lots of money. Well, what difference does a few million make? Mr. Sobrato will still make millions of dollars in profit on the subdivision of that parcel even if he does do the "neighborly" thing and agree to dedicate the existing Sister's driveway as a second lane of Bohlman Road. His sacrifice now may mean a smaller parcel for him to subdivide in the future, but what a character statement it would make.
I challenge the planning commission to put the reasonable needs of the residents affected by this development first and insist on this two-lane roadway development requirement. This section of riparian habitat is not a "renewable" resource! Mr. Sobrato either agrees to it or he doesn't complete the subdivision. No big loss for the city either way. I'm sure that there are other developers who would see this as a small price to pay for the substantial profits they stand to make!
Diane Greene
Bohlman Road
What will the next target be after septic systems?
What's next?
When Don Whetstone was pursuing the source of the Saratoga Creek pollution, I was in complete support of his efforts. Now that the real source has been identified, he and the city council should reassess their position on septic systems.
It seems to me that if you condemn someone to "death row" for a crime and later identify the true guilty party, it would be prudent to remove the falsely accused person from the death-row list.
I also find myself in opposition to Mr. Whetstone's elitist thinking regarding septic systems.
I guess, according to him, those of us who are still on septic systems, the "poor Port au Prince people," ought to be forced to either "shape up or ship out." I can understand requiring new homes to hook in to the sewer systems, but to require all functional septic systems to be eliminated, and potentially imposing as much as a $20,000 to $25,000 financial burden on many longtime residents with fixed incomes, is ludicrous.
Does the city mainly have its eye on the additional sewer taxes and fees from those 465 parcels (remember: follow the money!)?
After the septic systems, what will be the next target? Will those of us who enjoy having a vegetable garden be considered folks still living in the 19th century? After all, we do have Gene's market! What about targeting those who have horses? Nobody rides horses anymore when Mercedes, Lexus and BMWs are now available. Furthermore, horses do not utilize the sewer system and should be forced to do so or be "eliminated."
For years, we have heard that we all want to "preserve the rural atmosphere" here in Saratoga, but apparently the new way of thinking is to equate that with the 19th century. We now have to have new schools (oh, I forgot, "repaired and updated" schools), new sports complexes, new houses, new cars, and "21st" century sewage disposal.
In my opinion, it is time to organize a revolt against this ordinance before the next non-sensical target is conceived to increase our taxes/fees and take away yet another freedom we now enjoy.
L. M. Thorpe,
Farwell Avenue
A two-lane road is best alternative for Sobrato
The current development plan for the Sisters of Notre Dame novitiate seeks to widen Bohlman Road, at the cost of destroying quite possibly the most aesthetic stretch of road in Saratoga. Residents oppose the plan!
A separated two-lane Bohlman Road is by far the best alternative for all of Saratoga, addressing every need of the community and the development. Accordingly, I am surprised by Mr. Sobrato's vehement refusal to even consider this option. It does require excising approximately one acre from the 22-acre lot, but so much is gained.
First, safety. This alternative relieves the only bottleneck to uphill access. Equally important, a split road diffuses the current dangerous situation of a poor-visibility, heavily used road.
Widening the road would speed traffic, exacerbating the danger. Bicyclists such as myself would lose the novitiate road option, forced onto the dangerous Bohlman road.
Beyond safety, the split two-lane road alternative is by far the most aesthetically pleasing and environmentally sound option. This will neither disrupt the heritage trees that border the road, nor destabilize the steep hillside (protecting the already polluted Saratoga Creek).
The novitiate lot value may actually increase with this concession to aesthetics and the needs of the community!
The best choice for all involved in this case is not the easiest choice, and it takes leadership to pursue a more difficult choice.
Ted Cheeseman
Kittredge Road
Heritage Orchard 'buy a tree' is a good idea
In regard to Justin Fisher's letter in the July 19 issue of the Saratoga News, I strongly agree with keeping the Heritage Orchard. I recently attended a Saratoga City Council meeting concerning the fate of the orchard. It is sad that the thought of destroying such a beautiful orchard would even pass the minds of those in charge of this city.
While I listened to the discussion held at the council meeting about conserving the orchard, the idea of "buying a tree" was brought up. I think this idea would benefit the city of Saratoga greatly. It would bring the community together and, as a teenager, I think this idea would bring the younger generation more in touch with nature.
I will be attending Saratoga High School next year as a senior. As a student, I have spent long hours in the Saratoga library and every time I depart from the library, I admire the orchard from a distance. I think that even though many citizens take the orchard for granted, it would be missed greatly by the city. So I write to plead to not take our orchard away from us.
Kelly Lapinski
Montewood Drive
Prides Crossing traffic meeting was a fiasco
I attended the July 13th meeting of the Saratoga Public Safety Commission and it was a fiasco. About 15 people out of about 300 who should have been there to discuss speed bumps--or I should say undulations, speed tables, traffic circles, median islands and enhanced crosswalks--for the Prides Crossing traffic-calming plan. This plan basically is to control and slow down traffic on Miller and Titus avenues. None of the 16 interested people were asked to comment, asked to sign in on a roster or give a phone number, or asked about volunteering to help canvas residents.
The gentleman from CCS planning and engineering sat with his back to the crowd as he talked to the commission. Never did hear his name.
I guess that this is a volunteer commission and the people of Saratoga are getting their money's worth. Once the homeowners find out how much they will be assessed for all this nonsense, many more will show up at the next commission meeting.
R.V. Weesner
Titus Avenue
Correction
In a letter to the editor from Don Whetstone in the July 19 issue of the Saratoga News, two editing changes may have created confusion. In the first instance, "effluent" was changed to "effluence." In the second, two numbers were deleted which changed the meaning of the sentence. The sentence should have read:
"Effluent from septic systems and leaky sewers contains all sorts of organic and inorganic pollutants; and it eventually winds up in either (1) surface water such as creeks or (2) the aquifer, from which it may eventually be pumped back into municipal water supply."
|
|
|
|
Saratoga, California Since 1955
