HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/4/2023 Item 6a, Alvarez
DANIEL ALVAREZ <
To:Stewart, Erica A; Marx, Jan; Francis, Emily; Pease, Andy; Shoresman, Michelle; E-mail
Council Website
Subject:Regarding April 4, 2023 City Council Agenda Item 6a
Attachments:Young Buck.jpeg; Wild Turkeys.jpg; Wild Turkeys.jpeg; Large Buck.jpeg; Turkey
Vulture.jpeg; Raptor on back fence.jpg
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Dear Mayor Stewart, Vice Mayor Marx, Council Member Francis, Council Member Pease and Council
Member Shoresman:
th
We are writing to you about the April 4, 2023 City Council Meeting agenda topic 6a: “Review an
appeal of a Planning Commission decision denying architectural review application ARCH-0040-
2021, regarding development of property at 841 Patricia Drive (APPL-0075-2023; ARCH-0040-2021;
EID-0457-2021)”
Our home is located at 235 Twin Ridge Dr. and our property abuts the eastern portion of 841 Patricia
Dr. We have owned our home for 9 years. We have been following the review process for 841
Patricia from the beginning.
th
We attended the Planning Commission hearing on January 25 2023 where the ARCH application
was presented and discussed. The decision by the Planning Commission was unanimous (6/0) to
deny the ARCH application for the reasons presented in the Council Agenda Report. We had
previously communicated to City Staff providing our comments and concerns about the impact of the
development to Twin Ridge creek, the riparian habitat, and the wildlife corridor since early 2021 after
inquiring and receiving information about the proposed development from Mr. Oetzell.
The Staff report assessing the application for 841 Patricia is very well justified in reasoning why the
appeal and the application should be denied. No exceptions to the city’s standards for preserving the
integrity of creeks and wildlife corridors should be granted in this case. We appreciate the diligence of
the
City Staff in their review and assessment of the application. The record shows that the City Staff
were consistent in their feedback to the applicant throughout the process about why the plans were
inconsistent with City policies, City municipal code and City design guidelines regarding creeks and
creek set-backs and development impacts.
According to the City’s municipal code, “creeks and their corridors are to be preserved as open space
and creek corridors are to be maintained in essentially a natural state to protect the community’s
water quality, wildlife diversity and aesthetic value”. Maintaining these sensitive habitats is of critical
value to the community.
1
We have observed many types of wildlife traversing the creek wildlife corridor, including deer and
their young, rabbits, wild turkeys, raptors, vultures, blue jays, other birds and bats. Preserving the
creek and wildlife corridor enables protection and resources for wildlife survival. Attached to this
email are some photos taken of wildlife on the property at 841 Patricia in the wildlife corridor.
The construction of the vehicle-bridge, 160 feet of driveways, and retaining walls within the creek set-
back and across the creek channel and wildlife corridor would damage this precious resource for
wildlife. The bridge could create a potential flood hazard to neighboring homes should the creek’s
flow be blocked due to debris trapped under the bridge. This winter’s/now spring’s atmospheric river
and bomb cyclone storms should give pause regarding any intrusions into creeks. Denial of the
appeal is the right path forward. Allowing the proposed development would set a terrible precedent.
We agree with the City Staff report and the decision of the Planning Commission that there is
sufficient development area to build a house, ADU and accessory structures on the western portion of
the parcel. We do not object to reasonable development of the property consistent with the size and
scale of neighboring homes and in compliance to the development standards.
Therefore, we ask the City Council to adopt the draft resolution denying the Appeal and upholding the
Planning Commission’s decision to deny the Architectural Review Application ARCH-0040-2021 for
the proposed development at 841 Patricia Dr.
Respectfully,
Daniel Alvarez
Victoria Frydenlund
235 Twin Ridge Dr.
2
F14
1y. Ham' •rN{ � � • .� � r�
ti 4
02
it<.A . • 1 r,f •. �� * � � Y` •� , / � • � � I i1 �r � •r 1. �'• •� I� I
ZAP
low, Met
0 lie
• 9 •�
ad Well
o
NO .'
It
1 41 gg.: noun
so
a
low
10 two
OVOON 6 0,
• Itf�i 11I M
oft �. tit ,r 4
, r. - ►A �Y
Do
JOB
' db , r'i om
oft, 0
mote. Ni �Vft gg
Go VIP k I III
Igo waft .Avg
low IL 411,411 0
lift
Vow
or
to
n '
!• •
`'w 0111 • r At
' i,' a J '1
41
11
r i
1► w V • ' Djog
go •• �• .`
J t` 7
ell, %v
'.�' • , mow Imo` �"" � •' • • _ " •
• �� •�•�=, tit � �.
go GL It
r
p
4 IMF
' �►
Aor
r� r f ♦ r
�1 r •
low, .
am"
0 Ago .waft.
I ft
.,
l.
r M F ?4`e�
ff/iih C4� �
y�
r y P02
lo ti In- ' iM I - p I`
tr
� .r
e � � 'Y>ra•
•• tR
�('
Oto"i + ��
�;�r
J1 u '}
4�
i �
M1 )) � , :'.y
- ��' d \� h
. 0 4- . ..
..�.�' .
L .:� J ._
3 _ �. - a.
k, ..` � i
in
.. _ 1