Letters to the editor for Dec. 17

Readers talk about cell towers, 6th Street house remodel and more.|

Give the garage a chance

EDITOR: As a registered civil engineer for four decades and a frequent participant in Petaluma land-use actions, I have a few insights on the 26 6th St. controversy that may be useful.

Historic Accuracy: Like many, my preference would be for the house to move as close as possible to the original Brainerd Jones design. But I know that our community doesn’t have the resources to acquire and restore every historic building. Instead, we must entice private owners to undertake the preservation. Often, that enticement means getting less than we might have liked. When we insist on historic perfection, we sometimes get demolition by neglect, such as the French Laundry on Bodega Avenue.

Soil Stability: The homeowner, remodel team and city will require a shoring plan and a permanent structural system to support the home. I can’t conceive how adjoining properties would be at risk if the primary home is stable.

Groundwater Impact: Groundwater moves slowly through west Petaluma toward the river in a flow miles wide and up to 50-feet deep. To suggest that a large basement could impact groundwater movement is akin to arguing that a shallow draft boat can impede the Amazon River.

Looking into Backyards: My wife and I live in a three-story home in a neighborhood of mostly one-story homes. We sometimes fear that our neighbors worry we peer into their backyards. But after 15 years, we know we never look. Not only can we see only small portions of their backyards, but our neighbors aren’t that interesting. (Neither are we.)

In a perfect world, I’d prefer a different project on 6th Street but there are no apparent grounds to deny the homeowners what they ask, especially given the other municipal priorities from housing to climate action to the upcoming General Plan.

Dave Alden

Petaluma

No to cell tower

EDITOR: The Verizon Major Wireless Facility now being proposed to be installed on top of the historic Petaluma Creamery is a disaster in the making.

To even consider placing well known fire hazard wireless transmitters on the roof of that wobbly, chronically vibrating corrugated metal tower where it will sit directly over a huge spinning cooler with tanks of toxic ammonia is insane. We already know the Creamery is not a stable property, it has too many health, fire and environmental violations to count. Most recent was a fire just a couple of weeks ago.

Put that wireless facility which violates our ordinance up on a hill where it belongs. The power they are planning for it is 50,000 times more watts than our ordinance allows for near homes. Not a good idea. Put it above town on a hill.

But Verizon and the Creamery don't care. Because it's cheaper for Verizon than installing it up on a hill. They are willing to install 50,000 times more watts smack dab in the middle of downtown next door to our children's bedrooms, schools and where they play in the City Hall Park just one block away. Make no mistake, this project is about greed for money rather than caring for Petalumans' quality of life.

Even the International Association of Firefighters have come out against placing wireless facilities on their own firehouses. They know, and Petaluma needs to wake up before Verizon robs us of our ordinance with this project, opening the door for many more to go the cheap route rather than hauling the equipment up to a hill top. Look at all the fancy nonstop ads on TV. It's not like they're hurting for money. This is greed and recklessness.

Tony Lee

Petaluma

City not following its own rules?

EDITOR: I am writing regarding the huge renovation/ground excavation planned at 26 6th St. in the A Street Historic District that was approved by the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee (HCPC). The public should know the project was approved to move forward without adherence as required in City Resolution 2018-107 N.C.S. This resolution requires project applicants to perform outreach to neighbors within a 1,000-square-foot radius, if the project is major enough to require a public hearing.

Applicants must provide neighbors an opportunity to learn about project plans and details such as timelines and impacts and have their consultants available to answer questions — all of this ahead of even the scheduling of a public meeting. The applicant's architect voted for passage of this resolution when serving on the Planning Commission so he should be aware of its requirements. Every applicable project since the resolution passed has been required to comply including another project presented at the very same HCPC meeting. Every single one. This project was heard by the HCPC in July without compliance to this resolution. And now the project is scheduled for hearing by City Council on Dec. 21, again, without compliance. Why does the City’s Planning Department not require this applicant to follow the rules?

Todd Turrel

Petaluma

Save our history

EDITOR: The Argus-Courier editorial of Dec. 10 let readers know about the value of newspapers in telling the history of our community. Having ancestors who came to Sonoma County in 1844 and continued to live here, I have come to value the information about them to be found in our newspapers. I have also found information in the Sonoma County Archives – probates, land grants, marriage licenses and more. While these documents are for my own personal knowledge, there are many who dig into these records for professional purposes.

The Sonoma County Archives contain official records of deeds, mortgages, wills and probate records, assessments of property, voter registration, oaths of office, surveys, maps, corporation records, business licenses and more. It includes official records of Sonoma County schools, businesses and the library. If you are really curious about what is there, check out this website: https://oac.cdlib.org/institutions/Sonoma+County+Library. It is an astonishing list.

The Sonoma County Archives are located at Los Guillicos. Most records stored there are not digitized. The past two wildfires came to the edges of the building that houses these documents. Sonoma County history could have gone up in flames if it weren’t for the valiant effort of our firefighters. It is time to relocate the archives to preserve and protect them. Our Board of Supervisors, the Library Administration and the Library Commission must put this on their agenda and take action before the next wildfire. A better location should be found for the archives.

Carol Eber

Petaluma

‘Oddball controversies’

EDITOR: In the past few weeks, a couple of oddball controversies in west Petaluma have developed and I wanted to share my personal opinion. First, I read in the Press Democrat and San Francisco Chronicle that Peter Haas Jr., former president of Levi-Strauss, and his wife, Ginnie, are moving to Petaluma and are restoring a vintage home that they have worked with the city on for some time. Peter was quoted as saying he and his wife wanted to spend the rest of their lives here because they believed that Petaluma is a vibrant and thriving community.

Now, having personally traveled to all 50 states in my past vocational incarnations and family travel, I believe Petaluma is the best town in the United States. When my wife and I walk down the street, people say hello to one another. When I walk into the market, people say, "Don't the apples look good?" Point being that this is a friendly town with wonderful people.

Second, when the Haas's moved to Petaluma, they bought a vintage home that one of their neighbors, is as her right, got miffed at Peter in regards to a discussion about what she believed would be smoke and odors from barbecues on their patio that would drift over to her land from Peter's land. Well, the wind normally comes in from the west in the afternoon. And, sometimes, it comes down from the north. So, while I am a doofus at meteorology, I don't think she is going to be downwind from any smoke or odors having walked by their home, as my wife and I ourselves have a Heritage Home Victorian where we are right across from the Petaluma Creamery.

Now, let me share the other oddball story that involves the Petaluma Creamery. As our home is right across from the Petaluma Creamery, we recognize that we are neighbors. We put up with the occasional milk truck hydraulics and back-up beeps when the trucks unload or load their products. Noise is an issue. However, Larry Peter, the owner of Petaluma Creamery, does care about neighbors like myself.

Yet, in the past couple of weeks one neighbor has taken up an evangelistic effort to stop Petaluma Creamery from allowing Verizon to put a cell tower on top of his facility. The door-to-door effort this neighbor has made, along with ongoing literature putting forth unproven claims that radio waves from the cell tower are going to somehow cause major health problems for our little hamlet, are baseless. More importantly, I learned that the request to Larry for the cell tower came from the students at Petaluma High School because they could not get good internet reception. While I have not confirmed this as a fact, I cannot imagine that this is the case. I have known Larry for years. He is an honest businessman.

Ron Feldman

Petaluma

Of fires and cell towers

EDITOR: Last week’s fire at the Petaluma Creamery should be a wake-up call to all of us and especially to the members of the Planning Commission and the City Council. They will soon be voting on the proposed Verizon cell tower to be erected on top of the tower where I believe the fire broke out.

This is the second fire at the facility in six months. It is a major safety issue for the entire neighborhood, which is 95 % residential with churches and schools nearby. We were lucky this time as some employees smelled smoke and called 911, but since no alarm sounded what would have occurred had no one been present? In addition how can a fire crew safely access the roof structure as they had to last week if the cell tower had been present? Those antennas have transformers and other potentially explosive electrical equipment. Then there is the issue of the creamery’s ammonia cooling system which is flammable and extremely toxic.

The Petaluma Creamery is a major fire hazard and it should be obvious that erecting well-known fire hazards like wireless transmitters on the roof is a catastrophic mistake. Verizon needs to find a much safer site. I hope that our mayor and city officials would agree and will vote to deny Verizon’s application to put the cell towers on top of the Creamery.

Julia Allen

Petaluma

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.