This is something our local public agencies should be pursuing, not leaving it all up to non-profits. Sonoma is a very conservative region, conservatives hate ped/bike infrastructure "multi-modal" transit is the planning term. Of course the "pro-business" Chamber of Commerce Republicans see walkable communities as a threat to their auto-centric, sprawl type philosophy. Their type of thinking, in which everything needs to be about profit, is what has plagued land-use policies in California for decades.
This is disgusting. We need to remember, the housing crash was a result of unscrupulous business practices by people like Blum and greedy bankers; not the other way around.
Myself and most of my neighbors in Petaluma all have catchment tanks and grey water systems, mostly because we want to keep are water bills down.
Mainly, the reason municipalities are reluctant to encourage residential water saving, is because it's a source of revenue. (e.g. Petaluma has a $165 million bond to pay off)
Residential water use is such an insignificant part of the equation. If so called "pioneering activists" like Trathen Heckman and Daily Acts are sincerely concerned about these water resource issues, he and his org should've been more actively involved when the City of Petaluma approved two giant shopping centers, one having a large health club. Yet, I don't recall seeing him at any of the public meetings. For instance, the new Target shopping center is using 3 million+ gallons/year, (it's all documented in the hydrology report, if anyone from DA cared to read.
Commercial industry and AG is where the systemic problem sits. Rohnert Park just built a Casino with 15 restaurants with a hotel planned soon. RP also just finished building 244 condos behind the Casino. Has anybody heard of the recently approved Coliseum City on Oakland water front? New sports arena, retail/offices and 6,000 homes. SF Mayor Lee's ballot measure to build 30,000 new apartments by 2020? Policy makers need to make serious changes to building/planning requirements, when it comes to grey water/catch systems and water conservation. Just saying...
This is very difficult news to swallow considering what is at stake here in Petaluma. Chris Albertson stated while campaigning, "I am confident that we can bring in environmentally friendly and well designed projects" -yet, it is obvious from statements on his website that he supports both of these two large retail shopping centers in Petaluma. He seems to be inclined to contradiction on many issues.
Does he live here or not? Does he support environmentally friendly development project or not?
These are very important planning decisions that are being made today for Petaluma's future -it's a shame we have untrustworthy city council members making these decisions.
So I guess this means, the issues surrounding these large projects aren't really about "shopping" or having a new Friedman's, is it? I heard that this is the fourth project in the past several years that Friedman's was said to have been a tenant. After pulling out of the Target project over at Kenilworth, it's pretty obvious that this is more politically driven than anything else.
here are the links to two of the other locations:
2016 Metro Newspapers. All rights reserved.
Website powered by Foundation