(The letter below was originally published in the Press Democrat on December 31, 2007)
The proposed development would radically alter the character of Sebastopol in allowing four-story buildings, space for generic stores, and a redundant, artificial center. If Sebastopol’s General Plan is discarded, it’s possible that Santa Rosa and Sebastopol would eventually merge. Consider that the original charm of Santa Rosa is now obscured by its edges.
The Laguna de Santa Rosa is a resource and treasure that adjacent construction will further compromise. Nearby development is a threat to its viability, not to mention an aesthetic crisis.
There’s physical evidence that there is not sufficient water to supply the proposed growth: the water table sinks every year. Those paying for water can expect less of it
at a higher price, and those relying on wells can expect to drill deeper and deeper, requiring lots of money and lots of luck.
The water supply is the defining factor whether it is acknowledged now or a little later, when we’re in grave trouble and denial can no longer assert itself. Even with conservative habits life won’t be viable if there’s insufficient water to conserve. Regarding the proposed development, the operative isn’t one of personal tastes but whether continuous expansion is sustainable.
Nansi I. Weil, Sebastopol
(The letter below was originally published in the Press Democrat on December 31, 2007)
The proposed development would radically alter the character of Sebastopol in allowing four-story buildings, space for generic stores, and a redundant, artificial center. If Sebastopol’s General Plan is discarded, it’s possible that Santa Rosa and Sebastopol would eventually merge. Consider that the original charm of Santa Rosa is now obscured by its edges.
The Laguna de Santa Rosa is a resource and treasure that adjacent construction will further compromise. Nearby development is a threat to its viability, not to mention an aesthetic crisis.
There’s physical evidence that there is not sufficient water to supply the proposed growth: the water table sinks every year. Those paying for water can expect less of it
at a higher price, and those relying on wells can expect to drill deeper and deeper, requiring lots of money and lots of luck.
The water supply is the defining factor whether it is acknowledged now or a little later, when we’re in grave trouble and denial can no longer assert itself. Even with conservative habits life won’t be viable if there’s insufficient water to conserve. Regarding the proposed development, the operative isn’t one of personal tastes but whether continuous expansion is sustainable.
Nansi I. Weil, Sebastopol