Saving Clover Valley - Letters
 | |  | |  | |  |
| Preaching the truth, not propaganda Thursday, July 12, 2007 To say that the Save Clover Valley supporters are preaching propaganda, as Chris Wolfe did in his July 5 letter, is nonsense. A small group of citizens started seven years ago to save this valley. That number has grown into the thousands. Save Clover Valley people are dedicated to giving residents very accurate, informative and truthful information. We invite you to contact us for detailed information. Clover Valley is a place to rest our eyes on Nature's beauty and feel the spirit of the trees. It gives peace and refuge from this chaotic world. As a 28-year resident of Rocklin it is disturbing to see Rocklin all about development, more houses, malls and expressways. Highways do not relieve traffic; they make room for more cars. This is a "green year" is it not? It's our responsibility to do the right thing. If we don't save Clover Valley, we all lose. It is time for the people of Rocklin to wake up and realize we can make a difference. We can speak to our elected officials and tell them what we want. I have walked neighborhoods, tabled at supermarkets, participated at local and regional events and talked to people. Everyone is weary of traffic and developments. The right thing to do is Save Clover Valley. There will be a way without cost to the people. Our recent professional poll proved that. Development in Rocklin, Loomis, Lincoln, Penryn and Roseville will soon gobble up every inch of open space. But this Valley is our oasis. I ask this young man to pick up the FEIR (Final Environmental Impact Report) on Clover Valley. It will be the heaviest reading in his college career. I invite Chris to call us or visit our web site. Suzanne Kizer - Rocklin |
| Commission works for the public, does it not? Placer Herald - Thursday, August 9, 2007 What a joke! After two full days of public comment on the Clover Valley development, many people presented evidence that a different plan is needed. The scientific poll results presented show that most Rocklin voters are against this current development plan. Many people with comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report told stories of how their comments were ignored considered irrelevant or just plain rejected as not being valuable. Attorneys well versed in development law told the commissioners the developer's threats to sue the city did not have merit so they could freely decide the issue. The attorneys said the commission could reject this development and request a new plan. The commissioners then started to share their views. They thanked the community for their participation in the process and then told us that what we said did not matter and irrelevant to the process. They said they only deal with the facts. One commissioner said that with development comes traffic and the citizens will just get used to it. Another said that polls don't matter because they have to do what they feel is in the best interest of Rocklin. I thought these commissioners worked for the residents of Rocklin, or maybe I was mistaken. John Schimandle - Rocklin |
| Vision of county's future looking nightmarish Placer Herald - Thursday, August 16, 2007 Just sit back for a minute, close your eyes and imagine the Sacramento area with another million residents that are expected in the not too distant future. Just imagine another 400,000 homes, picture another 1,000,000 cars and trucks. Let's not forget the tens of thousands of acres of parking lots, roads, commercial buildings and all those wonderful shopping malls, mini-malls. I don't know about you, but I have to open my eyes, because this vision seems to be turning into a night mare. Let's also consider the additional ramifications of this "vision," little things like water, the loss of millions of acres of farm land, the air pollution and global warming gasses produced, the water pollution created, the global warming created by all that concrete and asphalt and traffic. Let's not forget traffic. I seem to remember reading some time ago about the "law of traffic and roads." The law states that traffic will increase to fill any roads you build. I believe this law because I can see its effects here in the Sacramento area. Maybe we ought to be asking our elected "representatives" if they have had this "vision," and what they plan to do about it. Don Perera, Rocklin |
| We will pay the price for developer's profit Placer Herald - Thursday, August 16, 2007 For the few residents who may still be confused about Clover Valley, here is what the development will really do, in spite of the glossy presentation to the Planning Commission last week. Even though the developer says he has reduced the number of homes and added open space, the fact remains they will still cut down thousands of 100-year-old native oaks that they claim will be replaced 100 percent. They don't say that the huge Oaks will be replaced with 12 foot non native trees requiring a lot more water than our California Valley Oaks and Blue Oaks. We've all seen the spindly little trees planted in new developments. They don't talk much about the expressway that will go through the northern end of the valley emptying onto Park Drive, except to say it's been in the planning for many years. But that was before most of us who bought in Stanford Ranch became aware of the fate awaiting our homes and schools. That's maybe our mistake for buying here but our City Council can change that outcome. They have the power to say no to outside communities using our streets for transit to other parts of Placer County. The city will not gain any net new tax revenue from this development but we will all pay the cost of the traffic and air pollution so that one developer can make a huge profit instead of fair one. Janet Dunlap, Rocklin |
| Real focus should be on valley's uniqueness Placer Herald - Thursday, September 27, 2007 Although the Clover Valley controversy focuses primarily on traffic, air quality, tree removal, land-speculation rights, prehistoric sites, etc., these are merely periphery, surface issues. The over arching, most compelling issue is the un-thinkable destruction of both a concentrated diverse ecosystem and a rich cultural district that is unique to the region and the state. Who in their right mind can condone such sacrilege? Clover Valley's 622 acres have never been development friendly. The developer/owners have known this for decades - it's the very reason so many purchase escrows collapsed. It's the reason the county's zoning remained as 10-acre or larger parcels. The total parcel number was/is 13, but to find a way around that hindrance, the owners merely annexed it to "whatever-you-want" Rocklin and opened cornucopia's doors. The real focus must hone in on Clover Valley's unique 622 acres that are culturally, historically, environmentally and aesthetically important to the region. These features belong to everyone and must be preserved with the same diligence we use in protecting our water and air. With so much at stake, don't citizens have a right to demand that both environmental laws be followed and constitutional rights be upheld? Jake O'Rourke - Loomis |
| Clover Valley: Just say 'No' to sprawl Placer Herald - Thursday, December 6, 2007 As sprawling development gallops along on the other side of Clover Valley's steep-sloped ridges, threatening to invade Rocklin's 622-acre ecological gem, opposition to this unnecessary, proposed project continues to grow. Between the ballot box and the courts, it is possible to save Clover Valley, the last of its kind. With additional traffic (14,000 more cars) that will be dumped on residential streets, combined with an array of other unacceptable impacts (i.e., removal of over 7,000 oaks), this proposed development never should have been approved. The city council's egregious vote must be reversed by citizens exercising their lawful rights. Clover Valley's concentration of environmental and cultural features - wetlands, perennial creek, oak woodlands, meadows, scenic ridges, historic rock walls and corral, pre-historic sites, wildlife refuge - makes it the perfect buffer in this extremely fast-growing region. In order to prevail on Feb. 5, Rocklin citizens must be educated with the truth. Despite confusion over ballot wording, massive financial resources of the developer partners and false statements to the public, voters will have a chance to right a wrong - NO development in Clover Valley, NO on H. Marilyn Jasper, Loomis |