Sample Letters

Sample Letter #1 - Legal

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP Code]
[Email Address]
[Date]

Nevada County Planning Commissioners
950 Maidu Avenue
Nevada City, CA 95959

Re: Opposition to Alpenglow Timber Use Permit, PLN23-0054; CUP23-0004; EIS24-0004

Dear Mr. Smith,

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed Alpenglow Sawmill and Glu-Lam factory project. As a concerned member of Friends of Prosser Truckee, I believe the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) fails to meet the standards set by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and I urge you to reject the project in its current form and instead prepare a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

1. Non-Compliance with CEQA Requirements

CEQA mandates that public agencies evaluate whether a project may have a significant environmental impact. If there's any possibility of such an impact, an EIR is required. The current MND does not adequately address the potential environmental consequences of the Alpenglow project. Specifically, it overlooks significant impacts on aesthetics, land use, noise, and traffic safety. An EIR would provide the necessary detailed analysis and public scrutiny, ensuring informed decision-making and full transparency.

2. Fair Argument Standard

Under the fair argument standard, an EIR is mandatory whenever there is substantial evidence that a project may have significant environmental effects. In this case, there is considerable evidence indicating potential negative impacts:

• Traffic Safety: The project will generate substantial truck traffic, with an estimated 61 trucks per day passing through residential areas every seven minutes. This poses serious safety risks to residents and road users.

• Noise Pollution: The operation of sawmill machinery will introduce significant noise into quiet residential neighborhoods, disrupting the peace and quality of life for local residents.

• Light Pollution: The project will contribute to light pollution, adversely affecting the area's natural dark skies and wildlife.

• Land Use Conflicts: The industrial nature of the project is incompatible with the existing residential character of the surrounding areas, conflicting with the Truckee 2040 General Plan, particularly Goal LU-12, which emphasizes regional land use coordination to protect natural resources and maintain the area's character.

3. Inadequate Public Notice

The County's notice for public review and comment was inadequate. The Notice of Availability (NOA) was not posted in a timely manner, reducing the public's ability to review and comment on the project effectively. This failure to provide proper notice warrants a re-notice of the project to ensure adequate public participation.

4. Conclusion

Given the substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the Alpenglow project may have significant environmental impacts, CEQA requires the preparation of a comprehensive EIR. Approving the project based on the current MND would be an abuse of discretion and contrary to the law. I respectfully request that you reject the MND and require a full EIR to thoroughly evaluate the potential impacts and explore feasible mitigation measures or alternatives.

Thank you for considering my comments. I urge you to protect our community and environment by ensuring a thorough and transparent review process for this significant project.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

Sample Letter #2 - Noise

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, Zip Code]
[Email Address]
[Date]

Kyle Smith
Nevada County Senior Planner
Nevada County Planning Commission
950 Maidu Avenue
Nevada City, CA 95959

Dear Mr. Smith,

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed Alpenglow Sawmill and Glu-Lam factory project at 10375 Silverado Way in Truckee, California. As a concerned resident, I believe the Environmental Noise Assessment for this project is insufficient and requires significant revisions to accurately reflect potential impacts on our community.

Firstly, the current Environmental Noise Assessment failed to select noise measurement locations that accurately represent the ambient noise levels in noise-sensitive residential areas. The chosen sites were too close to Klondike Flat Road, skewing the data with traffic noise. Additional measurements should be conducted at locations further from local roads to provide a true baseline for ambient noise levels. These new measurements should form the basis for evaluating the noise impact of the project, especially for residences northwest of the site.

Secondly, there are inconsistencies in the traffic noise modeling inputs and results. The report underestimates the traffic noise impact by not accurately reflecting the peak hour vehicle trips and the overall daily traffic volume. The noise generated by individual truck movements should be given proper consideration, as these are likely to be highly disturbing to nearby residents. The traffic volume inputs to the noise model need to be updated to include the correct number of daily project trips to provide an accurate assessment of the noise impact.

Furthermore, the operational noise modeling assumptions did not account for the possibility of open doors at the sawmill structure, which could allow additional noise to escape into the community. The SoundPLAN model should be revised to include this factor.

Additionally, a more restrictive noise standard should be used to assess the project’s impact, as sawmill noise typically contains high-frequency sounds and continues over long durations. The existing ambient noise levels in residential areas away from roadways are low, and any significant increase would severely affect the quality of life for residents.

Lastly, the Environmental Noise Assessment did not adequately evaluate the potential noise impact concerning existing noise levels. It is essential to aggregate all operational noise sources to determine the overall increase in noise levels caused by the project. Mitigation measures must be required if there is a substantial permanent increase in noise levels.

In conclusion, the current Environmental Noise Assessment is incomplete and fails to accurately represent the true noise impact of the Alpenglow Sawmill and Glu-Lam factory project. I urge the Nevada County Planning Commission to require a revised and more comprehensive noise assessment and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to CEQA before considering approval of this project.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

Sample Letter #3 - Special Findings for Requirement #8 - Highways

Here is another Sample / Form Letter 3 for folks to copy / paste / submit to these copy & paste-able email addresses for Kyle Smith, the five Nevada County Planning Commissioners, and five Board of Supervisors.

Kyle.Smith@nevadacountyca.gov; danny.milman@co.nevada.ca.us; laura.duncan@co.nevada.ca.us; Terence.McAteer@co.nevada.ca.us; Mike.Mastrodonato@co.nevada.ca.us; jo.garst@co.nevada.ca.us; Jo@jogarstdesign.com; heidi.hall@nevadacountyca.gov; ed.scofield@nevadacountyca.gov;lisa.swarthout@nevadacountyca.gov; sue.hoek@nevadacountyca.gov; Hardy.Bullock@nevadacountyca.gov

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, ZIP Code]
[Email Address]
[Date]

Nevada County Planning Department
950 Maidu Avenue
Nevada City, CA 95959

Subject: Opposition to Special Findings for the Proposed Alpenglow Sawmill and Glu-Lam Factory

Dear Members of the Nevada County Planning Commission,

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the approval of "Special Findings" that would allow the proposed Alpenglow Sawmill and Glu-Lam factory to bypass critical requirements set forth in Nevada County's own development regulations. These requirements, recently updated and reaffirmed by the Board of Supervisors in April 2024, are essential for ensuring public safety, environmental protection, and community well-being.

The specific requirement in question, Code Section 12.05.052.C.8, mandates that "Highways, streets, and roads on and near the site are adequate in width and pavement type to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use and adequate provision has been made for project-specific impacts and the cumulative effect of traffic generated by the proposed use." The proposed development fails to meet these standards for several critical reasons:

1. Traffic Safety on Highway 89 and Klondike Flat Road (KFR) Intersection:

• The current intersection at Highway 89 and KFR is inadequate to handle the increased traffic, particularly from heavy logging trucks. This poses a significant risk to traffic safety, as the intersection is not designed to accommodate the volume or type of traffic that the proposed factory would generate.

2. Safety for Pedestrians and Bicyclists:

• Logging trucks sharing KFR with pedestrians and bicyclists creates a dangerous environment. The road is narrow and lacks adequate shoulders, making it unsafe for non-motorized users.

3. Air Quality Concerns:

• Increased diesel emissions from logging trucks would significantly degrade air quality in the rural residential areas along KFR. Residents should not have to suffer from the health impacts of excessive diesel emissions in their own community.

4. Noise Pollution:

• The noise from jake brakes and trucks revving their engines at the Highway 89/KFR intersection will disrupt the peace and quiet of the surrounding neighborhoods. This constant noise pollution is unacceptable and detrimental to the quality of life for residents.

5. Public Safety Risks:

• The lack of a secondary access road for trucks presents a severe public safety risk. In the event of an emergency, having only one point of ingress and egress could hinder evacuation efforts and endanger lives.

6. Property Value Impact:

• The steady flow of logging and lumber trucks on KFR will negatively impact property values and erode the equity that homeowners have built over the years. This economic impact on residents is unjust and should be a significant consideration in the planning process.

7. Lack of Adequate Infrastructure:

• The proposed development requires the construction of a separate, primary access road for trucks at the existing Prosser Hill OHV entrance. This new road is necessary to mitigate the numerous significant and dangerous impacts outlined above.

In conclusion, the Special Findings required to approve this development are not justifiable and should be denied. The proposed Alpenglow Sawmill and Glu-Lam factory does not meet the critical infrastructure and safety requirements established by Nevada County. Allowing this project to proceed without meeting these standards would undermine the integrity of the county's planning process and put the community at risk.

I urge the Nevada County Planning Commission to uphold the county's development standards and deny the approval of these Special Findings. Our community deserves responsible and safe development that respects both the environment and the well-being of its residents.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]