SU0013451 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

V. DEL A-SIERRA OUP MOTHER LODE CHAPTER z SIERRA CLUB June 25, 1993 Kerry Sullivan, Planner San Joaquin County Community Development Department 1810 E. Hazelton, Stockton, Ca. 95205. Dear Ms. Sullivan: We see that there have been some improvements in the Buckeye Ranch Proposal since it was first presented. But unless there are certain substantial changes made in the Development Plan we can not agree that there is actually a 533 acre nature preserve as is claimed. 1) there is a road proposed which would cut through the middle of the 'preserve This would result in up to 5 years of disturbance to wildlife by the trucks hauling soil across the preserve. It would appear likely that the disturbance would continue beyond five years since once the bridge was built the owners would want to use it for alternate access. 2) The plan shows a thin strip of 'preserve' along the river adjacent to the golf course. I his fragment of a 'preserve' would not be very functional. Preserves have been shown to function when they are large contiguous areas, not when they are fragments and strips. If this were truly to be a preserve the four fairways through the woods would have be dedesigned to avoid this area. 3) Is it true that a 65 acre vineyard is being included as a part of the nature 'preseve'? (see section 2-5) 4) The shape of the area proposed for removal from the Williamson Act is appar- ently designed to conform to the needs of the developed area rather than to protect the 'preserve' from fragmentation and subjugation. The golf course nearly cuts off one section of 'preserve' and homesites one through four stick out into the preserve. Since the Sierra Club has been concerned with some aspects of this development from before it was even presented to the County, we wonder why this organization was not mentioned as a Group which might use the 'nature preserve'. We could as easlily kept from participation since the owners, who might harbor residual resentment, could bar us from participation. There should be a 'neutral" third party involved in these decisions. We have serious question about how this will be accomplished. If the property has been protected from certain taxes by its inclusion in the Williamson Act, will those back taxes have to be paid on the area which is to be removed from Williamson Act protection? We may wish to present more concerns at the public tparingpn the 13th of July. rel Mr. teve Stor_.king Conservation Cher