From:James Knackstedt <br />To:GIOELLO Nick R <br />Subject:Re: Applications PUD 24-001 and ST 24-003 <br />Date:Wednesday, July 31, 2024 5:32:19 PM <br />You don't often get email from jjknackstedt@gmail.com. Learn why this is important <br />[EXTERNAL ] <br />Re: Applications PUD 24-001 and ST 24-003 <br /> <br />Dr Mr. Gioello, <br />My wife and I participated in the recent zoom meeting and we are even more concerned about <br />this proposed project now than we were before. Hearing others echo our concerns has shown <br />us that we are not alone and that our worries are valid. <br /> <br />We would like to reiterate our concerns again for the record. <br /> <br />Erosion: We live on Suncrest, on a steep hill directly above the property. The applicant is <br />saying they don’t need to abide by the Tree Preservation rules and don’t need to have a <br />certified arborist because of Goal 5 Inventory Guidelines. This is unacceptable. The trees and <br />their deep roots prevent the land above from erosion. Along with the wetland grasses, they <br />keep erosion and landslides at bay. The danger from erosion or shifting land is high, especially <br />if the existing water retention and flow are disrupted during the property development. The <br />area is fragile and interdependent on underground water movements from adjacent <br />developments, which have not been looked at for this particular project. <br /> <br />Wetlands: The elimination of wetlands could potentially increase the danger of fire in our <br />neighborhood. They are one of nature’s wildfire suppression systems. We are very concerned <br />about the removal of 70% of the wetlands below our property, especially with climate change, <br />drought, and increasingly hot, windy days. In addition, oaks burn much more slowly than <br />other trees which, in a fire, would help firefighters mitigate the burn. We can be sure that <br />many of these oaks would be removed. <br /> <br />Emergency evacuation: 1) We were already concerned about evacuation plans for this area <br />should there be a major fire, which would be sorely tested by the addition of a possible 100+ <br />more families trying to escape the area. 2) The narrow driveways and hammerheads are not <br />large enough for multiple emergency vehicles to turn around. 3) We understand that the homes