RE: UP:20-27. Applicant: Raphael S. Knapp;
I do not support the project as presented. Concerns: Lake County supports the Dark Sky Initiative. The Initial Biological Study is incomplete. It did not include a physical inventory of the entire parcels and was done over 4 years ago. We have questions on wildlife assessment (page 48/111). “Habitat for the following species is not found on the property." Clear Lake hitch – Clear Lake and its tributaries. What studies were done on the possibility the hitch do use the tributaries to spawn? Bald eagle and Osprey can be spotted: eBird. Note the discrepancies from pg 7 ” Northern California black walnut is represented ...with a single individual.” Then pg 52/111 “These trees occur adjacent to Sulphur Canyon Creek along the based of the slope, as well as in a small copse located at the southeastern intersection of the two Knapp parcels.” Pg 41 mentions the intermittent wetlands but makes no reference to its importance to wildlife. These small but mighty habitats filter out pollution, ease the effects of flooding, and provide water for wildlife. The fertilizer/chemical shed should be relocated away from any waterway. CTFO is this in alignment when it states “The proposed outdoor cultivation areas...enclosed with 6-foot tall galvanized woven wire fences, covered with privacy screen/mesh...to screen the cultivation areas from public view. The growing medium of the proposed outdoor canopy areas will be native soil amended with compost. The proposed mixed-light canopy areas would be located within ten 3,000 ft2 greenhouse structures and twenty-two 1,000 ft2 hoop house structures.”. How would vehicles access this property without trespassing and new infrastructure put in place? Will it be handicapped accessible? Who would pay for the improvements and care for the road and bridges?
RE: UP:20-27. Applicant: Raphael S. Knapp;
I do not support the project as presented. Concerns: Lake County supports the Dark Sky Initiative. The Initial Biological Study is incomplete. It did not include a physical inventory of the entire parcels and was done over 4 years ago. We have questions on wildlife assessment (page 48/111). “Habitat for the following species is not found on the property." Clear Lake hitch – Clear Lake and its tributaries. What studies were done on the possibility the hitch do use the tributaries to spawn? Bald eagle and Osprey can be spotted: eBird. Note the discrepancies from pg 7 ” Northern California black walnut is represented ...with a single individual.” Then pg 52/111 “These trees occur adjacent to Sulphur Canyon Creek along the based of the slope, as well as in a small copse located at the southeastern intersection of the two Knapp parcels.” Pg 41 mentions the intermittent wetlands but makes no reference to its importance to wildlife. These small but mighty habitats filter out pollution, ease the effects of flooding, and provide water for wildlife. The fertilizer/chemical shed should be relocated away from any waterway. CTFO is this in alignment when it states “The proposed outdoor cultivation areas...enclosed with 6-foot tall galvanized woven wire fences, covered with privacy screen/mesh...to screen the cultivation areas from public view. The growing medium of the proposed outdoor canopy areas will be native soil amended with compost. The proposed mixed-light canopy areas would be located within ten 3,000 ft2 greenhouse structures and twenty-two 1,000 ft2 hoop house structures.”. How would vehicles access this property without trespassing and new infrastructure put in place? Will it be handicapped accessible? Who would pay for the improvements and care for the road and bridges?