HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 5.1 Correspondence received as of 500 p.m. on December 12, 2023From:Brad Lowe
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:Support for Osage pickleball courts
Date:Monday, December 11, 2023 5:04:58 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
Dear Danville,
I'm in favor of the new Osage court expansion.
If you look at the newly added courts in San Ramon's Central park, you can get an idea of the
positive benefit to the community.
The new SR courts bring a diverse crowd of all ages and abilities together. As far as I know,
there have been no complaints of noise, traffic or unruly pickleball players. After playing
there my friends and I often go out to dinner or shop at the nearby stores-- an economic
magnet!
No sport is comparable for getting people outside and staying active in a friendly yet
competitive environment.
Say "Sorry!" to those NIMBY naysayers and say "Yes!" to more public courts! We're
Sincerely,
Brad Lowe
Alamo
Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission
Correspondence received as of 5:00 p.m. on December 12, 2023
From:Terry Tringali
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:Pickleball Court Expansion
Date:Monday, December 11, 2023 6:19:50 PM
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFF
This email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from a Town Staff member! Do not
click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello!
I have loved living in Danville for nearly 30 years. I find it to be a town that values recreation for residents of all
ages. This email is in support of the expansion of the Pickleball courts at Osage Park.
I began playing in Walnut Creek before the tennis court at Osage was converted to two pickleball courts. Soon after,
I began a group now known as the Danville Dinkers. We have enjoyed the exercise and social interaction, and our
group has now grown to more than 100. Many times there will be 8 players on the courts with as many as 30
waiting. There is a need for additional courts.
I have followed the progression of planning, sent previous letters and spoken in favor of the courts at previous
meetings. I have been pleased with the due diligence of the Town of Danville and it is now time to act! Our
beautiful town has soccer fields, bocce ball courts, tennis courts, baseball fields, pools, playgrounds and parks. We
have the space and must now offer Danville residents adequate access to courts for the fastest growing sport in
America.
Thank you for your consideration!
Terry Tringali
From:Jeremy W
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:More pickleball courts at Osage park, please.
Date:Monday, December 11, 2023 9:04:09 PM
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFF
This email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from a Town Staff member! Do not
click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi,
I’m a local resident in favor of adding more pickle ball courts at Osage Park. This is an important step for the
Pickleball community based on the restricted usage / imminent closure of the Rudgear neighborhood courts.
Thank you!
Jeremy weisshar
From:Mark Lowe
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:I support the Osage Pickleball Court Expansion
Date:Monday, December 11, 2023 11:06:14 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
Dear Danville Parks, Rec and Arts Commission,
I support the expansion of the pickleball courts at Osage park for at least the following
reasons.
Pickleball is a rapidly growing sport that people of all ages can and do play.
It's relatively easy to learn, which makes it a low barrier to entry for most. Also
affordable, compared to sports like baseball, golf, etc. I started with a starter set from
Amazon for $40 for two paddles and some balls.
It is a great way to utilize our park land, as it will be used quite often vs how that
space is used now.
The utilization per person per square foot is high compared to all of the other sports
that are played at Osage, which brings high value for the land used.
I came from racquetball and transitioned to Pickleball during the pandemic. I found
that many other people have also learned to play recently and it's so encouraging to
see so many people out enjoying themselves outside, and at a place where you don't
need to belong to a private club to participate.
Pickleball is a very social sport as well, so a great place to meet new friends.
Many people from the area now play PB, and there are not nearly enough courts
at Osage. There is usually a waiting list to play on those courts for most of the day, so
I just end up going elsewhere. I think we would all say that the pilot program of
converting a rarely used tennis court to 2 pickleball courts was a success.
Many of us travel to Walnut Creek or Concord, and now San Ramon's new courts to
play, but it would be great to play close to home. I'd be riding my bike to the courts,
so please include bike racks :)
The proposed addition of more courts would be well utilized, as the popularity of the
sport continues to grow.
I think the argument that it will bring "crowds" to the park doesn't really hold much
merit. isn't that the point? to have space for us to enjoy? Would some suggest that the
many incredible facilities such as the picnic tables, baseball fields, soccer fields,
basketball courts are a negative because many people use them?
I don't agree at all with the argument that the extra courts and people will "ruin" the
park. There are a LOT of green areas at Osage, and this will fit in quite nicely.
We enjoyed Osage a lot when our son was growing up (Mustang, Little League,
Birthdays), continue to enjoy it today (walking our dog, picknics) - but it would be
fantastic to add pickleball to the list of uses as well.
I am hoping the town will proceed with this plan. It will be a great addition to the facilities
that Danville offers! Thank you for considering my comments.
Sincerely,
Mark Lowe
Proud Danville resident since 1994
From:Cheryl Allan
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:Support for more pickleball courts at Osage Park
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:03:43 AM
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFF
This email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from a Town Staff member! Do not
click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
To: Gail
Assistant for Parks and Rec
We are writing this email to give our support for new pickle Ball courts at Osage park, in reference to the Parks and
Rec meeting coming up on Dec. 13 and agenda item 5.1
Pickle Ball is a wonderful way to share a sport with our fellow community members, but often times, there are no
courts available. It is a fast growing sport that is a great source of exercise and camaraderie for the Danville
community , and we extend our whole hearted support for more pickleball courts courts!
Thank you,
Mark and Cheryl Allan
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:Lindsay Mazotti
Cc:Gail Massagli
Subject:RE: pickleball courts
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:11:21 AMLindsay, Thank you for your email. Your public comment has been forwarded to the Park,Recreation, and Arts Commission via this email for its next meeting on December 13,2023. We are currently in a public review period of a negative declaration ofenvironmental significance and studies conducted associated with the proposed project.The Commission will discuss this item at its next meeting. Information about this item,including the studies conducted and previous reports, can be found at the followingwebsite: https://danvilletowntalks.org/pickle-ball Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
From: Lindsay Mazotti <lindsay.mazotti@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 5:35 PM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>; Adam Falcon <afalcon@danville.ca.gov>;
Addison Brown <abrown@danville.ca.gov>; Jenna Mesic <jmesic@danville.ca.gov>; Randall Diamond
<rdiamond@danville.ca.gov>; Kevin Donovan <kdonovan@danville.ca.gov>; Jane Joyce
<jjoyce@danville.ca.gov>; Joe Lindsey <jlindsey@danville.ca.gov>; Charles Neary
<cneary@danville.ca.gov>; Carol Mascali <cmascali@danville.ca.gov>; Newell Arnerich
<NArnerich@danville.ca.gov>; Robert Storer <RStorer@danville.ca.gov>; Karen Stepper
<KStepper@danville.ca.gov>; David Fong <dfong@danville.ca.gov>; Renee Morgan
<RMorgan@danville.ca.gov>
Subject: pickleball courts
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
To Whom it May Concern:
As a longtime Danville resident, I am extremely concerned about the city's potential plan to add
multiple pickleball courts to Osage Park and the Danville Station neighborhood. I also grew up
across the street from Osage Park back before Charlotte Wood was onsite- the park is near and dear
to my heart.
If the Council has decided more courts are warranted, that is an understandable conclusion; but of
all the main parks and tennis facilities in the city, Osage Park is the least equipped to handle the
traffic, and most of all, the incredible noise.
If I am not mistaken all of the following potential sites feature the same easy access, ample parking
and clean bathrooms as Osage, but they DO NOT have homes and families living closely adjacent to
the potential new courts that will be ill-affected by the incredible noise the game of pickleball
creates:
Sycamore Park
Hap Magee Park
Monte Vista High School
Mustang Soccer Complex
People that play pickleball do not play tennis, there is literally zero overlap (it is like golf and mini-
golf), so these new courts do not need to be connected to existing tennis courts in any way.
The noise from a simple game of pickleball is real and it is shocking to the ears. To ignore this simple
fact would be a real mistake and permanently hurt a Danville neighborhood and its families.
There is no reason to do this when you have multiple other potential sites.
Thank you for your time. I wish I could be at the meeting.
Sincerely,
Lindsay Mazotti
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:LEEANN BROWN
Cc:Gail Massagli
Subject:RE: Osage Park Pickleball Project
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:12:06 AM
Leeann,
Thank you for your email. Your public comment has been forwarded to the Park, Recreation, and Arts Commission
via this email for its next meeting on December 13, 2023. We are currently in a public review period of a negative
declaration of environmental significance and studies conducted associated with the proposed project. The
Commission will discuss this item at its next meeting. Information about this item, including the studies conducted
and previous reports, can be found at the following website: https://danvilletowntalks.org/pickle-ball
Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
-----Original Message-----
From: LEEANN BROWN <cag2@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 7:03 PM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>; Adam Falcon <afalcon@danville.ca.gov>; Addison
Brown <abrown@danville.ca.gov>; Jenna Mesic <jmesic@danville.ca.gov>; Randall Diamond
<rdiamond@danville.ca.gov>; Kevin Donovan <kdonovan@danville.ca.gov>; Jane Joyce
<jjoyce@danville.ca.gov>; Joe Lindsey <jlindsey@danville.ca.gov>; Charles Neary <cneary@danville.ca.gov>;
Carol Mascali <cmascali@danville.ca.gov>; Newell Arnerich <NArnerich@danville.ca.gov>; Robert Storer
<RStorer@danville.ca.gov>; Karen Stepper <KStepper@danville.ca.gov>; David Fong <dfong@danville.ca.gov>;
Renee Morgan <RMorgan@danville.ca.gov>
Subject: Osage Park Pickleball Project
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFF
This email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from a Town Staff member! Do not
click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
527 El Capitan Drive
Danville, CA 9452
Parks & Recreation Commission and Town Council,
I’m writing due to my concerns regarding the Pickleball Project at Osage Park in Danville! First of all, I
would like to say I am not opposed to Pickleball in any way.
The Pickleball Courts are located directly behind my house. I’ve lived in my home for forty-three years and
have enjoyed the peace and tranquillity of our neighborhood.
Pickleball is unique, it delivers a high pitch, loud cracking sound, which is very disturbing and annoying! It
is impossible to entertain in your own back yard in the summer
due to the noise from the continuous games going on from sunrise, to even later than sunset. If there is the
slightest amount of light, they will play!
We have concerns for our children and grandchildren’s safety, the increase in traffic, decrease in our
property values, tournaments being scheduled, which will bring in food trucks, you say that won’t
happen, I’ve lived here long enough to know minds change very rapidly.
We are asking that you consider a better venue, one that is not in a housing area. There are better options
which could be considered, such as Sycamore Park which does
not infringe on homes, it has adequate roads, ample parking, is centrally located and has lighting for
extended play, a lot of amenities are already there, as far as the restrooms
being to far to walk, that is what people are playing Pickleball for, EXERCISE, walking is far less
strainuiouis than Pickleball. If it's too far for seniors to walk, there are remedies for that too!
Please reconsider the location of the Pickleball venue!
Leeann Brown
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:William Stone
Cc:Gail Massagli; _Parks Recreation and Arts Commission
Subject:RE: Osage Station Park Flood Mitigation
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:19:00 AMWilliam, Thank you for your email. Your public comment has been received and will be forwardedto the Park, Recreation, and Arts Commission for its next meeting on December 13, 2023.Please note that “For the Good of the Town” is an opportunity for members of the publicto address the Commission on a topic that is NOT listed on the agenda. However, theycannot discuss or take action on topics raised under “For the Good of The Town” but maychoose to refer the item to staff for follow up. Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
From: William Stone <wstone@intranotions.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 9:58 PM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>
Subject: Osage Station Park Flood Mitigation
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Henry,
I have prepared a document that discusses how the configuration of the west side of
Osage Park is causing unnecessary and preventable damage to 5 adjacent homes
during flood conditions. I have been through 2 floods in the last 20 years, so I have
experience with this situation. Here is the
document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1At_1jJGtL6W93X6wta8d7U2ok5AnI
8BnZW2_HB8_H7k?usp=sharing
Osage Station Park FloodMitigation
docs.google.com
It contains links to videos that show the problem and the impact of the flood waters.
I will present this issue at Wednesday's Parks & Rec meeting during the "for the good
of town" forum.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
William H. Stone
17 Orange Blossom Court
Danville, CA
925-984-9235
1
Osage Station Park Flood Mitigation
Danville, CA
12/5/2023
William H. Stone
17 Orange Blossom Court
Executive Summary
During flood conditions, the current configuration of Osage Station Park (aka Osage Park or
Osage or “the park”) causes unnecessary and preventable damage to neighboring homes
instead of redirecting water to proper outlets. Bigger storms are coming sooner than 20 years.
History
Although Osage Park is not in a flood zone, it has flooded twice in the past 20 years: December
of 2002 and just last year. Although the causes of the floods are different, their effects were the
same due to Osage Park’s configuration.
Both floods were during a significant rainfall.
The 2002 flood caused greater damage. The week before the flood, strong winds hit the area,
knocking down trees and branches. When the heavy prolonged rains came, the trees and
branches formed a dam under El Capitan Drive near the entrance to Charlotte Wood Middle
School (aka Charlotte Wood). The Danville Creek overflowed, flooding Charlotte Wood (causing
millions of dollars in damage) and filling up Osage Park. The park looked like a lake. Water that
was not absorbed, drained, or ran off, flowed to the west side of the park. During the flooding,
the power went out for 36 hours.
The flood last year occurred nearly in the same place but closer to the Danville Station HOA.
The overflow water traveled down Zephyr Circle to Brookside Drive to El Capitan Drive to
Orange Blossom Way. When the water arrived at the park entrance near the tennis courts on
Orange Blossom Way, the water flooded the parking lot and the west side of the park.
The common characteristic of both floods was that they contained heavy, thick, and sticky clay.
This clay was able to clog the park’s drainage systems causing water to accumulate in lower
(i.e. downhill) areas.
2
A significant amount of water from both floods flowed from Osage into the backyards and
homes of the following:
16 Orange Blossom Court
18 Orange Blossom Court
17 Orange Blossom Court
815 Brookside Dr
818 Orange Blossom Way
Having had major damage to their home from the flood in 2002, the residents at 16 Orange
Blossom Court reached a settlement with the town.
Osage’s drainage design
Osage Park has several drainage systems that are adequate to handle a large amount of
relatively clean water. There are several large drains throughout the park. When the water isn’t
drained fast enough (as in the case where the drains are clogged), a portion of the water flows
to the west side.
There are 4 major drains on the west side:
1) Two culverts near the tennis courts
2) Two wells+drains against the west wall
3
The #2 drains are in a channel of sorts. The west side of the channel is the brick wall of the
park’s boundary. To the east of the channel are two berms. These features form a north-south
channel. Should these drains become clogged, the overall water flow is north into Brookside
Drive.
4
The clogged #2 drains and the wells become huge reservoirs of water (containing several
swimming pools full of water). If a person was to stand on the drain, the water would be over
one’s head. These wells elevate the height of in-coming water creating large wide flows that
pour down the pathway and flow towards Brookside Drive.
Here are some pictures and video:
From inside Osage looking at the channel and reservoir on the west side looking west. The
water flows from left to right. At the center screen is the path to Orange Blossom Way.
https://youtu.be/Tjrs0cGoYZ4
5
Osage’s directed flooding towards private properties
The above water flow works well with one major flaw: the path entrance from Orange Blossom
Way into the park:
The path is effectively a 10-12 foot hole in the channel allowing hundreds of gallons per minute
to flow down the path. The flow of water down the path is roughly boot high and flowing quickly.
The path which runs east-west has houses on the north and south sides. The south side homes
are higher than the water level. However, the homes to the north are downhill from the path.
This is where the water branches off and causes damage to 5 homes.
6
Here is a picture and video of the flow from the park down the path between Osage and Orange
Blossom Way looking west. The water flowing down the path branches off to the right into 16
Orange Blossom Court:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmGFM5DmYFs
7
Here is the general flow of the water from the path. No other flood water sources contribute to
this problem (i.e. all water here comes from the pathway to Osage):
8
The extent of the collection of water is shown in this map:
16 Orange Blossom Court
This is the first house that is hit, with hundreds of gallons of water flowing into their yard per
minute. The water first encounters their pool causing $1,000s in damage to the pool and its
equipment. The water continues to flow under their house leaving several inches of water and
mud and the water flows through their garage (again, several inches of water and mud)
damaging anything on the floor.
9
Picture and video of their driveway, 16 Orange Blossom Court, and Orange Blossom Way. All
this water came through the garage of 16 Orange Blossom Court.
https://youtu.be/OErShbYRzWk
18 Orange Blossom Court
There is so much water that 16 Orange Blossom Court cannot contain it. The water flows next
door to 18 Orange Blossom Court, flooding their backyard and some water did reach under their
house in 2002.
17 Orange Blossom Court
At approximately 100-150 gallons per minute, the water flows into this property putting their
backyard completely under water. At points, the water is waist high. The water continues by
wrapping around their house and in 2002, it completely flooded their garage. This home was
spared having water under their house.
10
Here are pictures and a video from last year’s flood. The yellow house on the other side of the
fence is 815 Brookside Drive:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/72zeAaG_jyo
815 Brookside Drive
Since there is so much water, it continues into the next neighbor’s property, damaging their
pool, pool equipment, and air conditioner. Several inches of water makes its way under the
house.
818 Orange Blossom Way
As the water heads west from 17 Orange Blossom Court, this property’s backyard is flooded.
11
Flood severity
Last year’s flood vs the 2002 flood had several differences that reduced the amount of damage
to homes:
1. In 2002, based on the point of flooding, Osage was able to contain more water that was
eventually directed at homes.
2. In 2002, the flood happened in the middle of the night while residents were sleeping, so
residents couldn’t mitigate the flow of water. While last year’s flooding happened during
the day.
3. Last year, the fire department and the residents of 16 Orange Blossom Court created a
plug to block the water from flowing down the pathway, thus diverting hundreds of
gallons per minute from the above homes and towards Brookside Drive.
According to the World Weather Attribution (WWA), “Climate change creates the conditions in
which more powerful storms can form … while carrying more water.” Thus, the Town of Danville
will not have to wait 20 years until the next flooding event and such floods will be more intense.
The UCLA Institute of Environment & Sustainability paper suggests that over the next 50 years
there will be a 25% increase in rainfall. Source: https://www.ioes.ucla.edu/project/future-
extreme-precipitation-
california/#:~:text=We%20can%20expect%20more%20wet,dry%20and%20very%20wet%20yea
rs.
What is additionally problematic for this area is that Danville is in a valley with hills to the west
and east. Much of this acreage is open space with limited engineered drainage and that
drainage is not necessarily designed for the predicted storm intensities. Together, these factors
further amplify the volume of water that will find its way into our creeks, streets, parks, etc.
Here are some numbers
The flood from last year occurred during a storm that dropped 5.5” inches in a 24 hour period.
The largest rainfall in a 24-hour period in California was in 1943 at 25.83” in Southern California.
For every 1” of rain and 1,000 square feet of impermeable surface (roof, driveway, etc), about
620 gallons are generated. For a 10,000 square foot concrete surface (like what is being
proposed for the pickle ball expansion) in a storm like last year’s would generate 34,100 gallons
of water or roughly 2 swimming pools. For a 25% increase in the next 50 years, the same
10,000 square foot area would produce 42,625 gallons.
Using last year’s storm and increasing the amount of water by 25% would result in an
exponential amount of damage to the homes cited in this paper. These homes would most-likely
be uninhabitable until the flood damage is addressed.
12
Suggested remedies/mitigation
I am not a civil engineer nor have I spoken to one. These suggestions are amateurish at best.
Any solution devised needs to take into account the increase in storm severities over the next
50 years.
The overall solution needs to address the flow of water entering the property at 16 Orange
Blossom Court from the pathway which will continue to flow and damage 4 other homes. There
are two basic concepts:
1. Divert all water elsewhere (e.g. to Brookside Drive). Some solutions are:
a. Develop a proper channel along the west wall that will contain all the water and
divert it solely to the street (e.g. Brookside). This will most-likely require elevating
the pathway and require a bridge to cross the channel
b. Seal off the entrance of the pathway (i.e. remove the pathway) in order to create
a continuous park barrier along the west wall
c. If possible for the current drains, engineer them to be clog-proof (accounting for
possible damage by malicious park goers, i.e. the current debris barriers at the
park now are susceptible to damage)
d. Re-grade the park and tennis parking lot so that all water flows to the nearby
streets
2. Manage the flow of water down the pathway
a. Create a proper water channel down the pathway so that water flows straight
from the park to Orange Blossom Way without deviating into any privately owned
properties
b. Add a clog-proof drainage system on the pathway that can absorb all the flood
water
c. Increase the elevation of the pathway, so that water does not flow into the
pathway from the park
Conclusion
This document is not imposing blame on the causes of the original flooding, however this
document does show that the current configuration of Osage Park does direct a substantial
amount of water towards 5 adjacent homes creating $100Ks worth of damage.
With some adjustments, excess water from the park can be redirected to other outlets without
directly damaging homes.
We have less than 20 years for the next flood and it will likely be more severe.
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:Anthony Romanelli
Cc:Gail Massagli
Subject:RE: Osage pickleball comments and two new reports for your review
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:21:14 AMAnthony, Thank you for your email. Your public comment has been received by the Park,Recreation, and Arts Commission for its next meeting on December 13, 2023. We arecurrently in a public review period of a negative declaration of environmentalsignificance and studies conducted associated with the proposed project. TheCommission will discuss this item at its next meeting. Information about this item,including the studies conducted and previous reports, can be found at the followingwebsite: https://danvilletowntalks.org/pickle-ball Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
From: Anthony Romanelli <anthony.romanelli@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 10:09 PM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>; Adam Falcon <afalcon@danville.ca.gov>;
Addison Brown <abrown@danville.ca.gov>; Jenna Mesic <jmesic@danville.ca.gov>; Randall Diamond
<rdiamond@danville.ca.gov>; Kevin Donovan <kdonovan@danville.ca.gov>; Jane Joyce
<jjoyce@danville.ca.gov>; Joe Lindsey <jlindsey@danville.ca.gov>; Charles Neary
<cneary@danville.ca.gov>; Carol Mascali <cmascali@danville.ca.gov>
Cc: Newell Arnerich <NArnerich@danville.ca.gov>; Robert Storer <RStorer@danville.ca.gov>; Karen
Stepper <KStepper@danville.ca.gov>; David Fong <dfong@danville.ca.gov>; Renee Morgan
<RMorgan@danville.ca.gov>
Subject: Osage pickleball comments and two new reports for your review
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Henry & Commissioners,
In response to the notice and documents sent by the Town, I have commented below and also
attached two new reports specific to the traffic study and site selection. These two reports were led
by neighbors who have deep experience in business engineering consulting, leadership and analysis,
and were kind enough to donate their time.
I've organized my comments into three key areas:
1) Sound study: The study by Rincon Consultants oversimplifies the complexities of
measuring pickleball noise, relying on decibel measurements only and other missteps. It also
overlooks the Town's general noise ordinance, which explicitly prohibits sounds that are
unusual or an annoyance. I will not go further with my comments here, as I understand you
will soon receive a report from an independent sound consultant, who is expert in pickleball
sound measurements and abatement, and renders Rincon's study insufficient.
2) Traffic study review (new report attached): The attached report should speak for itself in
its summary section (see page 3) and supporting documentation in demonstrating the risks
and deficiencies with the traffic report. I'll also note that the Town's Staff Report itself points
out how close the project would be to exceeding the vehicle limits on Orange Blossom Way,
yet does not run a standard sensitivity analysis to pressure test its assumptions.
3) Site assessment (new report attached): the Commission's July 2022 motion directed staff
to both proceed in assessing Osage and to research other locations (though only the former
has taken place). In this spirit, the attached report thoroughly evaluates key criteria for
pickleball site selection. I encourage you to read through it and reflect objectively on whether
Osage is truly the best option for a Danville pickleball hub. I want to emphasize that we
support the Danville pickleball community finding a venue in the right place that does not
come at the expense of its residents' peace, well being and tranquility.
I thank you in advance for taking the time to review and apply an objective eye to these. I welcome
any questions.
Anthony Romanelli
Danville, CA
To: Parks, Recreation & Arts Commission (PRAC) and The Danville Town Council
Re: Alternate Sites To Osage Park for Pickleball Courts in Danville
PURPOSE
The purpose of this note is to follow up on the PRAC motion to look at alternate sites (July 2022) and
provide the PRAC and Town Council a useful methodology and alternative location to Osage Park . Now is
the time to choose the right location for both Pickleball Players and the Danville community. This analysis
process has been standard practice for other Danville town projects. It is best practice for any site selection
project and ideally should have been done prior to the JULY 13 2022 PR AC recommendation to “expand
pickleball courts from 2-14 at Osage Park” or in response to the July 13 motion “continue to look for alternate
sites” Post July 13, 5 months of testimony from Danville residents concerned about the negative impact to
Osage Park and the surrounding area culminated in the PRAC acquiescing to a CEQA impact study. A negative
declaration was recently issued for Osage Park and surrounding area for 6-8 courts. Detailed analysis
challenging this decision is documented in other published notes.
SUMMARY
Since July 2022, significant problems have been highlighted nationally with Pickleball locations. On a recent
interactive map over 200 Hot Spots in the US alone are dealing with human issues (noise/traffic) in complaints,
closings, and court cases. Tapping into this learning, criteria and associated attributes were selected for use in
this analysis.
Of possible criteria, four were selected because they have been found to be predictive of pickleball site
success.
1) NOISE IMPACT 2) PARKING/TRAFFIC ACCESS 3) LIGHTING 4) PARK FACILITIES
Sometimes it is difficult to interpret scoring outcomes prior to completing facilities, so existing pickleball court
locations around Danville were included to help benchmark results to real world situations. Rudgear Park in
Walnut Creek is a negative benchmark since noise/traffic problems caused reduced hours and ultimate closing.
Muirwood Park in Pleasanton and Central Park in San Ramon are more positive benchmarks .
The alternative site in Danville that shows highest potential is clearly Sycamore Park ranking top quartile in
total score and highly attractive across all criteria. Positive ranking is driven by being right off a major
connector (Camino Tassajara-24,000 car capacity) with signal lights for turning lanes at each of the two parking
locations (east and west). In the front location, houses are across Camino Tassajara, but constant noise from
the road and park overshadow potential court noise. Basically, the mitigations/concessions that cities have
struggled to implement would not be needed at Sycamore Park.
Osage Park and Rudgear Park tie for the least attractive sites in this set of locations. This is primarily due to
noise problems given the many homes bordering the courts and traffic/parking issues on residential roads. In
contrast, the San Ramon courts score among the highest across all criteria providing a positive benchmark with
lights and extended playing time (7am -10pm).
Oak Hill, Diablo Vista and Hap Magee were also evaluated and are stronger locations than Osage Park but
each have elements for discussion that are not factors for the Sycamore Park location.
Danville has alternatives to Osage Park for pickleball! The Pickleball community needs a great place to play
that can handle the popularity /growth of the sport. Danville residents deserve safe streets and environments
free from impulsive sounds that are documented to cause human harm over time. Danville CAN have both!
CRITERIA SELECTION AND SCORING
The historical references cited IN Appendix A and official Pickleball Site Selection Criteria being used for new
projects informed the choice of site selection criteria. 10+ criteria were originally chosen but given the nature
of successful sites across the country those were streamlined to the FOUR most important to site success.
Each of the criteria includes several attributes that make up the total criteria. For each attribute, scales were
developed to describe the range associated with each attribute and developed into a scoring matrix to
compare locations across Danville. This methodology is the same approach used in the SkatePark Site Analysis
and is a standard methodology used to determine the most attractive locations for developments.
Table 1. Four criteria were selected based on best practices across the US. Each of the criteria had 1 -6 attributes to
consider and score related to that criteria. The criteria and attributes are listed below.
• Each attribute was scored for each site. Each scale was numbered to indicate higher values were more positive
for the criteria. All attributes for each criteria were then totaled for each location and normalized (% out of
100). Using this method, strengths and weaknesses across locations for each of the criteria can be compared
and logically discussed.
• Stoplight charting was used to quickly see location comparisons.
o RED is lower on the criteria (0 -40%)
o YELLOW is middle of the road on the criteria (40 -80%)
o GREEN meets the needs of that criteria very well(80 -100%)
• Total scores across all criteria were also calculated to look at the ranking of sites. Normally weightings would be
applied to more important criteria based on specific project needs, but this was not done to keep the analysis
relative simple.
RESULTS
Table 2. Comparison of Potential Pickleball Sites around Danville using 4 criteria that are indicative of successful
pickleball facilities. The values in the table were calculated to indicate what % of the criteria each site met. Green is
good (meets 85-100% of the criteria), yellow moderate (meets 40 -85% of the criteria) and red is a problem (meets less
than 40% of the criteria).
Table 2 shows the results of using four criteria to compare potential pickleball sites. The intention of this table
is to highlight where some locations are stronger than others, indicate where further discussion is required and
to compare potential new sites to existing pickleball sites in the area. Real world benchmarks in the area were
included to understand the potential impact of a result for any given criteria.
The first point to highlight is similar scores for Osage Park and Rudgear Park, tied for last place in the ranking.
The similarities of these locations include the close proximity to houses (noise problems) and neighborhood
roads (traffic and parking problems). Both locations are designated to be lighting free, so there is no credit for
extended play times. The positive factor is that both are Parks with amenities available to players. Examining
the negative results and ultimate closing of Ruddgear Park(8 court) facility indicates what to expect from a
similar facility at Osage Park.
Contrast this to the criteria scores for the other two facilities already in place in Pleasanton and San Ramon .
The Muirwood(6 court) is not lighted and is closer to houses so it scores lower on those two criteria but the
difference for this location is that it sits next to I680 so the constant noise from the freeway overshadows the
noise potential from pickleball. The newer San Ramon(4 court) solution in Central Park is a great example of
site selection. Not in a residential area, lit for extended play 7:00AM- 10:00 PM, with parking and ample space
on the roadways. Because of the extended play with lights a four court solution actually gives similar play
hours to more courts that have to be schedule limited (because of noise or lighting).
RESULTS CONTINUED
This brings us to the alternative Danville locations and Sycamore Park is the most attractive in the rankings.
Three example locations at this park were scored with slightly different results. The common factor is that this
61-acre sport park is right off a major connector (Camino Tassajara-24,000 car capacity) with signal lights for
turning lanes at each of the two parking locations (east and west). Although in the front location houses are
across Camino Tassajara, the ambient noise from existing traffic overshadows potential pickleball noise. The
North location might include relocating the batting cage since the basketball court is in high demand. These
points are discussions to be had as the project moves forward. In total, costly and controversial mitigation
would not be required. July 13 2022 the PRC highlighted bathrooms and parking were farther than other
locations but since that time surveys of Pickleball players in other US locations indicate walking to amenities
and parking are fine and driving 20-30 minutes to a location is fine as long as they can play. This Park is
Danville’s largest and a destination for numerous sporting activities, it is lighted, on the bike path and park
activities continue until 10:00 PM with many sporting events.
Diablo Vista is high in the rankings because of access via a connector road, potential of lights and amenities.
The noise criteria is lower because a few houses are across the street from one potential location. This Park
was also discounted as too far from amenities (at the tennis court location) but that is not the case for other
areas of the Park. Sand volleyball and basketball areas are possible and these could easily be located in Osage
Park to increase inventory of those sports closer to town ! Oak Hill also scores in the top quartile due to being
away from houses, lots of parking and Stone Valley as the primary road with lights for turning lanes. It is
farther than Sycamore Park to downtown (10 vs. 5 minutes) but as indicated above this is well within the
tolerance found in pickleball player need surveys. This Park was not evaluated by the PRC because it was not
considered a sports park, but it does have sports and a wonderful community center that is so active and
vibrant with all ages going there for community meet ups and classes. Pickleball classes could be added to the
schedule. Hap Magee again not considered by the PRAC does score lower due to less parking and some areas
are closer to residential areas.
Non-park possibilities were illustrated with two scored locations and many other possible private buildings
could also be scored. What is obvious with these locations is they do not typically have park amenities, so
score low on that criteria. The biggest positive for non-park locations is being able to select something that can
be tailored to the pickleball community. Certainly, this is happening all over the US in other cities and even
here where vacant buildings are being used for pickleball locations with many features making them an
incredible destination.
CONCLUSION
This analysis was undertaken to identify potential alternatives to Osage Park for pickleball in response to the
July 2022 motion “ to continue to look for alternate sites”. The primary objective was to identify places that
meet pickleball needs without generating negative results for the community or negative press for Danville . I
am sure the PRAC and Town Council of Danville are interested in serving the whole community and care deeply
about the welfare, safety and future of our residential areas of the city. This is a moment to pause and be
logical about how to serve the pickleball needs of Danville. Other Town Councils are listening to and learning
from the issues, wasted resources and negative press in cities where sites were poorly selected. They are
making smart decisions based on what IS and IS NOT working elsewhere to avoid future problems. On July 13
2022 the PRAC motion included “ investigating alternate sites to Osage Park”. With closer examination, we
now know Osage Park has more negatives than positives and of the sites examined ties for the least attractive.
Knowledge highlights opportunity and The Danville Town Council can make a better choice.
APPENDIX A
TIMELINE
• November 2020 request for adding pickleball courts to Danville parks was presented to PRAC
• January 2021 decision made to convert a tennis court to pickleball. Inventory of Tennis courts was used to
identify Osage Park as the location to convert 1 tennis to pickleball. The rationale being Osage had 4 tennis
courts and could afford to loose one of those courts to pickleball. No locations were considered without tennis
courts THEREFORE Diablo Vista and Osage Parks were the choices.
• July 2022 the PR AC presented rationale to select Osage Park to expand pickleball courts to 14. Alternate sites
were listed in the materials, but no formal process was presented for comparison. The PRAC motion did
recommend Osage Park as the primary location to investigate in addition to looking for alternate sites.
• PRAC commentary for each location presented in July 2022
o Diablo Vista. Want to keep tennis courts and stated the courts are not “optimal for pickleball from an accessibility
standpoint due to their distance from the parking lot and restrooms. Other potential locations for new pickleball
courts at the park would be the existing basketball (2 courts) and/or sand volleyball (4 courts). Converting one or
both of these areas to pickleball would reduce the Town’s number of basketball courts to three and/or sand
volleyball courts to two.
o Sycamore. Grass area between the pond and playground (room for eight pickleball courts), and the basketball
courts (six pickleball courts). However, “ the grass area presents similar accessibility issues as Diablo Vista
Park, with both parking and restrooms being a relatively long distance away”. Additionally, the grass area
is the only real open, recreational space within the park. Opting to convert the basketball courts, which
continue to receive considerable use, would reduce the Town’s inventory to two.
o South Park. The only viable option at this site is likely the existing basketball court (1 court). Conversion of this
basketball court to pickleball would reduce the Town’s inventory to three.
o Hap Magee/Oak Hill/Schools. Excluded because they are passive parks and have historically not been considered
appropriate sites for sporting facilities, and the San Ramon Valley and Monte Vista High School tennis courts, as
access is restricted for large portions of the day
o Osage. Current facility has three tennis courts and two pickleball courts. Potential opportunities to expand the
facility exist both to the west and east of the existing courts. Expanding to the west, towards the parking lot,
could allow a total of three tennis courts and 10 pickleball. This area is currently underutilized and consists
of a grass knoll and trees. Expanding to the east, while still leaving enough of the grass for the youth athletic
leagues that currently use this area, could provide enough space for three tennis courts and 12 pickleball courts.
Alternatively, merging the two options and expanding in both directions could result in four tennis courts and 14
pickleball courts.
• July 2022-Nov 2023
o Community members became aware of the Osage Park expansion to 14 courts , protested and gave
testament/evidence to concerns of noise, traffic and safety. 1000s of concerned citizens of Danville
joined in protesting this location due to the 2 schools, heavy traffic already not to mention the 30 plus
houses surrounding the proposed site. The commission dismissed concerns but acquiesced to a CEQA
study to examine the noise and traffic/parking situation with 6 and 8 court
LITERATURE REVIEW (POST JULY 2022 RECOMMENDATION)
• Headlines: noise problems and traffic problems with new Pickleball courts
o Post July 2022 the news was just heating up with residential concerns for pickleball courts. Noise and
traffic were the themes that residents had no matter the location . Many towns listened and closed or
relocated courts in this early stage, but the only places where no issues occurred were areas of the US
having indoor locations. In fact, a growing number of courts across the US are indoor, with climate
control and extended playing hours. This has become a great business opportunity for many and similar
to the business model of tennis, racketball and squash.
o Tennis players continue to go on record since most locations are adjacent or sharing courts. The
continuous impulsive noise in addition to the sheer numbers of “waiting players” is not tolerable to a
well established sport, with highly organized play .
o This is not only National! Walnut Creek Rudgear Park is one of the hotspot locations that has caused the
town to have to relocate the 8 court facility. Countless hours of time have been spent explaining the
damage this pickleball location has caused to the people who live in that area. The theme in all of these
news stories and town meetings is that residents close to facilities do not dislike pickleball, they just
can’t tolerate the constant noise and traffic/parking congestion that neighborhood courts create. HOAs
and country clubs in the area have added courts to their facilities as well. Negative p etitions are in play
at Crow Canyon country club for example and HOA boards are dealing with complaints from tennis court
conversions in multiple Danville locations.
Figure 1. PICKLEBALL PROBLEM HOT SPOTS NOV 2023. RESIDENTS SITE NOISE/TRAFFIC/”QUALITY OF LIFE ”
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES
o Over 200 hotspots are in the US today regarding Pickleball locations. They are primarily regarding the
“quality of life concerns ” for residents close to pickleball courts that towns constructed. The universal
theme across all of these HOTSPOTS (lawsuits/complaints/closures) is that the pickleball courts were
located in a residential area, they are causing impulsive/disturbing noise, parking and traffic problems
for those residents. The location NOT THE SPORT causes complaints, risk of litigation or closure.
Everybody looses with poorly chosen locations for popular sports.
o Indoor venues do not show up in hot spots and are commonplace in many cities. They offer the most
control over the atmosphere and least affect on the community. Climate control is a huge plus in both
summer and winter for most US and Canada locations. They are popping up in empty building locations,
malls and downtown buildings that have been vacated since Covid. Danville has potential vacant
buildings, like Boswells Party Store, or Tuesday morning.
• All of the pickleball research/situations point to a minimum of 4 criteria for successful site selection
1. Away from residential areas (dont consider or have to mitigate <150ft and move toward 500ft+)
2. Easy access to large roadways
3. Ability to extend playing time with lighting
4. Nice to have is park amenities as long as the courts don’t displace existing park activities
• With this knowledge and the documented testimony regarding issues with Osage Park a true analysis was
completed to illustrate Danville has other-better options to create a wonderful location for pickleball.
1
December 11, 2023
To: The Town of Danville re: Pickleball Expansion at Osage Park
PART ONE - Background
The Town is proposing to add up to six pickleball courts at Osage Park where two pickleball and three tennis courts
already exist (The Project).
As part of an IniƟal CEQA study, the town planner completed the requisite environmental checklist for the Project. That
checklist indicated a need for a TransportaƟon Impact Analysis (TIA) study.
Env. Checklist Prompts KH Study 1
A traffic engineering firm, Kimley-Horn (KH), was commissioned to perform the TIA. KH submiƩed a TIA report (Report)
to the Town of Danville on November 3, 2023.
2
The KH Report concluded: “[The Project] will result in a less than significant impact.”
The Town of Danville Planner concluded. “I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this iniƟal evaluaƟon:
X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
❒ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❒ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
❒ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potenƟally significant impact" or "potenƟally significant unless miƟgated"
impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by miƟgaƟon measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
aƩached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be
addressed.
❒ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potenƟally
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable
standards, and (b) have been avoided or miƟgated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
revisions or miƟgaƟon measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Town Planner’s Intent to declare a negaƟve declaraƟon
On November 20, 2023 a NegaƟve DeclaraƟon for the project was signed and released by the Associate Town Planner.
_____________________________________________________________
The following is record of inquiry to the November 3, 2023, KH Report and the Town’s use of the Report for the basis of
its subsequent negaƟve declaraƟon.
_____________________________________________________________
3
PART TWO - Summary
The KH Report concludes that the Project will have a “less than significant impact”. However, a n examinaƟon of the KH
Report’s data, methods and analysis proves that the Project will likely have a significant impact on the neighborhood.
Furthermore, The KH Report cannot be used by the Town of Danville as a basis for a negaƟve declaraƟon as it:
(i) does not adequately contraindicate CEQA checklist item (a); “PotenƟally Significant Impact for “ConflicƟng
with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulatory system, including transit roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian faciliƟes”
(ii) nor does it verify CEQA checklist item (b); “Less than Significant Impact on CEQA 15064.3 subsecƟon (b).”
Summary Points:
Methodology
1. The Traffic and Parking Data used in the KH Report is disqualifying as they were collected on dates that are in
violaƟon to the Traffic CounƟng Protocol specified by the Contra Costa TransportaƟon Analysis Guidelines.
2. The North Orange Blossom Way traffic counƟng cordon was installed at a locaƟon that provided an under-
reported (Average Daily Volume) ADV on North Orange Blossom Way.
3. The parking data uses an unrepresentaƟve hours. (7 AM to 6 PM only).
Analysis
4. Level of Service (LOS), v/c and Growth Rate should have been reported and considered in the KH Report. LOS, as
defined in the Danville 2030 General Plan as roadway volume/capacity raƟo, is the sƟll town’s policy for Roadway
Segment Analysis. Although not CEQA, LOS recognized as a legiƟmate modality of measurement in the CCTA
Guidelines.
5. The KH Report ’s projecƟon is that the Project will come within 2 vehicles of exceeding the road’s 1,500 car
capacity while also showing that it will create unacceptable Levels of LOS E and LOS F thereby breaching the
2030 Town General LOS policy of, “LOS D or beƩer”. Using Tennis+ data as the basis for its Trip Volume EsƟmated
guess.
6. The traffic impact on the “Safe Routes to School IniƟaƟve” is not considered.
7. The report mischaracterizes the parking lots’ filling sequence from pickleball leading to erroneous conclusions.
The lots will not fill evenly. All new traffic will go to the South Lot first.
VMT
8. The CEQA Vehicles Miles Travelled (VMT) secƟon uses an incomplete list of screening criteria.
9. The VMT secƟon makes assumpƟons and claims that are contradictory and unsupported.
10. VMT has not been adopted by Danville and does not appear in the 2030 Town General Plan. In such cases, other
‘local’ standards may be allowed by CEQA.
11. Other Town Traffic Impact reports have used LOS as the singular and only comparaƟve metric in determining
impact. Osage Project should be allowed the same.
12. Impact Tolerance levels for Trip GeneraƟon Growth Rate change due to Land Use Projects could not be fully
ascertained but using others used in California towns, it is show that the Impact rate is egregious It is requested
that the town produce any standards for trip or parking volumes that a development project can introduce or
induce into an established area.
13. Future forecasƟng is absent. The changing ambient neighborhood demographics, school populaƟons and
commuƟng levels were neither considered nor projected for future potenƟal impact.
_____________________________________________________________
4
PART THREE - Methodology
Traffic and Parking Data were collected on improper days. The CCTA Guideline States:
“Traffic counts for traffic impact studies, level of service monitoring, and any other applica Ɵon intended to
represent prevailing traffic condiƟons at a given locaƟon should be conducted in accordance with the following
provisions:
a. During Fair Weather – Counts should be conducted in fair weather, without rain, flooding, heavy winds,
or other adverse weather condiƟons that could disrupt the flow of traffic;
b. On Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday of a non-holiday week when public schools are in session – which
may include but not be limited to New Year’s Day, MarƟn Luther King Day, President’s Day, Memorial
Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. (Refer to school district
calendar to verify official holidays.)
c. Typical School Day –Counts should be taken on typical school days avoiding half days, late start days and
early-dismissal days whenever possible. “
Wednesday May 24, 2023, Thursday May 25, 2023, Saturday May 27, 2023, and June 3, 2023 were data collecƟon days
documented in the report.
Wednesday May 24, 2023, was a late-start day for school. (The data shows it).
Both Wednesday May 24, 2023, and Thursday May 25, 2023, preceded the long Memorial Day long weekend.
Saturday May 23, 2023, WAS the long weekend and on June 3, 2023, school recessed for the summer.
The El Capitan data is from September 2021 during covid.
As per Contra Costa County TransportaƟon Analysis Guidelines, this data should not be used for the traffic impact
analysis.
_____________________________________________________________
5
For its roadway capacity analysis, KH used data from 3 trip measuring cordons (installed by the town) to interpret
Average Daily Volume (ADV) for 3 road segments (Figure 1, below). They are “n/o” (North Orange Blossom Way), “s/o”
(South Orange Blossom Way) and “e/o” (East of Orange Blossom Way / Parking Driveway). A fourth ADV dataset was
used from a Town of Danville 2021 study, for the segment of El Capitan, East of OBW.
The North Orange Blossom Way Cordon was installed at a poor locaƟon. It excludes 100% of the trips made by the
residents, trade people and delivery drivers who leave/enter to and from only the north, mulƟple Ɵmes per day, for 45
homes. Town of Danville uses ITE Trip GeneraƟon for a single residence at 10.5 trips per home per day. If only half went
in and out of the north, this would result in (10.5/2*45) 236 missed trips. Therefore, the 1,049 ADV value, for the North
Orange Blossom Way segment, under-reports and is incorrect.
_____________________________________________________________
For Parking data, the KH Report only used the hours of 7 AM - 6 PM. These should be extended to 6AM – 9 PM. People
will arrive early and play late. This is well documented. AddiƟonally, KH co-opted a distribuƟon borrowed from an
InsƟtute of Transport Engineers (ITE) esƟmate for Raquet / Tennis Club distribuƟon. The use of a pre-covid parking
distribuƟon from a paid membership indoor club is neither ideal nor applicable to a free outdoor Californian Pickleball
Complex.
There is “Private Parking/Unauthorized vehicles will be towed” Sign at the Charlo Ʃe Wood School Lot. Is Pickleball
parking to be an Authorized Parking classificaƟon? How will this be communicated? ClarificaƟon is requested.
_____________________________________________________________
“e/o“s/o
“n/o”
Figure 1
6
PART FOUR - Analysis
Relevant Report and Agency InformaƟon about Roadway Analysis
A. The KH report states:
“Roadway analysis was evaluated at each of the four (4) study roadway segments using the
methodology consistent with the 2030 Town of Danville General Plan roadway capacity thresholds. Daily
roadway volumes were analyzed rather than peak hour volumes since roadway capaci Ɵes provided in the
general plan are based on vehicles per day rather than vehicles per hour. Roadway segments are
assumed to the deficient when daily volumes exceed the capacity defined for its roadway classifica Ɵon.”
B. The Town of Danville General Plan states:
(i) “SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL: Safe Routes to School (SRTS) programs are intended to improve safety and
accessibility to schools and reduce air polluƟon and traffic around school campuses. They require
sustained efforts by parents, schools, community leaders and government to improve the health and
well-being of children by enabling and encouraging them to walk or bicycle to school.”
(ii) “Historically, and consistent with standard pracƟce in most ciƟes, the performance of streets and
intersecƟons in Danville has been expressed through a measurement called “Level of Service” (LOS). In
traffic engineering pracƟce, streets and intersecƟons are classified into six “levels of service” reflecƟng
the degree of traffic congesƟon. Like a leƩered report card, streets are graded on a scale from “A” to “F.”
The grades are based on the volume of vehicles passing through an intersecƟon or along a street
segment relaƟve to the design capacity of that street or intersecƟon (this is also called the volume to
capacity raƟo, or V/C raƟo). LOS “A” indicates free f lowing traffic with no delays. LOS “F” indicates
jammed condiƟons, with long delays. In the past, Danville has used LOS “D” as the benchmark for
defining the adequacy of a road’s performance during the peak hour. “
C. The Contra Costa County General Plan States:
Contra Costa County – General Plan “Growth Management Element”
7
D. The Conta Costa Traffic TransportaƟon Analysis Guidelines States:
E. Other California Traffic Impact Reports from (2020 and 2021) Cite V/C Project Related Increases for metrics
on acceptability of projects. San Gabriel, CA and Alhambra, CA.
_____________________________________________________________
All of the Agencies’ sƟpulaƟons above make “LOS” and “V/C Change” legiƟmate and criƟcal Traffic Impact elements to
consider.
_____________________________________________________________
8
ApplicaƟon of Data
The KH Report displays the capacity Scenarios based on its esƟmates in the Report’s Table 9 (below). The exisƟng traffic
is 1,251 ADV. With proposed Scenario 1, there will be 164 esƟmated new trips added to this count. Scenario 2 will add an
esƟmated 273. From this, the KH Report makes the singular conclusion:
“all roadway segment volumes under exisƟng plus project condiƟons are
below the capacity threshold.”
The KH Report’s ‘analysis’ which consists of ‘just seeing if the number is over 1,500 or not’ does not go far enough. Some
would think 1,497 is cuƫng it too close. Metrics like Growth Rate, Impact Significance Thresholds (v/c change), LOS and
Volume/Capacity permit more considered thought and comparison to established standards, policies, and ini ƟaƟves;
specifically, those listed in the Relevant InformaƟon secƟon above.
For report comparison, in its December 14, 2018 Traffic Impact Study Report for 2550 Camino Tassajara, TJKM measured
Traffic Impact only against Town of Danville LOS standards for its conclusions . It concluded that because all project
traffic will conƟnue to operate at LOS D or beƩer, the project will pose no significant impact. Since Danville (i) uses these
same standards today (and has not adopted VMT) and (ii) the KH Report shows that, unlike the TJKM Report, LOS D will
be breached, how can ‘no significant impact’ be approved for the Project?
9
USING KH Provided Traffic Count DATA ONLY:
Below are the proposed KH Report numbers. If looked at more criƟcally than as tables in report, they show that the
project cannot conƟnue.
Scenario 1 will breach the Town’s LOS D policy benchmark.
Scenario 2 will breach the Town’s LOS D policy benchmark AND is within 1-2 visitors of breaching the 1,500 ADV
capacity AND thereby degrading to LOS F.
Growth Rates (new trip introducƟons) are 13% & 20%.
Impact Significance Thresholds are exceeded by 500% and 800%
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way - Current Volume/Capacity
௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵଶହଵ
ଵହ = 0.834 ~ LOS D
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way - SCENARIO 1 (6 Courts)
1,251 + 0.9 * 182 = 1,415 ADT
CAPACITY: ௩௨ (்)
௧௬ = ଵସଵହ
ଵହ = 0.943 ~ LOS E (BREACHED STD.)
IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE = 0.943 – 0.834 = 0.11 (BREACHED Threshold by 550%)
% GROWTH RATE: ௪ ௧௦
௫௦௧ ௧௦ : ଵ଼ଶ∗.ଽ
ଵଶହଵ = +13%
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way - SCENARIO 2 (8 Courts)
1,251 + 0.9 * 273 = 1,497 ADT
CAPACITY: ௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵସଽ
ଵହ = 0.998 ~ LOS E (BREACH STD, pracƟcally at F.)
IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE = 0.998 – 0.834 = 0.16 (BREACHED Threshold by 800%)
GROWTH RATE: ௪ ௧௦
௫௦௧ ௧௦ : ଶଷ∗.ଽ
ଵଶହଵ = +20%
_____________________________________________________________
There are a vast number of kids who walk and bike to the park and to the John Baldwin and CharloƩe Wood schools, and
even to San Ramon Valley High School. On a typical school day in November 2002, 524 kids on foot or bicycle were
counted. For now, the streets and drivers barely allow for it. As recent as December 5, 2023, there was an injury between
a car and pedestrian at Orange Blossom Way and El Capitan in the morning. This freedom for children is unique to the
town and a cherished defining aƩribute of the neighborhood. The proposiƟon that someone from the neighborhood can
walk or bike to school for their enƟre 13 years of pre-college educaƟon is something that should be preserved at ALL
costs.
10
The Federal Government and the Town of Danville agree. Adopted by the Town of Danville, The Federal (DOT) “Safe
Route to Schools IniƟaƟve” (SRTS), promotes reducing traffic around schools and encouraging walking and bicycling to
school. In no case can the promoƟon of and the compliance to SRTS co-exist with the intenƟonal creaƟon of capacity
and policy breaching volumes of new traffic around schools. More cars mean more traffic, more air polluƟon and less
safety. More people driving from out of the area means more K-turns, curb searching and parking conundrums. To add to
the cycle, addiƟonal induced traffic will result in a safety shiŌ to car transport and, overall, fewer children will be walking
or bicycling. The KH report claims that there will be no significant impact, but the data clearly says it will.
_____________________________________________________________
It is probable that the Tennis+ esƟmate of 45.5 Trips per day is not fully in-line with the populaƟon, popularity of
pickleball and the inventory in the tri-valley area.
Residents from Dublin, Pleasanton, San Ramon, Danville Walnut Creek = approximately 250,000.
Number of outdoor free dedicated pickleball courts = approximately 20. 40% of those (8 at Rudgear, ill suited, in a
neighborhood) have reduced their hours to having the effecƟve availability of 4 courts.
Increasing the volume of courts in Osage Park will potenƟally create a doubling of an already capacity breaching traffic
volume (from 45 to 70-100 from a simple google search below). It would result in a deluge of traffic and create a
pickleball hotbed in a quiet neighborhood.
_____________________________________________________________
11
The KH Study notes that there are 318 available parking spots in the 3 Parking Lots. Osage North Lot has 132, Charlo Ʃe
Wood Lot has 122 and the South Lot (the pickleball lot) has 64. In the KH proposed parking demand, the below is
presented:
The KH study aggregates all parking capacity into one denominator (318) for determining current and future occupaƟon
percentages. Since all new parking demand will come from pickleball desƟned cars, the South Lot should be the principal
focus of any traffic parking study related to the Project, as it will fill first. TreaƟng all three lots as an even probability for
Pickleball parking is misguided. In fact, observaƟon shows that the South lot will fill first, then the street parking on
Orange Blossom Way around the south lot will fill, then Orange Blossom Way (adjacent to the cut-through pathway) will
fill and then the North Osage and CharloƩe Wood lots will fill. This paƩern is evident now, at school pick up and when
the park is full.
12
The KH proposed parking numbers with a focus on the South Lot are (re)shown below.
OSAGE STATION SOUTH (Capacity = 64)
Existing Scenario 1 Scenario 2
64 % Occupied Proposed % Occupied Proposed % Occupied
7:00 AM 11 17% 9 31% 14 39%
8:00 AM 12 19% 9 33% 14 41%
9:00 AM 21 33% 9 47% 14 55%
10:00 AM 23 36% 9 50% 14 58%
11:00 AM 23 36% 10 52% 15 59%
12:00 PM 17 27% 11 44% 17 53%
1:00 PM 13 20% 14 42% 21 53%
2:00 PM 23 36% 15 59% 23 72%
3:00 PM 7 11% 16 36% 24 48%
4:00 PM 18 28% 16 53% 24 66%
5:00 PM 19 30% 14 52% 21 63%
6:00 PM 24 38% 10 53% 16 63%
This data shows that the parking lot will, on average, never be more than 38% full now. With the addiƟon of 6 courts, it
will max out at 72% capacity, even at school drop off and pick-up Ɵmes.
Previous challenges to the parking data, its limited hours, collecƟon Ɵme and use of a co-opted distribuƟon were made
in the Methodology SecƟon of this document. But, in using the data with the hours and distribuƟon as presented by KH,
one car per player, it appears that for an average 12 hour weekday period, there could be a projected demand for 142
new cars arriving for the South Lot over a 12 hour period (284 Trips) for Scenario 1 and 217 new cars arriving for Scenario
2 (434 Trips). From KH distribuƟon esƟmates used previously, it is predicted that 90% of them will arrive and leave by
South Orange Blossom Way.
13
Using these KH numbers, a new calculaƟon of the South Orange Blossom Way capacity shows even more alarming
capacity and growth rate problems.
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way Current Volume/Capacity and LOS
௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵଶହଵ
ଵହ = 0.834 ~ LOS D
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way with Parking EsƟmate - SCENARIO 1 (6 Courts)
1,251 + 0.9 * 284 = 1,507 ADT
CAPACITY: ௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵହ
ଵହ = 1.004 ~ LOS F CAPACITY EXCEEDED
IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE = 1.004 – 0.834 = 0.17 (BREACHED Threshold by 850%)
GROWTH RATE: ௪ ௧௦
௫௦௧ ௧௦ : ଶ଼ସ∗.ଽ
ଵଶହଵ = +20%
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way with - Parking EsƟmate SCENARIO 2 (8 Courts)
1,251 + 0.9 * 434 = 1,642 ADT
௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵସଶ
ଵହ = 1.094 ~ LOS F CAPACITY EXCEEDED
IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE = 1.094 – 0.834 = 0.26 (BREACHED Threshold by 1,300%)
GROWTH RATE: ௪ ௧௦
௫௦௧ ௧௦ : ସଷସ∗.ଽ
ଵଶହଵ = +31%
_____________________________________________________________
14
Perhaps a more realisƟc alternaƟve is to base the proposed traffic volume and hours on free pickleball outdoor courts
elsewhere in California.
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way Current Volume/Capacity and LOS
௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵଶହଵ
ଵହ = 0.834 ~ LOS D
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way with SCENARIO 1 - CONSERVATIVE SCENARIO 1 (6 Courts)
1,251 + 0.9 * 16 cars * 12 hours * 2 = 1,635 ADT
CAPACITY: ௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵଷହ
ଵହ = 1.09 ~ LOS F CAPACITY EXCEEDED
IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE = 1.094 – 0.834 = 0.26 (BREACHED Threshold by 1,300%)
GROWTH RATE: ௪ ௧௦
௫௦௧ ௧௦ : ଷ଼ସ∗.ଽ
ଵଶହଵ = +28%
_____________________________________________________________
South Orange Blossom Way with - CONSERVATIVE SCENARIO 2 (8 Courts)
1,251 + 0.9 * 24 cars * 12 hours * 2 = 1,821 ADT
௩௨ (்)
௧௬ : ଵ
ଵହ = 1.180 ~ LOS F CAPACITY EXCEEDED
IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE = 1.180 – 0.834 = 0.346 (BREACHED Threshold by 1,700%)
GROWTH RATE: ௪ ௧௦
௫௦௧ ௧௦ : ସଷସ∗.ଽ
ଵଶହଵ = +41%
_____________________________________________________________
These calculaƟons show an unimaginable, yet possible, capacity impact and growth rate.
_____________________________________________________________
15
PART FIVE: VMT Screening
For transport studies,
“Danville has not adopted any CEQA thresholds for [Vehicle Miles Travelled] VMT”.
Rather, Danville uses Level of Service (LOS) and daily volume/daily capacity as standards. Since there is no Danville official
standard with which to compare VMT, we should use LOS as a metric.
Because of CEQA, VMT runs deep in the KH Report. The following needs clarificaƟon. The CCTA Guidelines Manual has
several listed screening criteria available to those studying transportaƟon impacts under CEQA “in order to quickly
determine if a proposed project should be expected to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.” The KH Report avails itself of
this opƟon and sets out to see if it can quickly ‘screen out’ the Project from a “detailed VMT” analysis by declaring ‘less
than significant impact’. The KH Report eventually concludes that the screening criteria have been met and a less than
significant impact applies to the Project. The KH Reports used these two screening criteria for the screening:
“Projects of 10,000 square feet or less of non-residential space or 20 residential units or less, or
otherwise generating less than 836 VMT per day.”
“Public facilities (e.g. emergency services, passive parks (low-intensity recreation, open space),
libraries, community centers, public utilities) and government buildings.”
As stated above and cited below from the CEQA CCTA Guideline Manual criterion Item “(ii)” was used as a screening
criterion but (i) was not. Why not?
“(i) Projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips; or
(ii) Projects of 10,000 square feet or less of non-residential space or 20 residential units or less, or
otherwise generating less than 836 VMT per day.”
The KH Report stated that, at a minimum, 182 trips would be generated. This value exceeds the omiƩed screening
criterion (i) almost by half. Why was this screening criterion neither menƟoned nor measured nor included in the
screening assessment, to be sure?
The KH Report esƟmates that the average vehicle miles travelled that would be generated from the Project would fall
under the screening threshold of 836 VMT. (VMT=L*T). It arrives at this crude baseless esƟmaƟon by dividing the
screening threshold value (836) by 182 esƟmated New Trips (Scenario 1) and 273 esƟmated New Trips (Scenario 2) and
thus concluding that the average distance to the courts per driver is 2.3 miles or 1.5 miles, respecƟvely. This math is a
backdoor calculaƟon toward an esƟmaƟon that favors a screen out result. You cannot solve for “L” in this manner. You
need to know “L”. A further VMT full analysis may provide “L”; and a mean and a standard deviaƟon and an either normal
or unbalanced histogram and distribuƟon for a more carefully projected VMT.
The KH Report doubles down on the math’s esƟmates in staƟng that these concocted average esƟmated distances (2.3
miles and 1.5 miles) are likely to be reasonable because collecƟvely (i) “most trips to the courts are assumed to be
generated by people within the town and, on average, within those distances” (ii) “the courts are assumed to be a locally
serving public facility and the users would come from predominantly within the town” and (iii) assume that local traffic
“from the north would likely walk or bicycle” (ed: “what!?”). Yet, KH then discloses: “However because a trip length
study of exisƟng trips was not conducted, it cannot be concluded whether the 836 daily VMT threshold would be
[exceeded].” How can KH admit this and then conclude that the project would result in a less than significant impact?
The screening conclusion, ‘no impact’ claim is unsupported and even doubted by KH. It is an admission of data that is
16
essenƟal for a correct screen assessment, but not collected. Per CEQA Subsec Ɵon 15064.3 (b) any esƟmaƟons for VMT
must be appropriately thought out and documented and explained.
CCTA Technical Guidelines for local projects are defined as “local-serving uses are uses expected to draw users from no
more than a 2-3 mile radius.” The KH reported average, 1.5 miles, doesn’t even go as far as Danville Livery. The Project is
2 miles from Downtown Danville, about 6 miles from each of Alamo, Blackhawk, San Ramon and 10 + miles to Dublin and
Walnut Creek. This cannot be called a local project. The KH report believes that it is; “the users of the project would come
from the general vicinity of the project or predominantly within the town”. Even the slightest empirical informaƟon
suggests that free pickleball has the potenƟal to be played all day every day by people with flexible schedules who carry
both the willingness and socioeconomic means to travel considerable distances. Given the populaƟon and closures and
pickleball inventory of the Tri-Valley area saying it is local does not make sense. Independent Pickleball studies have
shown that the average desired and acceptable distance is 20 minutes in duraƟon. Considering all of this and the pie
chart below, “local” cannot be reasonably claimed. If it is not considered a local Project, then it is a Regional Project. And,
per CCTA Technical Guidelines, it would automaƟcally require a detailed VMT.
_____________________________________________________________
The exploration into whether the pickleball courts will be 10,000 ft2 or not, is confusing. Surely, this 10,000 ft2
criteria is for some kind of dwelling, commercial or indoor space. Clarification on the exploration of this point is
requested.
_____________________________________________________________
Danville
46%
San Ramon
25%
Alamo &
Diablo
6%
Walnut Creek &
Pleasanton
10%
Castro Valley,
Oakland,
Livermore, Orinda,
Clayton, San
Francisco, San
Bruno, Other
13%
Tax/Residency of the 141 players who wrote to Town saying they
play/woudl play and urging Pickleball at Osage
17
PART SIX – Other
In the Transport SecƟons of the CEQA Environmental Checklist (Shown on First page), the Project was idenƟfied as
having:
1. PotenƟally Significant Impact for “ConflicƟng with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the
circulatory system, including transit roadway, bicycle and pedestrian faciliƟes.
Response: The Project has been shown in the KH Report and in this Document to absolutely conflict with LOS
and V/C capacity policies and Federal and Town IniƟaƟves.
2. Less than Significant Impact on CEQA 15064.3 subsecƟon (b).
As per CEQA SubsecƟon 15064.3 (b), which reads:
(b) Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts.(1) Land Use Projects. Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable
threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an existing
major transit stop or a stop along an existing high quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant
transportation impact. Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should
be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.(2) Transportation Projects. Transportation projects that
reduce, or have no impact on, vehicle miles traveled should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact.
For roadway capacity projects, agencies have discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation impact
consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements. To the extent that such impacts have already been adequately
addressed at a programmatic level, such as in a regional transportation plan EIR, a lead agency may tier from that analysis
as provided in Section 15152.(3) Qualitative Analysis. If existing models or methods are not available to estimate the vehicle
miles traveled for the particular project being considered, a lead agency may analyze the project's vehicle miles traveled
qualitatively. Such a qualitative analysis would evaluate factors such as the availability of transit, proximity to other
destinations, etc. For many projects, a qualitative analysis of construction traffic may be appropriate.(4) Methodology. A
lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project's vehicle miles traveled,
including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency
may use models to estimate a project's vehicle miles traveled, and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment
based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revisions to model outputs
should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in
Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.
Response: Among the other claims and conclusions challenged by this document, the KH Report claims that
people in Danville who travel to pickleball will no longer have to travel out of town and, overall, fewer miles
will be travelled. This cannot be claimed without any supporƟng data or detailed study. There will likely be
more people coming from locally and more people from afar to play pickleball, as there will be 40% more
free pickleball courts available than before.
_____________________________________________________________
The lowest designated capacity level for a road in Danville is 1,500 ADV. The logic presented by the Roadway Segment
Analysis is that a Land Use project can introduce up to as many trips as the capacity of the road is designated. For
example, a small sleepy street with a 20 ADV will carry a town appointed capacity of 1,500 ADV. Can a land use project
be introduced that brings in an addiƟonal 1,477 ADV, for a total of 1,497 ADV? Strictly using the output of the KH Report
and supporƟng negaƟve declaraƟon by the town, this would appear to cause ‘no significant impact’.
This document’s research was unable to ascertain tolerance levels for Growth Rate change or V/C impact capacity
thresholds (so it uses the San Gabriel and Kimley-Horn Alhambra Traffic Impact Studies) due to Land Use Projects. It is
requested that the town produce any standards for trip or parking volumes that a development project can introduce
into an established area.
18
_____________________________________________________________
The 2030 General Plan states “local roads” are rated at 1,500. The Danville NTMP plan states “Traffic Volumes that
exceed the “environmental capacity” of the residenƟal roadway, where the threshold is generally 1200 vehicles per day.”
If 1,500 is the lowest for all local streets, where does the 1,200 threshold come from? ClarificaƟon, please.
_____________________________________________________________
Commentary
In 2009, Orange Blossom Way ADV was 1,400; much higher than today. At that Ɵme, school enrollment at John Baldwin
and CharloƩe Wood Schools was 25% and 10% higher. People were commuƟng. During covid, many young couples
moved into the area from the city, Marin and the Peninsula. They have gone on the record with Town Council to say they
moved here for their kids’ safety and freedom, not found where they were. They now have babies and toddlers and, like
everyone, are concerned about the changes the Project will bring. There was a record (50+) preschool aged children Trick
or TreaƟng on Halloween on Orange Blossom this year. These changing condiƟons are real and imminent, and the future
must be part of traffic impact consideraƟon set.
WE ALL know that the volume of traffic is unacceptable and dangerous today. EVERBODY in this town has acknowledged
this; The Town Council, The Traffic Supervisor, The P&R Commission, the Schools, the Parents, the pickleball players, the
residents.
The KH report explicitly demonstrates that the Project will breach Federal and Local Government standards and
iniƟaƟves by creaƟng traffic volumes that are even WORSE than the unacceptable and dangerous volumes of today. It
has not adequately screened out of the need for a detailed CEQA and CEQA VMT analysis.
_____________________________________________________________
The Expansion of Pickleball in Osage Project should not, and cannot, proceed.
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
19
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:Laura Miller
Cc:Gail Massagli
Subject:RE: Osage Park - Please Preserve
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:22:00 AMLaura, Thank you for your email. Your public comment has been received by the Park,Recreation, and Arts Commission for its next meeting on December 13, 2023. We arecurrently in a public review period of a negative declaration of environmentalsignificance and studies conducted associated with the proposed project. TheCommission will discuss this item at its next meeting. Information about this item,including the studies conducted and previous reports, can be found at the followingwebsite: https://danvilletowntalks.org/pickle-ball Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
From: Laura Miller <laurareimersmiller@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 5:44 AM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>; Adam Falcon <afalcon@danville.ca.gov>;
Addison Brown <abrown@danville.ca.gov>; Jenna Mesic <jmesic@danville.ca.gov>; Randall Diamond
<rdiamond@danville.ca.gov>; Kevin Donovan <kdonovan@danville.ca.gov>; Jane Joyce
<jjoyce@danville.ca.gov>; Joe Lindsey <jlindsey@danville.ca.gov>; Charles Neary
<cneary@danville.ca.gov>; Carol Mascali <cmascali@danville.ca.gov>; Newell Arnerich
<NArnerich@danville.ca.gov>; Robert Storer <RStorer@danville.ca.gov>; Karen Stepper
<KStepper@danville.ca.gov>; David Fong <dfong@danville.ca.gov>; Renee Morgan
<RMorgan@danville.ca.gov>
Subject: Osage Park - Please Preserve
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Dear all,
I am writing regarding the proposal to add additional pickleball courts to Osage Park. I
currently live directly behind the tennis courts/pickleball courts on El Capitan. When we
moved in 9 years ago, we chose this house due to the proximity to the schools and wonderful
park. While we enjoy the noise of children playing and tennis, the pickleball court noise has
been disruptive and very upsetting. When we sit outside to enjoy dinner with our extended
family the pickleball noise is jarring and unpleasant.
When I heard of the potential to expand, my heart sank. The idea of more pickleball courts is
extremely upsetting and concerning to our neighborhood. We love where we live and
collectively agree that more pickleball courts will ruin our outdoor experience in our own
backyard and significantly decrease our home values. In addition, the increased congestion
will be significant on the surrounding residential streets as the pickleball players will be forced
to park where they can, including, but not limited to drop-off areas and the lot at Charlotte
Wood Middle School.
The community this directly impacts does not want the noise, or excessive amounts of pickle
ball courts in their backyard. We are all urging you to initiate a comprehensive study to
identify a more favorable and appropriate location. Please do what is best to preserve our
amazing neighborhood and Osage Park. The long-term impact of adding more pickleball
courts will be devasting to the community and cause significant problems.
Sincerely,
Laura Reimers
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:Traci Krueger
Cc:Gail Massagli
Subject:RE: Alternative location to Osage Park for Pickleball
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:23:08 AMTraci, Thank you for your email. The Park, Recreation, and Arts Commission has received yourpublic comment for its next meeting on December 13, 2023. We are currently in a publicreview period of a negative declaration of environmental significance and studiesconducted associated with the proposed project. The Commission will discuss this itemat its next meeting. Information about this item, including the studies conducted andprevious reports, can be found at the following website:https://danvilletowntalks.org/pickle-ball Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
From: Traci Krueger <tracilrolfe@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 7:09 AM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>; Adam Falcon <afalcon@danville.ca.gov>;
Addison Brown <abrown@danville.ca.gov>; Jenna Mesic <jmesic@danville.ca.gov>; Randall Diamond
<rdiamond@danville.ca.gov>; Kevin Donovan <kdonovan@danville.ca.gov>; Jane Joyce
<jjoyce@danville.ca.gov>; Joe Lindsey <jlindsey@danville.ca.gov>; Charles Neary
<cneary@danville.ca.gov>; Carol Mascali <cmascali@danville.ca.gov>; Newell Arnerich
<NArnerich@danville.ca.gov>; Robert Storer <RStorer@danville.ca.gov>; Karen Stepper
<KStepper@danville.ca.gov>; David Fong <dfong@danville.ca.gov>; Renee Morgan
<RMorgan@danville.ca.gov>
Subject: Alternative location to Osage Park for Pickleball
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Please initiate a comprehensive study to identify a more favorable and appropriate
location to build a pickleball center than Osage park. Aside from the noise and
increased traffic that will infringe on home-owners it certainly poses a safety risk to
have a daily influx of strangers coming to a facility sitting right next to a middle
school. It seems a recipe for disaster not to mention lawsuits. Would you want that
near your home and children? I certainly would not and more thought needs to be
given when selecting to build something so impactful to the entire community.
Thank you,
Traci Krueger
From:Chris Coles
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:Osage Park Pickleball Courts
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 10:11:57 AM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
Hi Gail,
In regards to the upcoming agenda item 5.1 on December 13, I am in FAVOR of adding 6
additional Pickleball courts at Osage Park.
Thank you for your assistance.
Chris Coles
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:adrienne kolowich cummings
Cc:Gail Massagli
Subject:RE: no more pickleball courts at Osage
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 11:32:28 AMAdrienne, Thank you for your email. The Park, Recreation, and Arts Commission has received yourpublic comment for its next meeting on December 13, 2023. We are currently in a publicreview period of a negative declaration of environmental significance and studiesconducted associated with the proposed project. The Commission will discuss this itemat its next meeting. Information about this item, including the studies conducted andprevious reports, can be found at the following website:https://danvilletowntalks.org/pickle-ball Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
From: adrienne kolowich cummings <adrienne1146@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 10:35 AM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>; Adam Falcon <afalcon@danville.ca.gov>;
Addison Brown <abrown@danville.ca.gov>; Jenna Mesic <jmesic@danville.ca.gov>; Randall Diamond
<rdiamond@danville.ca.gov>; Kevin Donovan <kdonovan@danville.ca.gov>; Jane Joyce
<jjoyce@danville.ca.gov>; Joe Lindsey <jlindsey@danville.ca.gov>; Charles Neary
<cneary@danville.ca.gov>; Carol Mascali <cmascali@danville.ca.gov>; Newell Arnerich
<NArnerich@danville.ca.gov>; Robert Storer <RStorer@danville.ca.gov>; Karen Stepper
<KStepper@danville.ca.gov>; David Fong <dfong@danville.ca.gov>; Renee Morgan
<RMorgan@danville.ca.gov>
Cc: Adrienne Cummings <adrienne1146@yahoo.com>; williiamfcummings@gmail.com
Subject: no more pickleball courts at Osage
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Town Council and Park and Rec Commission,
I am a pickleball and tennis player. I love both. One is noisy the other not so much. I
love dogs too, my 3 and any other dog (we foster for a local shelter). I also live near
Osage (not within noise distance) and have lived in Shadow Hills since 2007.
I have attended past meetings where these pickleball courts have been discussed.
There are other locations that are less disruptive than Osage; Sycamore has tons of
space NOT near houses. Why not go build them new in an area that would cause
less problems for loyal Danville residents who have lived there longer than probably
most of you. We all know how much we look forward to retirement and how hard we
work to get there. Many residents are retired, enjoying their life next to this park they
walk daily. Many other parks have added pickleball courts as well only to have
lawsuits imposed on them. Why not learn from example? I could list many articles but
you could simply Google "lawsuit pickleball courts residents". Here is one. It would
be irresponsible of you in your role/position to approve this knowing other towns have
put themselves in a legal storm.
Another point - by adding these courts as a "East Bay Pickleball Destination," would
be negligible considering there is a middle school next door. Pickleball players will
park in Charlotte Woods parking lot possibly during school because the Osage lot by
the tennis courts isn't big enough. You will be having strangers walking past students
who are doing PE or other outdoor activities which I think is just asking for trouble.
I have attended police meetings that have discussed dogs off leash at Osage. A dog
park at Osage seems to be a bigger need than Pickleball courts at Osage. Not a
fenced in area (because we have those options at Hap McGee, but an area for dogs
to run free with responsible owners. Many of us attended this meeting and have
heard nothing since, where we brainstormed with Captain Shields.
I hope you consider these points.
Sincerely,
Adrienne Cummings
(925) 336-0310
From:Henry Perezalonso
To:Carl Taibl
Cc:Gail Massagli; _Parks Recreation and Arts Commission
Subject:RE: In Favor of Osage Pickleball Court Expansion - Please adopt CEQA results
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 11:33:47 AMCarl, Thank you for your email. The Park, Recreation, and Arts Commission has received yourpublic comment for its next meeting on December 13, 2023. We are currently in a publicreview period of a negative declaration of environmental significance and studiesconducted associated with the proposed project. The Commission will discuss this itemat its next meeting. Information about this item, including the studies conducted andprevious reports, can be found at the following website:https://danvilletowntalks.org/pickle-ball Henry
Henry Perezalonso, CPRE
Recreation, Arts & Community Services Director
Town of Danville | (925) 314-3454
From: Carl Taibl <carltaibl@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 11:22 AM
To: Henry Perezalonso <HPerezalonso@danville.ca.gov>; Gail Massagli <gmassagli@danville.ca.gov>
Cc: Carl Taibl <carltaibl@aol.com>; Carl Taibl <carldtaibl@gmail.com>
Subject: In Favor of Osage Pickleball Court Expansion - Please adopt CEQA results
***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Hello, please accept the CEQA recommendation. I write this as I may not be able to
attend tomorrow's meeting as even though I am 65, I am still employed and need to
work in my Oakland office until after 5pm.
I live near Osage Park and play pickleball there several times weekly, usually during
my lunch break as I usually work from home. As more players now use the courts I
can only play about half the time I once did, although I do enjoy the socialization of
meeting many other fellow residents. If you were to do an impromptu site visit you
will find folks bringing food to share and good camaraderie all around.
Our family contributes to pickleball when my son visits, he is a semi-professional
player and enjoys giving free instruction back to the community. That is what should
be emphasized with this activity, it is a community park, not a neighborhood or HOA
park, and additional courts will provide this experience to others in Danville.
In that regard, the park should be enjoyed by as many residents as possible, it is not
a private park for the neighborhood. Neighbors opposed take a NIMBY point of view,
continue to over-exaggerate and provide misleading and unsubstantiated claims, and
simply copy complaints raised from other communities with the same issue. Please
vote to move forward quickly with the expansion so the courts are ready for the
Spring.
Please contact me should you wish to discuss further.
Regards,
Carl
Carl Taibl
CarlTaibl@aol.com
602-549-4607 cell
From:WESLEY SOOHOO
To:Henry Perezalonso; Gail Massagli
Subject:Support of PR&A Commision Meeting, Dec 13, 2023, Agenda Item 5
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 12:10:31 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
Town of Danville,
We are writing to support and request Approval of Agenda Item 5 on the Parks,
Recreation & Arts Commission, Wednesday, December 13, 2023, Meeting, to accept
the Negative CEQA Report and approve 6 additional Pickleball Courts at Osage
Station Park.
Our family has resided in Danville since 1988 and have been greatly blessed by the
quality of life and education system in Danville. Because of personal physical
conditions and limitations, my wife, Jean and I, started playing Pickleball at the start
of 2023 on the two courts at Osage Park. We were welcomed and embraced by the
warm, open, and inclusive group of people and have made many new friends there.
Because of its popularity, there is usually a wait list of players to go on the 2 courts,
causing Danville residents to seek other Public, Free courts in the Area. An online
search of public courts (NOT requiring Fee or Membership) show:
San Ramon, Central Park, 4 courts
Pleasanton, Muirwood Community Park, 6 courts
Livermore Downs Park, 4 courts, May Nissen Park 8 courts
Walnut Creek, Rudgear Park, 8 courts
Orinda Community Park, 3 courts
Martinez, Hidden Valley Park, 4 courts
Concord, Willow Pass Comm Park, 14 courts
DANVILLE, OSAGE PARK, 2 COURTS
Consequently, Danville needs more Public Pickleball Courts to enhance the physical,
social, and emotional well-being of its residents. The PR&A Commission should
approve Agenda Item 5, Administrative Staff Reports, and forward to the Town
Council for further action.
Please forward our comments to the full Parks, Recreation & Arts Commission for
consideration before the Wednesday, December 13, 2023, meeting.
Thank you!
Wesley & Jean SooHoo
55 Woodvalley Dr
Danville, CA 94506
From:Bill/Wendy Lueth
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:Parks and Rec meeting date of Dec 13 and agenda item 5.1
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 3:05:33 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
To Whom it May Concern,
I support the Pickle Ball court expansion of adding six more PB courts in Osage Park.
Sincerely,
~Wendy Lueth
10 Madrid Court
Danville, CA 94506
From:Hamid Fatehi
To:Henry Perezalonso; Gail Massagli
Subject:Support of Pickleball Expansion
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 3:27:43 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
Dear Henry and Gail
I write in support of the pickleball court expansion at Osage Park.
Pickleball is gaining popularity every day and is good for the community to be involved in
such activities that helps all including seniors stay healthy.
Looking forward to your support in approving this project.
Thank you
Hamid Fatehi
From:RON FONG
To:Gail Massagli
Subject:Dec 13th Park Recreation and Arts Commission Meeting, Agenda Item 5.1
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 3:47:04 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
To: Gail Massagi,
RE: Dec 13th Park Recreation and Arts Commission Meeting, Agenda Item 5.1
My wife and I are writing to show our support for adopting the recently published
"Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance" which was a product of the
CEQA environmental study for adding additional pickleball courts at Osage Station
Park.
Should the Commission adopt the Negative Declaration, we are hopeful that the
Town's project to add additional pickleball courts at Osage Station Park will get back
on track and proceed to the next steps to add the pickleball courts.
We thank all the members of the Park Recreation and Arts Commission as well as all
Town staff members who have been working for many, many years to meet the
community's overwhelming demand for a quality place to play pickleball.
Ron and Barb Fong
436 Silver Chief Place
Danville, CA
From:Cindy Keefer
To:Henry Perezalonso; Gail Massagli
Subject:Dec. 13, 2023 Danville Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission meeting
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 4:11:45 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
Attention:
Henry Perezalonso
Gail Massagli, Administrative Assistant
Danville Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission Town Meeting
December 13, 2023
Re: Agenda Item #5: Addition of Six New Pickleball Courts at Osage Station Park
I am writing in support of adopting the resolution to add six (6) new pickleball courts with seating at Osage Station
Park in Danville (for a total of eight (8) courts).
I was pleased to read the results of the CEQA environmental study indicating no significant impacts are anticipated
with the addition of six more pickleball courts. Hopefully, the commission will now agree to move forward on
building the much-needed courts.. The new facilities will positively address the mission of Parks and Recreation to:
- Provide Recreational Experiences
- Promote Health and Wellness
As you know, pickleball is a great sport for all different age groups and abilities including tennis lovers who can no
longer play tennis. The rewards are many - physical, mental, social, and definitely boost community spirit. I have
made so many new and treasured friends in this wonderful, inclusive mix of players, people I would never have
known without this fun and healthy pastime.
Thank you for all of your efforts to make our parks ever better.
Best regards,
Cynthia Keefer
From:Nancy Perry
To:perezalonso@danville.ca.gov; Gail Massagli
Subject:Dec 13, 2023 agenda item #5 Pickeball courts
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 4:51:42 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
To Henry and Gail,
I am in support of the additional Pickleball courts at Osage Park. I am writing in support of the
Pickleball expansion project for the meeting that will take place December 13, 2023 at 6:30
agenda item number, item 5.
Having more courts will be beneficial to the community. I have found playing Pickleball at
Osage to be a great opportunity for socialization with the community. I have met a lot of great
people through playing Pickleball which I would not have if not for the courts. Having the
additional courts will definitely help the playing time.
Pickleball has helped with depression and is a low-impact sport that anyone can play. It is
great to have all ages out playing together and meeting people of all ages that you wouldn't
normally meet. I look forward to being able to go out each day and play!
Thank you for your time,
Nancy Perry
925-915-9008
From:Jane
To:Henry Perezalonso; Gail Massagli
Subject:Town Of Danville Meeting 12/13/23 Agenda Item #5
Date:Tuesday, December 12, 2023 4:56:38 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe.
As a user of the Osage pickleball courts, I would like to express my opinion on the proposed expansion.
I support the proposed concept of eight pickleball courts with one seating area.
Eight courts is adequate to accommodate the number of players who currently play at Osage and it allows
for future growth. The existing parking lot could handle eleven courts (three tennis and eight pickleball) all
being used to full capacity.
A seating area is important because there is a big social component to pickleball. It is necessary that there
is a safe waiting area when there are players waiting for a court to become free.
Thank you for considering adding additional pickleball courts at Osage Park. It will be a tremendous asset to
the community.
Sincerely,
Jane Raquel