Here is a transcript from the full video https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/poverty-politics-and-profit/transcript/
Tuesday, April 5, 2022
Thursday, March 24, 2022
Wednesday, March 23, 2022
Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Friday, March 18, 2022
Thursday, March 10, 2022
Wednesday, March 9, 2022
Three Minutes of excuses why Marinwood Plaza is not cleaned up 3/9/22
Curious why Marinwood Plaza toxic waste is STILL not cleaned up and has remained vacant for well over two decades ?
Here are the dangerous chemicals present as reported by the Regional Water Quality Control Board as of today.
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=SL0604185908
Yesterday, the Clean Up Marinwood Plaza Committee (est. 2012) attended the RWQCB meeting and we got 3 minutes of excuses. The RWQCB has ordered the owners to cleanup since 2014 under financial penalty.
As of today the "hotspot" of PCE toxic waste remains in the ground, poisoning the groundwater and creating toxic gases that seep everywhere on the site including a site just outside Casa Marinwood.
Supervisor Damon Connolly and Asst. Mary Sackett has been steadfast in the support of clean up but the RWQCB has not imposed penalties.
Tuesday, March 8, 2022
No, mountain lions won’t drop dead if California builds duplexes.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/
No, mountain lions won’t drop dead if California builds duplexes. But some towns are in their habitat
March 8, 2022
Woodside was ridiculed after claiming itself a mountain lion habitat in seeming attempt to avoid a state housing law. Brontë Wittpenn/The Chronicle
The Bay Area town of Woodside recently found itself in the international spotlight, and not in a good way. Officials in the town of 5,000 in the heavily forested foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains wanted to pause housing applications under SB9, a law meant to encourage construction, because they believed Woodside is habitat for mountain lions and wanted to await a determination from the state on whether the species would be protected.
The issue raised a question that has garnered widespread mockery: To what extent should developed areas with single-family homes be considered habitat for mountain lions?
California Attorney General Rob Bonta gave his unequivocal answer in a statement he issued last month chastising Woodside officials. “Habitat is land that has the capacity to support a specific species, including providing food and shelter,” he said. “Land that is already developed — with, for example, a single-family home — is not, by definition, habitat.”
Bonta’s tone was undoubtedly meant to send a message to all California communities who have been reluctant to get on board with the state’s new housing laws. But his rationale in rebuffing Woodside’s claim is incorrect.
Bottom line: Building a house — or a duplex — on a plot of land does not eliminate the ability of that land to support wildlife and native plants.
For those who have never been, Woodside isn’t the lawn-filled suburban enclave you might have guessed from its recent media depiction. The town is adjacent to large, natural open spaces, part of what’s called the wildland-urban interface — that is, a place where people and wildlife share space and resources. In these areas, homes are intermingled with redwood forest and coast live-oak woodland, accessed via narrow, winding mountain roads. Deer are much more common than transit stops (the only bus that serves Woodside only runs on Saturdays). And not coincidentally, these heavily wooded hillsides with their challenging terrain are also wildfire hazard zones.
Whatever you may think of state housing policies, one thing is true: Woodside is indeed mountain lion habitat, and treating that habitat responsibly is critical to the survival of this species.
Mountain lions, also knowns as cougars, once freely roamed the hills, forests and grasslands of the Bay Area. Their habitat has been severely degraded by development. But these big cats still live here. There are only around 2,000 to 3,000 cougars left in California. They are currently a “candidate species” under the California Endangered Species Act, giving them the same protection as threatened and endangered species. Mountain lions are at the top of the food chain. A robust cougar population keeps the whole ecosystem in balance.
That ecosystem includes many California neighborhoods. Unfortunately, the controversy in California over housing density has raised the political stakes to the extent that it has generated gravely misinformed public statements about wildlife habitat. The assumption that anything short of a state or national park isn’t habitat and has no conservation value is inaccurate and damaging to efforts aimed at preserving biodiversity.
Indeed, the Bay Area is a biodiversity hotspot equal to Madagascar, and towns in the foothills to the west of Interstate 280 contain much of that biodiversity. These areas are threatened by human development; they make up just 2.5 percent of the planet’s surface but represent an outsize opportunity to protect a large variety of species. This demands land use planning with extra care.
Woodside inarguably has areas of mountain lion habitat. We therefore have a particular obligation to take account of the habits and needs of cougars when building here. Most importantly, we should prioritize protecting key wildlife corridors when planning for development. Our plans should account for the needs of wildlife, especially large mammals, that require room to roam, feed and breed.
This issue is not unique to the Peninsula. Ventura County just passed ordinances requiring environmental review for projects that may hinder wildlife connectivity. Wildlife crossings being built across Highway 17 in the Santa Cruz Mountains and across Highway 101 northwest of Los Angeles show efforts to connect wildlife habitat are necessary and possible. Both wildlife crossings will save human and animal lives and increase efforts to keep species from dying out by allowing cougars and other animals to access additional habitats and populations. Recognizing the ecological crisis caused by divided habitats across the U.S., Congress recently allocated $350 million to support these types of crossings.
In other words, “habitat” is not something only found in remote wilderness areas.
Even as we must plan for adequate affordable housing for all Californians, we must also protect sufficient habitat for our state’s wild animals and plants to survive, particularly in the wildland-urban interface.
No, that doesn’t mean mountain lions will drop dead if we build duplexes. But it does mean housing goals can and should exist alongside our obligation to preserve our environment, keep people safe in an era of increasing wildfires and create housing policies that recognize the importance of wildlife in our extraordinary state.
As our planet faces an existential biodiversity crisis, let’s remember that mountain lions deserve a place to live, too.
Nancy Reyering is a 35-year resident of Woodside and is president of the San Mateo County Harbor District.
EDITORS NOTE: Lucas Valley is also home to mountain lions. They have been spotted in Marinwood Park on rare occasions. They are extremely shy and seldom seen. Most often the bobcat is seen in our neighborhoods. Many people mistake them for mountain lions which are much bigger.
Friday, March 4, 2022
Thursday, March 3, 2022
Monday, February 28, 2022
My Letter sent the Marin Community Planning and Supervisor Damon Connolly today
Dear Marin County Supervisors and Community Planning Staff:
The 2022 Marin County Candidates site for Unincorporated Marin and especially Marinwood/ Lucas Valley/Silveria Ranch is absurd. It targets just 5 square miles with 80% of the housing allocation for affordable housing in one community WITHOUT essential planning for schools, roads, government services, water, sewer and other essential services.
Why "plan to fail"?
Shouldn't a good faith effort to build affordable housing in our community also include a comprehensive plan for accommodating growth? It doesn't. This is why it should be rejected today.
Instead, let's address the core questions for growth AND the financial impact of adding massive amount of largely non profit housing to a single community WITHOUT ADDITIONAL TAX BASE.
Marinwood/Lucas Valley currently has approximately 2700 housing units for 6000 residents. The proposed housing sites could add 2300 apartments and 5500 residents who ALL WILL NEED schools, water, government services, transportation, access to shopping, etc. Shouldn't a proper plan for growth precede approval for housing?
One of the sites listed is Marinwood Plaza, our communities ONLY commercial plaza within walking distance for thousands of residents. If the plan for 160 units is approved, this would squeeze out a vital community center to the detriment of all. This is not including the problem of TOXIC WASTE contamination clean up suitable for residential dwelling is a long way off despite community pressure on the Regional Water Quality Control Board who will not enforce its own clean up orders on the current owners.
Despite the harsh criticism of the RHNA process, I believe there is a real community desire for more affordable housing in a community that will be planned appropriately, won't redevelop our neighborhoods and utilize open spaces like Silveira Ranch, St Vincents and other sites.
While everyone I know supports the idea of more housing, not a single one wants a poorly conceived plan that forces large housing projects without considering the impacts.
Reject the current RHNA plan until a comprehensive community plan with real public input can be drafted.
Sincerely,
Stephen Nestel
Marinwood
PS. The "Balancing Act" tool is NOT a serious tool for community input. Less than 25% of the homes under consideration were ever included in the database. I do not find "our database could not handle the data" as a credible reason from the Community Development Department.
If you want REAL success seek REAL community support.
Public comments on the 2023-2031 Marin County Housing Element DRAFT Candidate Housing Sites are due TODAY
Public comments on the 2023-2031 Marin County Housing Element DRAFT Candidate Housing Sites are due on February 28th! Marin County Board of Supervisors & Planning Commission will discuss the proposed sites at a joint session on March 1st at 5 PM!
County Staff is asking the Supervisors & Planning Commissioners to do the following at the March 1st joint meeting
SUBJECT: Marin County Housing Element Update
RECOMMENDATION to Supervisors & Commissioners:
1. Receive report on community outreach and feedback received related to candidate housing sites and site scenarios.
2. Review and provide feedback on staff recommendation for candidate housing sites and alternative scenarios that address the State-mandated Regional Housing Need Allocation for housing production for the 2022- 2030 planning period.
Future Housing Sites on Agenda for March 1 County prepares to update long-term plans to meet needs and state mandates San Rafael, CA – A master list of all potential locations in unincorporated Marin County that are under consideration as future housing sites will be the subject of online-only meetings on Marin 1 and March 15. The Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission, which are co-hosting the meetings, will then select sites to be evaluated in an upcoming Housing Element environmental review. During the March meetings, members of the two governing bodies could direct County staff to narrow down the list by eliminating some eligible locations. The March 1 joint session of the Board and Planning Commission will be held as a 5 p.m. videoconference only because of the topic’s high interest in unincorporated neighborhoods and the need to prevent large crowds from congregating due to COVID-19. The Civic Center’s Board chamber will be closed. That session will be a follow-up to December 7 and February 1 joint meetings between the two bodies at which staff from the Marin County Community Development Agency (CDA) presented details about the Housing and Safety Elements, which are required plans to accommodate future housing needs and address climate change. Staff has been hosting community meetings throughout the unincorporated county to share information on candidate sites and gather feedback, which will be shared with the Board and Planning Commission. “Residents in the local workforce struggle to find suitable affordable housing close to their Marin jobs, which leads to longer commutes, negatively affects the environment, and erodes quality of life,” said CDA Deputy Director Leelee Thomas. “We see this as a chance to make marked progress with racial and social equity. At this stage, we are asking our residents to participate in this process and help us identify places where we can add housing within our communities.” The County has been directed to plan for at least 3,569 new housing units in unincorporated areas during the eight-year cycle that begins in 2023. Those must be distributed among all income categories, from extremely low to above moderate. Parcels have been identified as potential housing sites in all areas of the unincorporated county. Land owned by schools, houses of worship, businesses, nonprofits, private owners and the county government is all open for consideration. While housing is allowed in almost all local zoning districts, including commercial, the update to the Housing Element will increase the maximum number of homes allowed in some areas. The consequences of noncompliance with housing requirements could be stiff. If a jurisdiction does not meet its housing goals, it becomes ineligible for state funding to serve local transportation needs and may be subject to statewide streamlining rules, which allow for housing development with limited public review process. California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has a new division that is designed to enforce accountability with plans to meet housing needs. “It behooves us to listen, collaborate, and come with our own locally designed plan rather than risking state reprimand and losing local control on decisions,” Thomas said. The Housing Element, along with the accompanying Safety Element, needs to be completed by the end of 2022 so it can be submitted to the State of California for approval. This winter, CDA staff is engaging in community discussions, speaking at local homeowners association meetings and design review boards. Three online tools are being used to encourage residents to provide feedback on where housing could be located.
“Our outreach has received positive feedback, and several thousand people have visited the Balancing Act website,” said CDA Senior Planner Jillian Nameth Zeiger. “The meetings with design review boards and other community organizations have allowed us to describe the process, answer questions, and gather a lot of public comment that will be reported back to the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission. We have more sites on the candidate list than we need for the plan, so we are looking to the public for guidance on where they think we should be planning for more housing. Balancing Act, public comment at meetings, phone calls, and emails are great ways to get involved.” Questions and comments can be emailed to staff and phone inquiries can be made to (415) 473-6269. Regular updates can be found on the Housing and Safety Elements update webpage. For disability accommodations, please phone (415) 473-6358 (voice), CA Relay 711, or e-mail the Community Development staff at least five business days in advance of the event. The County will do its best to fulfill requests received with less than five business days’ notice. Copies of documents are available in alternative formats, upon request. You have subscribed to News Releases & Advisories for Marin County. This information has recently been updated. Visit the Newsroom to view all County news releases.
| ||||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)