Welcome! About Us Archived Articles References & Research Links  
March 2006

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Recent Entries

Check out www.LimitEminentDomain.org

Imminently concerned: A local view of eminent domain

Cupertino's land use shot heard far and wide

Eminent Domain Project at Standstill Despite Ruling

Blight Makes Right: October 26, San Diego

Eminent Domain in N.J. - Now They Just Steal Land

Senate & Assembly Committee Joint Interim Hearing on Redevelopment & Blight. Weingart City Heights Library, S.D.

PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT MOST OF BERKELEY LIKELY TO BE SUBJECT TO "TAKING" BY EMINENT DOMAIN

Senate bill would blunt property ruling

Conference on Redevelopment Abuse

Archives

January 2006
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
Syndicate News
(XML) Feed Available Here
Contact Info
P.O.Box 446
San Jose, California. 95103

(408) 817-5678
email at: c2r_coalition@yahoo.com
:: RETURN TO FRONTPAGE NEWS ::

January 16, 2005

Residents Have Their Say on Martinez Draft EIR

By Liz Tascio
CONTRA COSTA TIMES

MARTINEZ - Residents this week questioned a report that says development between the city's railroad tracks and shoreline would be safe for people and the environment.

Earthquake safety, train accidents and other topics came up Tuesday night at a public hearing for an environmental impact report that studied the city's plan for its downtown. The draft plan endeavors to bring vibrancy to the quiet neighborhood.

The report, prepared by LSA Associates of Berkeley, says the city can accommodate about 1,000 new residences downtown without straining city services, housing, traffic or the environment.

"Because we didn't have any significant or unavoidable impacts, there was nothing that pushed us to say the plan should be changed," said Lynette Dias, an environmental consultant from LSA.

About 270 new townhomes and apartments could be built north of the railroad tracks, which some residents want made into a park and open space. The land is zoned for light industrial use.

Gigi Walker of Martinez brought up last week's accident in South Carolina, in which a train carrying chlorine crashed, releasing deadly fumes. Nine people died and thousands were evacuated.

"My concern is that our tracks here in this town carry toxic and hazardous materials on a daily basis," Walker said, asking why "we want to build houses down there by these tracks when these accidents can happen."

Resident Julianne George said the report needs to analyze further how emergency vehicles would reach the new development, since trains would sometimes block the only routes in and out.

Housing near the shoreline would pollute and damage the wetlands, said Carol Baier, a Martinez resident for 50 years.

The number of houses north of the tracks can probably be negotiated, said Igor Skaredoff of Martinez. But he was concerned by the report's finding that land north of the tracks would be less stable than nearby land during an earthquake.

Resident Tim Platt asked if the report considered that the city could see more than 1,000 new housing units once the city rezones downtown, as called for in the draft specific plan.

Not everyone wanted more information in the report. Maurice Huguet, an attorney for one of the property owners north of the tracks, said the report erred when it said an endangered mouse near the shoreline would need protection. He said a 1997 study found no such species.

The strongest criticism of the report came from Beth Rainsford, who helped create an alternative plan that recommends about half the number of residences studied.

"The specific plan is not the community's vision," she said. The report does not explain how the city can significantly increase its housing and population downtown and build near the shore without affecting the city's small-town character and scale, she said.

The East Bay Regional Park District, which owns land near the potential development, will prepare comments on the EIR, said Ted Radke, a member of the district's board of directors, in an interview Wednesday.

The public has until Feb. 7 to submit comments to the city. State law requires that the city provide a written response to every comment in the final draft of the EIR

This article can also be found at the Contra Costa Times website

Posted by Coalition Webbies at January 16, 2005 10:40 PM
©2003 Coalition for Redevelopment Reform. All rights reserved. Site by Rasteroids Design