Please come to City Hall on Oct. 7 for the public hearing on the traffic study and the final vote on the Seeno/Benicia Business Park project.
[To refresh you memory about the reason for the traffic study please view some of the previous posts on this blog, particularly this one on June 4. This timeline of the project approval process is also quite revealing. ]
The Benicia Business Park public hearing is at the end of the City Council agenda, and is not likely to begin until around 8:00 pm. It may last until quite late, and many people will not be able to stay, but a good citizen turnout at the beginning would be very helpful.
In a nutshell, in order for the Council to approve the proposed project on Oct. 7, they must agree to sign a "Statement of Overriding Considerations." That statement admits that the proposed project will generate traffic emissions which will cause significant air pollution impacts that exceed State thresholds for ozone precursors.
(Ozone is a serious public health hazard, and Benicia already has higher levels of ozone than most Bay Area communities. The toxic effects of the localized traffic emissions will be particularly severe for the school children and residents around Robert Semple school near E. 2nd Street and I-780. But the increased ozone level and its increased ozone-related health hazards will be experienced by everyone city-wide. )
The Statement of Overriding Considerations goes on to make the very dubious claim that there are no other mitigation measures that can be employed to reduce the traffic impact to a less than significant level. Finally, it makes the unproven claim that the economic benefit to the city's tax base is so great that it creates an "overriding consideration," thus allowing them to approve the project and override the clean air requirements of CEQA law and accept the ozone air pollution burdens and adverse public health effects that will accrue from the project.
If you don't feel that is an acceptable trade off, now is the time to let the City Council know! (Click here to send them emails)
And by the way, project denial would not be the end of the project. Instead, it would finally open the door and allow a fresh start for the developer to work with the City and the community on a new vision for the project, clearly outlined in a detailed Specific Plan. Many details of the community’s vision have already been thoroughly described throughout the approval process by many individuals and groups (most recently in a detailed document posted by the Green Gateway Group at http://www.greengatewaygroup.org/ ), so the developer would not have to start over with no ideas and a blank slate.
If you have time, in preparation for the Council meeting you will find it useful to read the Staff Report and the Public Comments pertaining to the Seeno hearing on Oct. 7. To read them click on this link to the Oct.7 City Council agenda and scroll down to item VIII. Public Hearings, B. Benicia Business Park. Then click the links to Staff Report and Public Comments. (They are both very large files and may take several minutes to download.)
Showing posts with label mitigations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mitigations. Show all posts
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Analysis of revised Benicia Business Park project
We have read the new Benicia Business Park proposal submitted to the city of Benicia by the Seeno Corporation on March 20. The following summarizes Benicia First reactions to that proposal.We appreciate that this plan is an improvement from the initial proposal.
It is reduced in size, providing for greater open space and attention has been given to certain mitigations of environmental impacts. It proposes to incorporate LEEDS standards in building design as well as Low Impact Development standards both of which are highly desirable and commendable.
Nonetheless, a number of issues and questions remain, An example would be traffic near the Semple School with its air quality, noise and safety problems. Using the state standards for siting of schools which set a maximum of 100,000 vehicle trips daily close to the school, we noted in our analysis of the initial project that this could be projected to 137,000 at project build out. The project reduction being proposed would reduce this to 131,000 trips a day, hardly an adequate mitigation. Other problems of traffic, including noise and safety, were dealt with very cursorily and clearly inadequately in the EIR.
Further, the very significant danger that the large centralized commercial development will compete with and negatively affect Benicia's efforts to revitalize First Street as its business center still exists.
We believe that such issues require an initial study before project approval.
However even more important is what we regard as the central issue and problem with this proposal. It is that while smaller and less environmentally intrusive, this project continues to reflect the same fundamental conceptual flaw as the original, its lack of a coherent and integrated development basis.
What is singularly lacking is any attention to the desirability of a campus setting, or a research and development core, biotech, for example, which would shape the entire project and provide the nucleus and engine, helping to stimulate additional high quality R&D ventures as well as subsidiary and supportive projects.
We express again our concern that Benicia not settle for a backward oriented project simply framed as an extension of our existing industrial park. In the explosively changing economic climate of these times, the long term viability of that type of static twentieth century model would be in great doubt.
It is vitally important that what takes place in this last major piece of Benicia's developable land be aesthetically inviting, with attractive structures, scenically placed, green in design, economically viable over the long term, sustainable in every sense of that term and productive of the kind of high wage jobs matching the demographics of Benicia. By virtue of location, transportation and its special characteristics, Benicia is in a uniquely strong position to attract such an economy. Why would we consider anything less?
Further, the type of light industrial and warehousing development suggested in this plan is in direct contradiction to the city's planning. The Economic Development Strategy developed by the EDB commission and adopted by the Council last September, sets out an overriding economic goal of encouraging a campus-style project in our industrial areas, specifically encouraging "clean energy, high-tech, research and development" uses.
In the absence of such a coherent, inherently stimulative focus, the shaping of Benicia's future is clearly left to chance. The Seeno project as constituted simply sets out a pattern of providing space for light industry and warehousing, a pattern in which initial entries could foreclose such a focus.
It is our view that before this project moves forward, this central issue must be addressed and resolved. Achieving that goal would provide high wage employment, matching Benicia's demographics, a steady dependable growth in related research and development and a need for related office space. That kind of high quality development demands and insures the preservation of aesthetic, environmental and architectural integrity. Most importantly by its productivity it would provide a highly sustainable future for Benicia and with that a profitable return for Seeno.
Jerome Page, April 4, 2008
Chair, Benicia First www.beniciafirst.com
It is reduced in size, providing for greater open space and attention has been given to certain mitigations of environmental impacts. It proposes to incorporate LEEDS standards in building design as well as Low Impact Development standards both of which are highly desirable and commendable.
Nonetheless, a number of issues and questions remain, An example would be traffic near the Semple School with its air quality, noise and safety problems. Using the state standards for siting of schools which set a maximum of 100,000 vehicle trips daily close to the school, we noted in our analysis of the initial project that this could be projected to 137,000 at project build out. The project reduction being proposed would reduce this to 131,000 trips a day, hardly an adequate mitigation. Other problems of traffic, including noise and safety, were dealt with very cursorily and clearly inadequately in the EIR.
Further, the very significant danger that the large centralized commercial development will compete with and negatively affect Benicia's efforts to revitalize First Street as its business center still exists.
We believe that such issues require an initial study before project approval.
However even more important is what we regard as the central issue and problem with this proposal. It is that while smaller and less environmentally intrusive, this project continues to reflect the same fundamental conceptual flaw as the original, its lack of a coherent and integrated development basis.
What is singularly lacking is any attention to the desirability of a campus setting, or a research and development core, biotech, for example, which would shape the entire project and provide the nucleus and engine, helping to stimulate additional high quality R&D ventures as well as subsidiary and supportive projects.
We express again our concern that Benicia not settle for a backward oriented project simply framed as an extension of our existing industrial park. In the explosively changing economic climate of these times, the long term viability of that type of static twentieth century model would be in great doubt.
It is vitally important that what takes place in this last major piece of Benicia's developable land be aesthetically inviting, with attractive structures, scenically placed, green in design, economically viable over the long term, sustainable in every sense of that term and productive of the kind of high wage jobs matching the demographics of Benicia. By virtue of location, transportation and its special characteristics, Benicia is in a uniquely strong position to attract such an economy. Why would we consider anything less?
Further, the type of light industrial and warehousing development suggested in this plan is in direct contradiction to the city's planning. The Economic Development Strategy developed by the EDB commission and adopted by the Council last September, sets out an overriding economic goal of encouraging a campus-style project in our industrial areas, specifically encouraging "clean energy, high-tech, research and development" uses.
In the absence of such a coherent, inherently stimulative focus, the shaping of Benicia's future is clearly left to chance. The Seeno project as constituted simply sets out a pattern of providing space for light industry and warehousing, a pattern in which initial entries could foreclose such a focus.
It is our view that before this project moves forward, this central issue must be addressed and resolved. Achieving that goal would provide high wage employment, matching Benicia's demographics, a steady dependable growth in related research and development and a need for related office space. That kind of high quality development demands and insures the preservation of aesthetic, environmental and architectural integrity. Most importantly by its productivity it would provide a highly sustainable future for Benicia and with that a profitable return for Seeno.
Jerome Page, April 4, 2008
Chair, Benicia First www.beniciafirst.com
The Seeno Project - EIR vote
After countless months of City Council meetings, votes, public hearings, public forums and presentations, and voluminous written and oral public comments on the Seeno Project's Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the Final EIR came up for a vote at the City Council on Feb. 19, 2008.
BAD NEWS: The EIR for the proposed Benicia Business Park contains multiple instances of inadequate imact assessments, based on inaccurate data and assumptions. It also proposes alarming "mitigation" measures that would not bring the project into compliance with our city's General Plan and would have serious negative effects on our air quality, traffic, safety, noise, and ecology. Unfortunately, in spite of these facts, the City Council, on Feb. 19, 2008, went ahead and certified the EIR as "adequate" ! (BUT with important caveats, requiring "the applicant" to come back with a revised project containing suggested environmental improvements.)
View Environmental Impact Report, Comments, Presentation
GOOD NEWS: This step does not mean the Proposed Project itself has been approved, but only the EIR. There will be many more stages in this process and more opportunities to affect the final design and function of this project, but it will take constant citizen vigilance and engagement.
To stay informed as new developments evolve on this issue, please sign up for our mailing list by writing to: beniciafirst@earthlink.net
BAD NEWS: The EIR for the proposed Benicia Business Park contains multiple instances of inadequate imact assessments, based on inaccurate data and assumptions. It also proposes alarming "mitigation" measures that would not bring the project into compliance with our city's General Plan and would have serious negative effects on our air quality, traffic, safety, noise, and ecology. Unfortunately, in spite of these facts, the City Council, on Feb. 19, 2008, went ahead and certified the EIR as "adequate" ! (BUT with important caveats, requiring "the applicant" to come back with a revised project containing suggested environmental improvements.)
View Environmental Impact Report, Comments, Presentation
GOOD NEWS: This step does not mean the Proposed Project itself has been approved, but only the EIR. There will be many more stages in this process and more opportunities to affect the final design and function of this project, but it will take constant citizen vigilance and engagement.
To stay informed as new developments evolve on this issue, please sign up for our mailing list by writing to: beniciafirst@earthlink.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)