A Wide Range of Organizations and Individuals Express Concern Over the Cargill Development Proposal

A definitive majority of the 900 pages of commenters regarding the Cargill Saltworks proposal voiced concern for the project or highly encouraged city officials to closely examine certain aspects of the project.

Despite some support and optimism for the project, many environmental groups, local agencies, neighboring cities and towns and individual residents opposed the project or opposed the way the process was carried out.

Excerpts from the majority of comments opposing the project: (Note: the organization and its members are not explicitly for or against the project unless explicitly printed in their comment. You can also read comments expressing support or optimism .)

Environmental Groups

Shute, Michaly & Weinberger, LLP, on behalf of Save the Bay: “This site is simply too important and ecologically valuable to develop. Ninety percent of San Francisco Bay wetlands have already been destroyed. The Cargill property offers a rare and tremendous opportunity for wetland restoration… Save the Bay has consistently urged the City Council to disapprove the Saltworks Project at the outset, without conducting an expensive, politically divisive, and unnecessary EIR… Moreover, given that the City’s General Plan envisions that the salt ponds will “remain as open space forever,” the City Council has no legal power to approve the Project at all unless it first decides to abandon this long-standing general plan policy.”

Sierra Club, Loma Prieta Chapter: “State agencies should generally not plan, develop, or build any new significant structure in a place where that structure will require significant protection from sea level rise, storm surges, or coastal erosion during the expected life of the structure.” “Five new Schools: California’s Climate Adaptation Strategy requires that new schools generally cannot be built below sea level unless they are to serve already existing communities.”

Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), “The majority of the proposed project would require Commission authorization” because it “is located within the Commission’s salt pond jurisdiction.” “The EIR should evaluate what the project site will look like in 100 years if sea levels rise 55 inches. A BCDC staff report explains that scenarios project anywhere between 16 and 55 inches of sea level rise.

Friends of Redwood City: “The City’s ‘Alternatives Development Report’ should be postponed until this serious deficiency in the public process the City outlined for the Saltworks Project CEQA review is remedied. The City’s ‘basic project objectives” should be provided to the community prior to, or as a component of, the second Saltworks Project Notice of Preparation.

Sequoia Audubon Society, San Mateo County chapter of the National Audubon Society: The Society “considers the potential development on Redwood City baylands the greatest threat to resident and migratory bird populations we have seen in the area for over 50 years.”

Green Sangha, a Bay Area spiritual and environmental organization: “The alternative, Cargill’s development plan, represents the biggest threat to San Francisco Bay in 50 years… The Bay is the heart of what makes the entire region vibrant, fresh, and alive – a magnet for recreation, tourism, and quiet self-renewal. By restoring the shoreline at the salt ponds, you will be showing a vision and commitment that will be appreciated and admired for generations to come.”

Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge and Friends of Redwood City: “Redwood City salt ponds can and do provide important mudflat/salt panne foraging habitat for both migratory and resident waterbirds. This is contrary to statements that it is inhospitable for birds.” It also added, “In light of a rise in sea level associated with global warming, the EIR needs to analyze the impact of global warming on flood protection and whether the Project’s flood protection is adequate.”

Woodside-Atherton Garden Club (WAGC): “The property is at sea level with very high susceptibility to liquefaction from an earthquake. The earthquake and tsunami in Japan tragically emphasize the vulnerability of low-lying developed areas to destruction and loss of life.”

Committee for Green Foothills: “During the winter rainy season, the site is underwater for several months of the year, and during this time, the site is used as habitat by several species, including migratory birds… There is no description of the environmental conditions, merely a statement that the site “consists of 1,360 acres of a Solar Salt Production Facility.” This language, although it adheres to Cargill’s representations of the site as an 'industrial site,' does not reflect the reality of the conditions currently obtaining at the site."

Local Agencies

San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board: “It is unclear whether sufficient water is available through and beyond 2078 because: 1) additional supplies from SFPUC’s service area are unreliable beyond 2018, and 2) it is questionable whether the City could meet the additional supply needs since they were included in SFPUC’s analysis of water supply needs.”

Port of Redwood City: “The Port is concerned that the Saltworks is inconsistent with the policies and goals of the General Plan. The Saltworks project as currently designed is clearly incompatible with adjacent Port industrial uses. A considerable portion of the housing and office space development proposed by the Saltworks project is located within 300 feet from Port operations, without an adequate buffer.”

Seaport Industrial Association (SIA): “Despite assurances from the development team that they understood the value of the Port and industry in the Seaport/Blomquist area, SIA members have so far seen little evidence to substantiate the developer’s commitment to plan for land use compatibility… The application proposes residential and office uses immediately across the street from the Port and heavy/maritime industry, with schools in close proximity… the project design does not include adequate distance, buffers or trasition zones between clearly incompatible uses.”

Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District: We are “writing to request that you not approve going forward with the proposal by Cargill and DMB Associates to develop housing on the former salt ponds in Redwood City… Our Board unanimously encourages you to join with a wide array of regional partners in restoring the San Francisco Bay. We all share this incredibly valuable resource, and must work together to assure the bay continues to be a productive and healthy component of our region.”

San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board: “As noted in the Basin Plain, it is preferable to avoid wetland disturbance. When this is not possible, disturbance should be minimized.”

Tuolumne River Trust, provides 85 percent of the water to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, which provides to Redwood City: “The Environmental Impact Report should identify a water source for the Saltworks Project beyond 70 years.”

State Agencies

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC): “The major types of impacts to consider are collisions between trains and vehicles, and between trains and pedestrians. The proposed project has the potential to increase vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the vicinity.”

California Highway Patrol, Redwood City area: “A requisite increase to the staffing of the Redwood City area would be necessary to provide optimal levels of safety and service. Based on an analysis of existing resources, current population density, and ADT statistics, I would estimate the need to add a minimum of ten officers and two supervisors to oversee and adequately address in the increase in service demands.

Nancy Skinner, CA Assemblymember, 14th District: “As someone who has played a pivotal role in protecting our regional wetlands and a bayfront as a Director on the East Bay Regional Parks District Board, while a member of the Berkeley City Councilmember in the 80s… I understand the importance of closely monitoring the San Francisco Bay… I would like to express concerns I have about the potential for significant damage to the environment of the San Francisco Bay if this project is undertaken as proposed.”

Neighboring Towns and Cities

Portola Valley Town Council: The Town Council “opposes the proposed project… and supports the restoration of the Cargill salt ponds and their inclusion in the Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge… There are times, however, where the potential impacts of a proposal are so far reaching, with significant regional consequences, and require so many public concessions that it is impossible to not raise strong objections and concerns. The Saltworks project is certainly one of these proposals and this is underscored by the scope of regional citizen and official reaction that your City has already received in response to the NOP.

Menlo Park: “Menlo Park is extremely concerned about the environmental impacts of the Saltworks Project and adopted a resolution opposing the Project and supporting the full restoration and inclusion of the salt ponds in the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge. “An ongoing source of funds (supplied by the developer, not taxpayers) should be identified to cover future emergency costs from earthquakes, floods, etc. In addition, a fully funded source should be created to cover both construction and ongoing maintenance of the amenities and mitigations.” The city council submitted a resolution “supporing the full restoration of the Cargill salt ponds.”

Town of Woodside: I am writing “to convey to you our strong opposition to the DMB Redwood City Saltworks Development Proposal… We now feel that there is an overwhelming body of evidence that the proposed project faces insurmountable environmental challenges and that its approval and implementation will gravely impact the project site and its enviorns and the San Francisco Bay itself.”

Greater East San Carlos (GESC) neighborhood group: “We have seen and agree with the scoping comments submitted by Redwood City residents raising significant concerns about the inappropriate nature of allowing development on this sensitive open space site… Together with the strong statement in Redwood City’s general plan that the site should ‘remain open space forever,’ should case serious reservations over any plan to build housing on the site.”

Schools/Teacher Associations

Sequoia Union High School District: “The District anticipates that this project, if it moves forward, could have significant impact to Sequoia High School in terms of increase student enrollment.” The District asked that potential impacts to the high school be examined “to determine if its existing facilities and services will be adequate to support the additional student population at Sequoia High School.”

American Federation of Teachers, Local 1493: “Eighty-five percent of the Bay’s historic tidal marshes have been destroyed for development or diked for salt ponds, and every existing tidal marsh and restorable acre is critical to the future health of the Bay… Therefore, [we] oppose the development of the Redwood City salt ponds and support full restoration of these historic Bay tidal marshes for inclusion in the Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge.”

Individuals

Former (Federal Emergency Management Agency) FEMA employee: “The Bay has shrunk to one-third its original size since World War II. It is surrounded by numerous towns and cities. Any construction pollution, infill, traffic, waste or other major action proposed by one of these entities will impact many others, not just those that are politically contiguous to it.” “Redwood City should hold $25 billion in cash from Crgill & DMB for DMB to periodically draw down on as construction proceeds. (The $25 billion covers 12,000 homes @ $1,000,000/each, plus $13 billion for the cost of the levee, open space, public buildings, etc.) This would facilitate the project’s completion whether or not DMB continues their involvement.

Resident: “Please stop this plan to build on the Bay. Paving our bay is not acceptable. We need all the wetlands we can have. It will be an environmental disaster.”

Geographer: “An ongoing source of funds should be identified, to cover future emergency costs from earthquakes, floods, etc. Taxpayers at all levels—from Redwood City to FEMA—should not to have to subsidize and cover emergency expenses due to additional landfill.”

Portola Resident, “I urge you to take a formal stance strongly opposing Redwood City’s further pursuit of Cargill/DMB’s misguided baylands development. Some ideas are so dreadful that they are not worthy of further study; this is one.”

Chemical sciences research scientist and prior graduate student and researcher in chemical and physical oceanography: “Carbon dioxide, methane and other pollutants are influencing rapid and exponential changes in our environment, leading to climate disruption from human influence… Compounding influences from other sources of pollution of the air, land and sea are also accelerating climate disruption and ocean acidification. History is revealing these changes.”

Students from a Stanford University Urban Studies course prepared a detailed analysis of potential traffic impacts as a final class project. They highlighted that the Woodside Road and Whipple Avenue corridors between El Camino Real and US 101 are already operating at a grade “E” on an A-F scale, with “F” being the worst. The US 101 corridor between Woodside Road and Whipple Avenue operates at an F, so the project would have to take great measures to not lower the current grade any lower than it already is. As a result, the students proposed incorporating several alternative modes of transportation other than cars in the environmental impact report.

Resident: “A schoolbus full of clamoring 6-year-olds arrives anxious to touch the mud and bus and taste the salty bay in the pickleweed. The wonder of nature is not lost on them… The wetlands and mudflats can and should be restored to their natural state so they can perform the myriad free services they are able and willing to offer.”

Others

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: “Due to the potential to impact these species, we recommend the analysis include all direct and indirect effects resulting from, but not limited to, construction of the proposed project and increased presence of people, pets and other urban activities… We recommend you evaluate human activities that may result in the introduction of non-native plant species.”

League of Women Voters in San Mateo County: “Is it advisable to place 30,000 residents at risk of sea level rise, earthquake liquefaction and flooding? Redwood Shores recently added additional feet to their seawall and other types of reinforcement. These costs were paid for by the residents?”

Greenbelt Alliance, housing group: “While the project may present an opportunity to address regional jobs/housing imbalances, the environmental costs may be substantial. Particular attention should be paid to opportunities to restore a unique open space resource and the importance of fully realizing existing plans for concentrated, transit-oriented infill development in other locations.

Lyngso Garden Materials, Inc.: Recently DMB representatives visited to explain their plans. “We were told that working with them on the impacts to our business would be a give and take situation.” Why should our company, with less than 4 acres of land, have to compromise with the Saltworks Project with 1400 acres?

International Longshore & Warehouse Union, Local 10: “The Port of Redwood City is a vital component of the local, regional, and state economy, and the only deep water port in the South Bay; generating more than $4.5 million annual tax revenue to state and local municipalities, including $1.4 million directly to Redwood City, and supports over 600 jobs as part of Redwood City’s diverse economic base… Therefore, [we] formally join the community in expressing opposition to Cargill’s inappropriate residential salt pond development proposal in Redwood City.”

Correction: The original title used the word "opposed" which didn't accurately reflect the wide range of commenters' sentiments.