To the editor: (Benicia Herald, May 9, 2008)
We want our City Council to keep downtown alive, to reap the most revenue possible, and leave an inheritance for Benicia for the 21st century; a legacy of intelligent land use planning, development, and a reputation for smart growth.
Benicia can be the leader in Solano County, situated perfectly between Davis and UC Berkeley for a high tech, green, campus style development in the Benicia Business Park. But Seeno wants us to wait for him to build his passé commercial development as a first phase, and wait for the second phase, proposed for 5-8 years from now…..that will be too late.
A huge opportunity for Benicia has arrived. There are investors RIGHT NOW ready to invest in and facilitate green technology and there are companies RIGHT NOW looking for places to build imaginative, clean-tech developments. There are also countless numbers of bright, educated people right here in this town, that are willing to help forge a vision for the Benicia Business Park, aka the Seeno Project.
The trick is what to do with the old project we have now. There is precious little to be recommended in terms of the needs of Benicia and the 21st century. The conditions recently styled by the City Staff are easily dodged or ignored. And we are not equipped to establish a development agreement (although that would be preferable to nothing at all). Seeno has said that they will not accept a development agreement anyway.
Maybe there is way to find a win-win solution here.
First, the Council must insist that Seeno give it time to learn about alternative, profitable possibilities.
Second, the Council needs to work with Benicia First in helping to create a forum with speakers from the field of clean-tech, with examples of cities working with these concepts of green industry and research and development campuses. Let’s listen to the experts.….let’s learn together.
Third, given that the future of Benicia’s well-being lies in Council’s hands, they must negotiate with Seeno from a position of strength and accommodate both the town and Seeno….. by opening their minds to the possibilities and find an alternative where Benicia AND Seeno can win.
This is not an easy task, but I sincerely believe that the Council has the ability to accomplish this for Benicia. The challenge is this: Why settle for second best? A brand new, clean tech project is the right choice for Benicia.
Susan Street
Benicia, CA
[Note: to learn about the Seeno Project and what it means for Benicia, go to www.beniciafirst.com , and to keep up to date on rapidly evolving developments in the approval process, go to www.beniciafirst.blogspot.com ]
Showing posts with label smart growth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label smart growth. Show all posts
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
County's draft general plan deserves scrutiny
To: The Reporter Editor:
03/04/08 www.thereporter.com
submitted by Nicole Byrd, Fairfield.
After reading recent letters regarding the Solano County general plan update process, we felt that a few other points should be made about what occurred with the process during 2007.
First, let's not forget that the original Citizen's Advisory Committee, a well-balanced committee consisting of four people appointed by each supervisor, was disbanded shortly after Supervisor Jim Spering took office in 2007.
The supervisors claimed that the committee wasn't getting enough done; however, the original committee - as did the second committee - followed agendas designed by consultants, with some input from an agenda subcommittee.
Additionally, the original committee was developing a vision plan and attending a number of field trips to various county locations to be better informed when making decisions.
The criticism that the original committee was not doing enough was a "smoke screen" by those who wanted an excuse to remake the committee.
The board, chaired by Supervisor Mike Reagan, directed Supervisors Spering and John Silva as an "ad hoc subcommittee" to review the structure of the Citizens Advisory Committee.
Supervisors Spering and Silva met in closed session, without public input or public viewing, and hand-picked the vast majority of the new members for the second committee. Each supervisor was allowed only one appointment in addition to those selected by the subcommittee. This was a move to change the original, well-balanced committee and replace it with a more development-oriented group.
The timeline is another point of contention.
The committee was forced to make important decisions, often with insufficient data, just to meet the timeline. In fact, the timeline was clearly more important than careful study of the issues. Only Supervisor Barbara Kondylis has shown the wisdom to question this overly hasty process.
As members of both the original and second citizens advisory committees, we wanted the public to hear more of the story.
A new Solano County general plan is a critically important blueprint for how and where Solano will develop during the next 20 to 30 years. The new plan is quite different than the original plan and it deserves a thorough public airing and discussion.
We urge the county, in addition to the circulation of the general plan's Draft Environmental Impact Report for review and comments, to thoroughly and publicly present the draft general plan to solicit input from throughout the county and consider the concerns and comments expressed.
Nicole Byrd, Fairfield.
This letter also was signed by Patrica Gatz of Vallejo, Eva Laevastu of Green Valley and Benicia Mayor Elizabeth Patterson, all of whom, like Ms. Byrd, served on both the original 20-member and the second 16-member Citizens Advisory Committee; as well as original committee members Marti Brown of Vallejo, Jeanne McCormack of Rio Vista and Ian Anderson of Birds Landing.
03/04/08 www.thereporter.com
submitted by Nicole Byrd, Fairfield.
After reading recent letters regarding the Solano County general plan update process, we felt that a few other points should be made about what occurred with the process during 2007.
First, let's not forget that the original Citizen's Advisory Committee, a well-balanced committee consisting of four people appointed by each supervisor, was disbanded shortly after Supervisor Jim Spering took office in 2007.
The supervisors claimed that the committee wasn't getting enough done; however, the original committee - as did the second committee - followed agendas designed by consultants, with some input from an agenda subcommittee.
Additionally, the original committee was developing a vision plan and attending a number of field trips to various county locations to be better informed when making decisions.
The criticism that the original committee was not doing enough was a "smoke screen" by those who wanted an excuse to remake the committee.
The board, chaired by Supervisor Mike Reagan, directed Supervisors Spering and John Silva as an "ad hoc subcommittee" to review the structure of the Citizens Advisory Committee.
Supervisors Spering and Silva met in closed session, without public input or public viewing, and hand-picked the vast majority of the new members for the second committee. Each supervisor was allowed only one appointment in addition to those selected by the subcommittee. This was a move to change the original, well-balanced committee and replace it with a more development-oriented group.
The timeline is another point of contention.
The committee was forced to make important decisions, often with insufficient data, just to meet the timeline. In fact, the timeline was clearly more important than careful study of the issues. Only Supervisor Barbara Kondylis has shown the wisdom to question this overly hasty process.
As members of both the original and second citizens advisory committees, we wanted the public to hear more of the story.
A new Solano County general plan is a critically important blueprint for how and where Solano will develop during the next 20 to 30 years. The new plan is quite different than the original plan and it deserves a thorough public airing and discussion.
We urge the county, in addition to the circulation of the general plan's Draft Environmental Impact Report for review and comments, to thoroughly and publicly present the draft general plan to solicit input from throughout the county and consider the concerns and comments expressed.
Nicole Byrd, Fairfield.
This letter also was signed by Patrica Gatz of Vallejo, Eva Laevastu of Green Valley and Benicia Mayor Elizabeth Patterson, all of whom, like Ms. Byrd, served on both the original 20-member and the second 16-member Citizens Advisory Committee; as well as original committee members Marti Brown of Vallejo, Jeanne McCormack of Rio Vista and Ian Anderson of Birds Landing.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
What’s Wrong with the New General Plan?
By Gary Boudreaux
Green Valley Landowners Assn.
The Solano County Board of Supervisors is preparing a new general plan, setting forth principles to guide the evolution of the county in the coming 20 years. Unfortunately, there has been almost no direct citizen involvement in the creation of this plan, raising profound reasons for concern on the part of the average citizen.
So what's wrong with the county's new general plan?
• The proposed plan sets the stage for county-based development, even though our cities have provided effective jurisdiction over residential and commercial development since the county was established. (There is no obvious justification for this change, as the county shares in the fee revenues collected by the cities, and the county would not receive additional tax revenues after the costs of new services were paid.)
• The draft general plan is overly vague in its definitions or intent in utilizing lands within its newly created "municipal service areas," but it is clear that the county intends to encourage development in areas adjacent to existing cities, whether the cities want it or not. This will create poorly mitigated traffic, noise, diminished air quality, uncompensated use of city services, school crowding, and competition for utilities - all with no input from the affected cities.
• The proposed plan puts the county in competition with its cities for development, and interferes with cities' rights of self-determination and their established urban limit lines.
• The proposed general plan runs contrary to all well-known principles of smart or sustainable growth, in which development is planned in areas where there are existing services, not in scattered rural areas with no services or adjacent to municipalities where services must be duplicated.
• The notice of preparation for the plan's environmental impact report was issued before the draft plan was made available. It is obvious that the board is eager to get the plan completed and in front of the voters by Nov. 4 at any cost. The public comment period on the notice was to have expired Feb. 4.
• The proposed general plan clearly favors development interests and large landowners over long-term public interests. It fails to explain the justification for additional development in county areas. It especially fails to explain the general conversion of prime agricultural lands to residential development.
• The environmental impact report assessing the county's draft general plan is being prepared by the same company that was hired to write the general plan itself. How is it possible to objectively critique a work one has just written? Although permissible, the process smacks of conflict of interest and displays the single-minded urgency and profound lack of objectivity of the entire plan.
• County supervisors are establishing mutual sewer and water districts in rural areas to accommodate new developments, yet claim that these measures are not growth-inducing in and of themselves. These proposals, when written into our general plan, will radically and permanently alter rural Solano County.
• The proposed plan sets the stage for future rural land use designation changes by failing to establish concrete measures ensuring the protection of agriculture, habitat or open space. It addresses these critical concerns with vague platitudes.
• The rural character of Solano County is likely to be lost forever. Without public outcry, Solano County will go the way of Sacramento, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties.
The coming Solano County general plan is a plain and simple land grab and opens the door to unprecedented development, inevitably turning Solano County into an overpopulated, densely developed, urban cityscape. Our Board of Supervisors has no business developing the county in ways that are unsustainable by our infrastructure and our natural resources.
What can the average person do?
They can voice their opinions in writing to the Board of Supervisors.
They can vote against the acceptance of the general plan. Vote for those who care about our county heritage and the future of our county as we enjoy it today.
They can attend the Board of Supervisor meetings and speak out against the wholesale unbalanced sellout of Solano County to development interests.
Our children, and their children, deserve no less.
________________________________________________
Information about the general plan and the process for adopting it can be found online at http://solanocountygeneralplan.net/
_______________________________________________
Green Valley Landowners Assn.
The Solano County Board of Supervisors is preparing a new general plan, setting forth principles to guide the evolution of the county in the coming 20 years. Unfortunately, there has been almost no direct citizen involvement in the creation of this plan, raising profound reasons for concern on the part of the average citizen.
So what's wrong with the county's new general plan?
• The proposed plan sets the stage for county-based development, even though our cities have provided effective jurisdiction over residential and commercial development since the county was established. (There is no obvious justification for this change, as the county shares in the fee revenues collected by the cities, and the county would not receive additional tax revenues after the costs of new services were paid.)
• The draft general plan is overly vague in its definitions or intent in utilizing lands within its newly created "municipal service areas," but it is clear that the county intends to encourage development in areas adjacent to existing cities, whether the cities want it or not. This will create poorly mitigated traffic, noise, diminished air quality, uncompensated use of city services, school crowding, and competition for utilities - all with no input from the affected cities.
• The proposed plan puts the county in competition with its cities for development, and interferes with cities' rights of self-determination and their established urban limit lines.
• The proposed general plan runs contrary to all well-known principles of smart or sustainable growth, in which development is planned in areas where there are existing services, not in scattered rural areas with no services or adjacent to municipalities where services must be duplicated.
• The notice of preparation for the plan's environmental impact report was issued before the draft plan was made available. It is obvious that the board is eager to get the plan completed and in front of the voters by Nov. 4 at any cost. The public comment period on the notice was to have expired Feb. 4.
• The proposed general plan clearly favors development interests and large landowners over long-term public interests. It fails to explain the justification for additional development in county areas. It especially fails to explain the general conversion of prime agricultural lands to residential development.
• The environmental impact report assessing the county's draft general plan is being prepared by the same company that was hired to write the general plan itself. How is it possible to objectively critique a work one has just written? Although permissible, the process smacks of conflict of interest and displays the single-minded urgency and profound lack of objectivity of the entire plan.
• County supervisors are establishing mutual sewer and water districts in rural areas to accommodate new developments, yet claim that these measures are not growth-inducing in and of themselves. These proposals, when written into our general plan, will radically and permanently alter rural Solano County.
• The proposed plan sets the stage for future rural land use designation changes by failing to establish concrete measures ensuring the protection of agriculture, habitat or open space. It addresses these critical concerns with vague platitudes.
• The rural character of Solano County is likely to be lost forever. Without public outcry, Solano County will go the way of Sacramento, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties.
The coming Solano County general plan is a plain and simple land grab and opens the door to unprecedented development, inevitably turning Solano County into an overpopulated, densely developed, urban cityscape. Our Board of Supervisors has no business developing the county in ways that are unsustainable by our infrastructure and our natural resources.
What can the average person do?
They can voice their opinions in writing to the Board of Supervisors.
They can vote against the acceptance of the general plan. Vote for those who care about our county heritage and the future of our county as we enjoy it today.
They can attend the Board of Supervisor meetings and speak out against the wholesale unbalanced sellout of Solano County to development interests.
Our children, and their children, deserve no less.
________________________________________________
Information about the general plan and the process for adopting it can be found online at http://solanocountygeneralplan.net/
_______________________________________________
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Suburban sprawl: a costly, inefficient way to build a community
by Will Gregory
Jan. 23, 2008
"Sprawling suburbs are arguably the most economically, environmentally, and socially costly pattern of residential development humans have ever devised."
From Urban Sprawl to Sustainable Human Communities
Mark Roseland and William Rees
" Walking in Benicia’s downtown helps me keep a promise. I want to see the world in green, or walk more gently in the world and prevent further irreversible damage to the planet.’
Benicia Mayor- Elizabeth Patterson
" They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."
Singer,song-writer, Joni Mitchell
Recently, out of curiosity I was going over the final thoughts and comments on the elizabethformayor.com web site. I read an interesting note from Councilman Tom Butt from Richmond. He mentioned smart growth and something called the Ahwanhee Principles. Being the curious type, I looked it up. I thought it might be interesting to share this data with the community.
But first I wanted to comment on this idea that mayor Patterson brought up on Dec.4th in the council chambers." Patterson addressed‘ fears’ that she was ‘a zealot tree hugging conservationist,’ by saying that she is zealous about the environment and has a vision of Benicia becoming the green gate to Solano County." (Benicia Herald- "New city council takes over" 12/6/07)
One of the biggest myths is that environmental protection hurts the economy. It doesn’t take much research to prove this wrong.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Stephen Meyer posed the question : Does environmental protection and regulation hinder economic growth, job creation, and overall production, as some business groups maintain?
He evaluated and ranked the 50 states based on two sets of criteria: Economic prosperity (gross domestic product, total employment, and productivity); and breadth and depth of environmental programs. Meyers found that:
* States with stronger environmental policies consistently out-perform the weaker environmental states on all economic measures.
* the pursuit of environmental quality does not hinder economic growth and development.
* there appears to be moderate, yet consistent, positive association between environmentalism and economic growth; and
* there is no evidence that relaxing environmental standards will produce economic growth.
Mayor Patterson idea of a green gate to Solano County is buttressed by another study- by the Institute of Southern Studies- Briefly stated: " The states that do the most to protect their natural resources also wind up with the strongest economies and the best jobs for their citizens."
(Source: Better not Bigger: How to Take Control of Urban Growth and Improve Your Community. Eben Fodor. 2001.)
It would seem that Mayor Patterson has her hand firmly on the- environmental stewardship- rudder and is steering the community in the right direction.
With Solano County in the process of updating its General Plan and with counties like Marin and Ventura adopting the Ahwanhee Principles- I thought it might be of interest to community members to know about these innovative ideas. ( Note: there are no members of the Solano County GP Committee from Benicia ?)
The Ahwahnee Principles for Resource-efficient Communities were presented in 1991 at the Ahwahnee Hotel in Yosemite National Park and written by members of the Local Government Commission. ( Excellent site: http://www.lgc.org/ )
These principles provide a blueprint for elected officials to create compact, mixed use, walkable transit oriented development in local communities; cities and counties across the nation have adopted them to break the cycle of sprawl.
Community Principles:
1. All planning should be in the form of complete and integrated communities containing housing, shops, work places, schools, parks and civic facilities essential to the daily life of residents.
2. Community size should be designed so that housing, jobs, daily needs and other activities are within easy walking distance of each other.
3. As many activities as possible should be located within easy walking distance of transit shops.
4. A community should contain a diversity of housing types to enable citizens from a wide range of economic levels and age groups to live within its boundaries.
5. Businesses within the community should provide a range of job types for the communities residents.
6. The location and character of the community should be consistent with a larger transit network.
7. The community should have a center focus that combines commercial, civic, cultural and recreational uses.
8. The community should contain an ample supply of specialized open space in the form of squares, greens, and parks whose frequent use is encouraged through placement and design.
9. Public spaces should be be designed to encourage the attention and presence of people at all hours of the day and night.
10. Each community or cluster of communities should have a well defined edge, such as agricultural greenbelts or wildlife corridors, permanently protected from development.
11. Streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths should contribute to a system of fully-connected and interesting routes to all destinations. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being small and spatially defined by buildings, trees, and lighting; and by discouraging high speed traffic.
12. Wherever possible, the natural terrain, drainage and vegetation of the community should be preserved with superior examples contained within parks or greenbelts.
13. The community design should help conserve resources and minimize waste.
14. Communities should provide for the efficient use of water through the use of natural drainage, drought tolerant landscaping and recycling.
15. The street orientation, the placement of buildings and the use of shading should contribute to energy efficiency of the community.
Finally, the late Jane Jacobs in her book -"The Death and Life of Great American Cities"(1961) sums it up best if we don’t control sprawl and excessive growth.
" Traffic arteries, along with parking lots and filling stations, are powerful and insistent instruments of city destruction. To accommodate them, city streets are broken down into loose sprawls, incoherent and vacuous for anyone afoot. Downtowns and other neighborhoods that were marvels of close grained intricacy and compact mutual support are casually disemboweled. Landmarks are crumbled or are so sundered from their contexts in city life as to become irrelevant trivialities. City character is blurred until every place becomes like every other place, all adding up to Noplace."
Jan. 23, 2008
"Sprawling suburbs are arguably the most economically, environmentally, and socially costly pattern of residential development humans have ever devised."
From Urban Sprawl to Sustainable Human Communities
Mark Roseland and William Rees
" Walking in Benicia’s downtown helps me keep a promise. I want to see the world in green, or walk more gently in the world and prevent further irreversible damage to the planet.’
Benicia Mayor- Elizabeth Patterson
" They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."
Singer,song-writer, Joni Mitchell
Recently, out of curiosity I was going over the final thoughts and comments on the elizabethformayor.com web site. I read an interesting note from Councilman Tom Butt from Richmond. He mentioned smart growth and something called the Ahwanhee Principles. Being the curious type, I looked it up. I thought it might be interesting to share this data with the community.
But first I wanted to comment on this idea that mayor Patterson brought up on Dec.4th in the council chambers." Patterson addressed‘ fears’ that she was ‘a zealot tree hugging conservationist,’ by saying that she is zealous about the environment and has a vision of Benicia becoming the green gate to Solano County." (Benicia Herald- "New city council takes over" 12/6/07)
One of the biggest myths is that environmental protection hurts the economy. It doesn’t take much research to prove this wrong.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Stephen Meyer posed the question : Does environmental protection and regulation hinder economic growth, job creation, and overall production, as some business groups maintain?
He evaluated and ranked the 50 states based on two sets of criteria: Economic prosperity (gross domestic product, total employment, and productivity); and breadth and depth of environmental programs. Meyers found that:
* States with stronger environmental policies consistently out-perform the weaker environmental states on all economic measures.
* the pursuit of environmental quality does not hinder economic growth and development.
* there appears to be moderate, yet consistent, positive association between environmentalism and economic growth; and
* there is no evidence that relaxing environmental standards will produce economic growth.
Mayor Patterson idea of a green gate to Solano County is buttressed by another study- by the Institute of Southern Studies- Briefly stated: " The states that do the most to protect their natural resources also wind up with the strongest economies and the best jobs for their citizens."
(Source: Better not Bigger: How to Take Control of Urban Growth and Improve Your Community. Eben Fodor. 2001.)
It would seem that Mayor Patterson has her hand firmly on the- environmental stewardship- rudder and is steering the community in the right direction.
With Solano County in the process of updating its General Plan and with counties like Marin and Ventura adopting the Ahwanhee Principles- I thought it might be of interest to community members to know about these innovative ideas. ( Note: there are no members of the Solano County GP Committee from Benicia ?)
The Ahwahnee Principles for Resource-efficient Communities were presented in 1991 at the Ahwahnee Hotel in Yosemite National Park and written by members of the Local Government Commission. ( Excellent site: http://www.lgc.org/ )
These principles provide a blueprint for elected officials to create compact, mixed use, walkable transit oriented development in local communities; cities and counties across the nation have adopted them to break the cycle of sprawl.
Community Principles:
1. All planning should be in the form of complete and integrated communities containing housing, shops, work places, schools, parks and civic facilities essential to the daily life of residents.
2. Community size should be designed so that housing, jobs, daily needs and other activities are within easy walking distance of each other.
3. As many activities as possible should be located within easy walking distance of transit shops.
4. A community should contain a diversity of housing types to enable citizens from a wide range of economic levels and age groups to live within its boundaries.
5. Businesses within the community should provide a range of job types for the communities residents.
6. The location and character of the community should be consistent with a larger transit network.
7. The community should have a center focus that combines commercial, civic, cultural and recreational uses.
8. The community should contain an ample supply of specialized open space in the form of squares, greens, and parks whose frequent use is encouraged through placement and design.
9. Public spaces should be be designed to encourage the attention and presence of people at all hours of the day and night.
10. Each community or cluster of communities should have a well defined edge, such as agricultural greenbelts or wildlife corridors, permanently protected from development.
11. Streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths should contribute to a system of fully-connected and interesting routes to all destinations. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being small and spatially defined by buildings, trees, and lighting; and by discouraging high speed traffic.
12. Wherever possible, the natural terrain, drainage and vegetation of the community should be preserved with superior examples contained within parks or greenbelts.
13. The community design should help conserve resources and minimize waste.
14. Communities should provide for the efficient use of water through the use of natural drainage, drought tolerant landscaping and recycling.
15. The street orientation, the placement of buildings and the use of shading should contribute to energy efficiency of the community.
Finally, the late Jane Jacobs in her book -"The Death and Life of Great American Cities"(1961) sums it up best if we don’t control sprawl and excessive growth.
" Traffic arteries, along with parking lots and filling stations, are powerful and insistent instruments of city destruction. To accommodate them, city streets are broken down into loose sprawls, incoherent and vacuous for anyone afoot. Downtowns and other neighborhoods that were marvels of close grained intricacy and compact mutual support are casually disemboweled. Landmarks are crumbled or are so sundered from their contexts in city life as to become irrelevant trivialities. City character is blurred until every place becomes like every other place, all adding up to Noplace."
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Alternative Vision for the Seeno Project
Our local citizens' group, Benicia First!, calls for a more visionary and sustainable development:
by Jerome Page
We have great concern about the proposed Seeno project, its size, conceptual design and obvious impacts, including many not subject to adequate mitigation. What is entailed in this project as designed will irrevocably alter the character and quality of life of Benicia without the promise of a viable, prosperous long term future.
We do not believe that Benicia should settle for a backward oriented, conventional project framed as something of an extension of our present industrial park. The long term economic viability of that static twentieth century model would be in great doubt.
We believe that the site, the landscape, the quality of Benicia and its population make it an ideal setting for the types of creative, research oriented companies and enterprises that will be shaping the future of our country. We believe that a development that uses the beauty of our landscape as an asset is preferable to one that destroys it.
The country is beginning to awaken to concepts of sustainability, of green enterprises, of a future not dependent upon a petroleum economy and it is hungry for ideas. Numerous cities and towns are beginning to respond with projects and ideas for that future. We believe that Benicia has a unique opportunity to be among them.
There has already been talk of searching for a research and development center, that itself becomes a magnet for other creative and future oriented new enterprises. We would like to work with other groups and individuals in developing plans for such a search and developing the critieria for the type of development in which all Benicians can have confidence and pride.
We believe that Benicians working together can frame such a future for Benicia and we pledge to do everything in our power to assist in achieving that end.
by Jerome Page
We have great concern about the proposed Seeno project, its size, conceptual design and obvious impacts, including many not subject to adequate mitigation. What is entailed in this project as designed will irrevocably alter the character and quality of life of Benicia without the promise of a viable, prosperous long term future.
We do not believe that Benicia should settle for a backward oriented, conventional project framed as something of an extension of our present industrial park. The long term economic viability of that static twentieth century model would be in great doubt.
We believe that the site, the landscape, the quality of Benicia and its population make it an ideal setting for the types of creative, research oriented companies and enterprises that will be shaping the future of our country. We believe that a development that uses the beauty of our landscape as an asset is preferable to one that destroys it.
The country is beginning to awaken to concepts of sustainability, of green enterprises, of a future not dependent upon a petroleum economy and it is hungry for ideas. Numerous cities and towns are beginning to respond with projects and ideas for that future. We believe that Benicia has a unique opportunity to be among them.
There has already been talk of searching for a research and development center, that itself becomes a magnet for other creative and future oriented new enterprises. We would like to work with other groups and individuals in developing plans for such a search and developing the critieria for the type of development in which all Benicians can have confidence and pride.
We believe that Benicians working together can frame such a future for Benicia and we pledge to do everything in our power to assist in achieving that end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
