|

|
November 2, 2000
Mayor Jim Perrine and Council Members
Marina City Council
City Hall
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933
RE: Approval of General Plan and Certification
of Final EIR
Dear Mayor Perrine and Council Members:
This letter is to make a formal protest, for the
record, of your proposal to certify a Final
Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Marina
General Plan, and thereafter to approve that
proposed General Plan.
On August 2, 2000, LandWatch submitted an
extensive comment letter on the proposed General
Plan. With very few exceptions, your Council chose
not even to analyze or comment on the points we
made, as you carried out your deliberations. It is
certainly your prerogative to ignore comments and
testimony from interested parties, but we believe
that the General Plan before you on November 2,
2000 would better achieve the objectives
articulated by the Council, and outlined in the
proposed General Plan, by incorporating many of our
comments. We also note that the Council, by
incorporating a proposed extension of California
Avenue across a Natural Reserve Area, contrary to
the recommendation of the Marina Planning
Commission, is apparently proposing to adopt a Plan
that is inconsistent with the Fort Ord Reuse
Authority Plan. We urge you again to delete this
inconsistent proposal from the General Plan, and to
reconfigure the General Plan accordingly.
We do not believe that the Final EIR has
adequately responded to the comments submitted on
the Draft EIR, including the extensive comments we
submitted. Water and traffic impacts have been
inadequately considered, and we particularly note
that you have absolutely failed to undertake a
visual analysis of the impact of the development of
the Armstrong Ranch. The Draft EIR identified the
degradation of visual resources as a major
unmitigated environmental impact of the proposed
General Plan. As we noted in our comments on the
Draft EIR, we believe that CEQA requires your
Council to understand the visual impacts of your
proposed action, prior to acting. The public, too,
has the right to visualize these impacts. It would
certainly be feasible for you to prepare a
computerized simulation, accurately showing the
impact that the development proposed for the
Armstrong Ranch would have on the extraordinary
visual resources associated with that land in its
current condition.
CEQA requires that the environmental documents
prepared by a Lead Agency must really provide
"information" about possible impacts--for both
decision makers and the public--and you have chosen
not to provide that information about the impact of
the proposed General Plan on visual resources. It
is, in fact, feasible to produce the kind of
simulation our comments called for--witness the
attached campaign mailer. The visualization
included in the Marina 2020 Vision Campaign
Committee tabloid, circulated in connection with
the Measure E campaign, is not, as the tabloid
notes, a visualization that represents an actual
development proposal. But the fact that a small
community group, at no cost, could have produced
this visualization demonstrates that the City could
quite feasibly have produced a fully accurate
simulation--as we believe that CEQA in fact
requires. We again urge the Council not to adopt a
General Plan that will lead to the destruction of
the visual beauty of Marina without even having a
"picture" of what their decision actually means. If
you could actually see the effects of what you are
proposing to adopt, we believe that you might well
adopt a different General Plan.
Thank you for considering these comments.
LandWatch urges the City Council not to adopt the
proposed resolution certifying the Final EIR on the
proposed General Plan, and we again urge you not to
adopt the proposed General Plan as presented to you
at your November 2, 2000 meeting.

|