905 votes
Cargill: Don't Pave San Francisco Bay!
Save The Bay (San Francisco Bay) - non-profit - www.saveSFbay.org
Corporate giants don’t just quietly destroy natural resources in developing nations – they’re trying to do it here! Agri-business giant Cargill wants to build a mini-city on one of America’s greatest natural treasures, San Francis... more
Harry
The Bay wetlands's crucial role as the filtration system of baywater and waterway runoff continues to erode by every acre of wetland we take away in the name of real estate. People want to live here because of the integration of nature and development, so why would we continue to jeopardize the very thing that draws people to the bay area to begin with, let alone jeopardize our own health and that of the species around us? Can you imagine a time in the future where we have to worry about getting too clos... more
The Bay wetlands's crucial role as the filtration system of baywater and waterway runoff continues to erode by every acre of wetland we take away in the name of real estate. People want to live here because of the integration of nature and development, so why would we continue to jeopardize the very thing that draws people to the bay area to begin with, let alone jeopardize our own health and that of the species around us? Can you imagine a time in the future where we have to worry about getting too close to the water because of high bacteria or because the smell of the water is so overwhelming that you don't want to be close to it?
Linda
I have watched Redwood City pave over Redwood Shores since 1984. Now they want to pave over what little remains of our open space. This not only impacts those of us who live in Redwood City, but the entire Bay Area, including Menlo Park and Palo Alto. We are all facing forced water conservation, increased traffic and pollution issues. Developing Cargil will only hasten our clogged roads, drought issues and extinction of wildlife around the Bay. Will the only place that we will be able to see geese,... more
I have watched Redwood City pave over Redwood Shores since 1984. Now they want to pave over what little remains of our open space. This not only impacts those of us who live in Redwood City, but the entire Bay Area, including Menlo Park and Palo Alto. We are all facing forced water conservation, increased traffic and pollution issues. Developing Cargil will only hasten our clogged roads, drought issues and extinction of wildlife around the Bay. Will the only place that we will be able to see geese, rabbits and raccoons is in zoo? A few more soccer fields, with artificial turf, are not what our children need. They need to be able to see the wonder of nature in its truest form.
And don't you all realize that when a huge developer overbuilds an area, that all of our property values will drop. Too much of a supply, causes a glut" on the market. Just look at all of the development in the Sacramento area, Las Vegas and other over saturated markets. Do we want a future of continued upside down loans and rapidly dropping home values? I don't!!!!! Those that run DMB don't live here!!! But I do, and I don't want this is my backyard, do you?????
All in all.....Redwood City is greedy!!!! And, it is time for them to look at the legacy they are leaving our next generation. PLEASE DON"T BUILD ON CARGILL LAND!!!
Carolyn Garbarino
Stop Cargill from destroying some of the last California wetlands.
Sarah Lyons
Don't let Cargill destroy our beautiful Bay just to make a buck!
Julie Abraham
Nothing is more repulsive to me, or more worthy of activism, than this effort to destroy yet more of what was historically one of the greatest system of marshes in the US outside of the Everglades. It seems foolish in the extreme to build into tidal marshes when we are facing rising waters and already ugly population pressures. Growth for growth's sake, with no thought to the quality of our environment makes zero sense.
Beverly Dahlen
No! to Cargill, NO. NO! Think of this bay 300 years ago---an absolute paradise. An abundance of fish, of birds, and the idea of restoring even a little of that is essential. We must stop any more development on the baylands. The poor bay is already inundated with industrial pollution. We must begin to reverse that.
stevenwrussell
This area was a thriving marsh just 60 years ago. For water filtration, flood protection, recreational activities and wildlife habitat it must be returned to marshland. There are many places in Redwood City where sustainable transit-oriented development can and should occur. The Cargill property is not one of them.
Ron Lorensen
That is about the dumbest idea I have heard. Plain and simple if we want to survive as a species we better start getting in balance with Mother Earth that's all she asks.. A parking lot is not balance but shear madness
Kelly
The Salt Ponds have been a long part of our history on the Peninsula. They are not infill, but baylands. It is unconscienceable to 1) add more development to the bay front and into the Bay. 2.) Develop more along the already insanely crowded Peninsula. 3.) Oversaturate Redwood City with more retail space when much of the space in the newly renovated, lovely downtown is empty. 4.) Build on a location that is sure to be impacted greatly when seas rise. 5.) Create a development that will use more water wh... more
The Salt Ponds have been a long part of our history on the Peninsula. They are not infill, but baylands. It is unconscienceable to 1) add more development to the bay front and into the Bay. 2.) Develop more along the already insanely crowded Peninsula. 3.) Oversaturate Redwood City with more retail space when much of the space in the newly renovated, lovely downtown is empty. 4.) Build on a location that is sure to be impacted greatly when seas rise. 5.) Create a development that will use more water when our water needs are already extremely high.
Janet Lyons
We have a rare opportunity to reclaim an industrialized portion of the Bay's wetlands and reverse some of the damage that has been done to its ecosystem over the years. Help spread the word !
John Davey
Restoring the Bay, and the 1,433 aceres of once pristine marshland, is unquestionably the right thing to do.