Reports show that the Spaceport America, currently under construction in the New Mexico desert, will employ 2,300 people with a payroll of $300,000,000 within five years and $1 Billion within the decade. Dammit, let’s change Concord’s slogan from, “The City where some families come first,” to “Concord, the Final Frontier!”

Incidentally, did you know that the State of California actually has a Space Authority? And it is already licensing companies beginning to do business with Virgin Galactic’s plans to become a viable commercial space tourist industry. How did we not see this one coming? Blame it on the stupid bullet train, I suppose. How 19th Century is that?

It’s not too late Concord. Let’s get a piece of this while we still can. City Council should appoint Helen Allen as lead conniver and beam her up put to work on this immediately. Between her connections with Shaw and the Navy, Concord could make the dream of an intermodal port located in North Concord an out of this world reality!

HAS Application 20081212

Shortly after the founding of this city of Todos Santos the people changed the name to Concord. No one knows why it was done, but I would like to think it was because of the spirit of a single community that the word concord represents. This was typified by the founders Pacheco/Galindo who when they put in the first swimming pool in their adobe, it was opened to all the children in the City.

The community has recognized the need for a development of an UPTOWN area as it looks forward to an efficient extension of the city into the 21st Century. This is seen on both plans. We should not harness that hope with the curse of divisions and isolated locales upon the hope of a GREATER CONCORD.

For generations the traditional citizens of this city have been confronted with the stark ugliness of the Cold War as represented by the visual display of the rows of Bunker City south of Willow Pass Road. Now that we have an opportunity to reward their patience: shall we honor that sacrifice by the back end view of an OBSCENE development with a green moat to highlight its separation from the rest of OUR city?

If Concord wants to have separatist new developments and elitist villages then we should annex Clyde and Clayton and still keep this land for parks and open space.

YES to PARKS and open space which is more than just dirt and weeds but the fields of play and the fulfillment of the original soul of a city searching for greater unity rather than retreating to more divisions.

The Clustered Villages plan for CONCORD is a blueprint for DISCORD.

“The conclusions of this survey mirror, in many ways, a similar survey that was conducted at the beginning of the planning process in 2006. Overall, residents favor a balanced approach. Respondents favored a mix of housing (single-family, townhouses, condos, larger and smaller units) as well has homes for sale and for rent. In addition to housing, office buildings and other projects that create jobs were supported.

“Survey respondents expressed a strong desire for open space as well as developed recreation areas and sports fields. The average amount of the land that respondents believe should be in open space and parks was 44 percent, with 72 percent calling for 50 percent or less. Respondents were clear, as in 2006, that the project must produce sufficient tax revenue to cover the city’s costs.

“In general, the responses support the themes represented in the “Clustered Villages” alternative, one of two plans being considered by the Concord City Council. The survey shows that respondents are more comfortable with less dense development as reflected in this alternative. This alternative focuses dense development around the North Concord BART station, but then spreads development out along the southern portion of the site in three pedestrian-friendly villages.

“The second plan, “Concentration and Conservation”, locates all development in the northwestern quarter of the project area with the remainder of the property left in open space. In order to be financially feasible, this alternative requires fairly dense residential development, which would give the area a more urban feel. The City Council is scheduled to select a preferred alternative at its January 12, 2009 meeting.

Final Phone Survey

So it is with the Concord Naval Weapons Station as people trip over themselves promising mass suicide if the new CNWS is not universally recognized as “world-class.” People are pumping so much sunshine up each others’ assholes that if we could put a cork in it we’d solve the domestic energy shortage in less than a week; or three more CAC hearings, whichever comes first.

Put a sock in it people. Please. And learn to express original thoughts instead of vomiting buzz terms as if you know what they mean.

Cause no one else really does.

Thanks; I feel so “value-added,” now.

COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CNWS MINORITY REPORT

October 28, 2008
Mayor William D. Shinn and Concord Council
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, California 94519

Dear Mayor Shinn and Council,

At the Community Advisory Committee, Concord Reuse Project, meeting on October 14, two alternatives for the CNWS, findings and a resolution were sent to the Concord City Council on a 10-7 vote. When the CAC met on September 30, Michael Wright indicated that a minority report might go to the Council as well, particularly if the CAC recommendation was less than 2/3. Therefore, those of us in the minority would like to submit a minority report.

We commend the efforts by the Council, CAC and staff to allow for extensive public participation and to carefully craft two alternatives from the original seven, following the Guiding Principles. We strongly support the basic elements in both alternatives especially the open space, regional park, city parks, sports complex, higher education campus, new library, new green housing, jobs-generation and new local schools.

We request that the Council consider our comments and amend the findings with the suggestions we have submitted.

TIME FOR THE COMMUNITY
We believe the community should have had time to read and respond to the newly framed alternatives with the findings as expressed in the resolution (CAC No. 08-1). While the CAC had this information hand -delivered a few days in advance, members of the community did not. After months of building consensus, this rush to approve was divisive and unnecessary.

CAC Minority Report 1
Most people expected a decision on October 21, which was well within the time table the CAC was given.

OPPORTUNITY TO MODIFY THE FINDINGS
The motion that was made to accept the draft resolution also accepted the findings without any modifications. We believe that the CAC should have had the opportunity to modify and add to these findings before taking action, preferably at the October 21st CAC meeting. If this had been done, we believe that the CAC vote probably could have provided a consensus. We seek to remedy this, in part, by including amendments to the findings in this report.

CHALLENGES WITH BOTH ALTERNATIVES
NN Both provide for more density in housing and jobs than the transportation system should be expected to accommodate. The Oct. 10, 2008, Clustered Alternative has 12,300 dwelling units (28,880 people) and 26,530 jobs; the Concentration and Conservation Alternative has 10,205 dwelling units (23,240 people) and 21,260 jobs. At a conservative 10 trips per day per household — not counting jobs traffic — this would be 123,000 Average Daily Trips (Clustered) and 102,050 Average Daily Trips (Concentrated). While we understand that any development will add to traffic, these figures would create congestion that is unacceptable to the community. NN Development in both alternatives has been placed over major wetland areas. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board’s response to the DEIR referred to filling 35 acres of wetlands on this site which would occur on the least developed of the seven Reuse Plan Alternatives covered by the EIR. The letter states: “”it is critical to acknowledge that compensatory mitigation for the permanent loss of such a substantial acreage of wetlands habitat could be very difficult, if not impossible to achieve.” (p. 2, DEIR response) This agency must provide permits for development, as you know.

–In the Clustered Alternative, parks or open space/trail areas which buffer the existing neighborhoods are still inadequate, as expressed repeatedly by the Neighborhood Alliance and others.

–After two years of meetings, workshops, and dialogue, it is clear that the community will accept nothing less than permanent public open space status for the designated open space areas. The findings and maps need to reflect this, preferably specifying the open space as

CAC Minority Report 2
a regional park, in order to clearly represent the city’s intentions for the open space areas.

SPECIFIC FINDINGS IN THE CAC RESOLUTION NO. 08-1
At this point we do not know what the reactions of the community might have been to these findings. We believe a community consensus was possible which the CAC could have forwarded to the Council in late October. It is now up to the Council to find that consensus.

Here are our suggested additions to the findings:

Section 1. General Findings Regarding the Concentration and Conservation Alternative and Clustered Village Alternative

A. Overarching goals
p. 3 Quality of Life
The final sentence should list: some additional community facilities such as large picnic areas, educational centers and camping.

B. Key Planning Principles

p. 4 6. This item should include “a broad array of travel choices” (a phrase used elsewhere in the findings).

p. 4 12. This principle should read “Maximize permanent open space
and include plans to provide public park facilities, tree-planting and trails.”

Section 2. Specific Findings Regarding the Concentration and Conservation Alternative
p. 5 C. COMMUNITY

p. 7. 4. Parkland
Second bullet add at end: with park facilities and trails. Retain existing trees as a goal.
p. 7 D. LAND STEWARDSHIP

p. 7 Viewshed and Hillside Protection Second bullet add “and regional park facilities.”
CAC Minority Report 3

p. 8 Biological Resources
Fifth bullet, first sentence. Change last phrase to say “special management of cattle grazing.” (not termination, necessarily)

p. 8 E. ECONOMICS
new 2. Benefits to Concord
As the project progresses, many jobs will be created in the businesses that locate here and in the construction of the project itself. Through a practice of hiring local workers in good living wage jobs with training/apprentice programs, we can ensure that the City of Concord, its residents, and businesses realize the economic benefits of this project and have trained local workers for the future.

Section 3. Specific Findings Regarding the Clustered

Alternative
p. 10 C. COMMUNITY

p. 12. 4. Parkland
Third bullet add at end: with park facilities and trails. Retain existing trees as a goal.

p. 12 D. LAND STEWARDSHIP

p. 12 Viewshed and Hillside Protection Second bullet add: “and regional park facilities.”

p. 12 Biological Resources
Fifth bullet, first sentence. Change last phrase to say especial management of cattle grazing.” (not termination, necessarily)

p. 13 E. ECONOMICS
new 2. Benefits to Concord
As the project progresses, many jobs will be created in the businesses that locate here and in the construction of the project itself. Through a practice of hiring local workers in good living wage jobs with training/apprentice programs, we can ensure that the City of Concord, its residents, and businesses realize the economic benefits of this project and have trained local workers for the future.

CAC Minority Report 4

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this minority report. We have appreciated the opportunity to serve on the Community Advisory Committee and look forward to the Council’s discussions and decision.

Sincerely yours,

Scott Hein, Beverly Lane, John Mercurio, Rosanne Nieto, Greg Enholm,
Melvin Lee and Paul Elliott

cc City Manager Daniel E . Keen , Michael W. Wright, CAC
CAC Minority