Category archive

Featured - page 86

Political Climate with Mark Simon: What’s to come east of 101?

in Featured/Headline/PoliticalClimate by

Amid the hours of comment on Redwood City’s Harbor View project, the 400 letters to the Council, the multiple citizen-expert reviews, and attacks on the project and the detailed questions from the City Council, one fact stood out: something is going to be built on the 27-acre site east of Highway 101.

What that something might be is also likely to be opposed by the same forces currently arrayed against the current project, but the reality is so undeniable that it is worth noting again: something will be built there.

Whether in its current form or some other, the debate over Harbor View raises another, larger issue: what should be done – or can be done — with available property on the east side of the Peninsula? More on that further down.

Concerning the Harbor View project, it can be safely assumed that the developer, Jay Paul Company, already had in-hand a scaled-down version of the project long before the recent City Council hearing, at which it was obvious the current proposal is dead on arrival. Full disclosure: the Jay Paul Company is represented by the same people who publish Climate. They have not been consulted about this column.

Winning approval of a project is a lengthy to-and-fro and Jay Paul is not new to the process. They are seeking what the traffic will allow, and they probably have a pretty good idea of what kind of project still generates enough revenue to make it worth their while.

AN OPPORTUNISTIC DEVELOPER: Jay Paul was called “opportunistic” at the same council meeting, which is an odd thing to call any developer, in particular one who has been trying to get something approved for several years. Or, put another way, an opportunistic developer? What is the world coming to? It is the very definition of land development – buy a hunk of property, propose to build something new, make money. It is neither inherently good or bad. Someone wants to make money off it. Welcome to America, land of opportunity

Along the way, the developer may provide a public benefit, first in the form of the project, which will provide housing or office space for residents and businesses, and, second, in the form of other amenities – open space, access to public waters, sports fields, cleanup of a toxic site. In the second category, those amenities often are made to make the project more palatable to a community or a city council. And they often are trade-offs for other impacts, such as traffic. All of which is to say, so what? That’s the way it works. Get something, give something, or vice versa – it’s universal equation.

In Harbor View, the site is what used to be Lyngso Garden Supplies, which moved to San Carlos, and the Malibu Grand Prix amusement park, which moved to the Great Beyond, where there are some existential similarities to San Carlos. The last proposal, which is not going to be approved, called for more than 1 million square feet of high-end, office space contained in four seven-story buildings, plus one two-story amenities building (whatever that is), two parking structures and 36 percent of the site devoted to public open space.

The environmental impact report prepared on the project showed that the huge number of people commuting to work there would make traffic at Highway 101 and Woodside Road worse, if that even seems possible. Council members also were worried that it would worsen the jobs/housing imbalance that is driving up local housing costs.

A HOME OFFICE IS NOT A HOME: An obvious answer would be to build housing there, which may have the same impact on traffic, but would certainly affect the housing shortage.

Except, building housing east of 101 seems to be a non-starter, for a host of reasons, of which the Harbor View site is a good example.  There is significant toxic contamination on the site from prior usages; the environmental burden for housing is substantially stricter than for office buildings, which means additional costs to the developer. It’s true up and down the Peninsula – east of Bayshore historically has been industrial, and not just light industry, like an auto shop, but heavy industry, like a cement factory.

Then there is the specter of sea-level rise. Much of the Peninsula east of 101 is landfill. As huge hunks of the Arctic ice break off and the oceans rise, it appears the bay could reclaim the property now considered waterfront land. I suppose we won’t want the bay to reclaim the toxics, either, but that’s a problem for another day. Anyway, for a host of reasons, cities that consider development of the eastside will approve commercial development, but not housing.

And that’s too bad.

The Peninsula is facing increasing regional pressure to build housing. Certainly, some cities haven’t done their share, but the choices are going to grow increasingly unpleasant.

We all agree El Camino Real is the most likely place for widespread development of high-rise, high-density residential projects. But few cities will bite the bullet the way Redwood City has and build more than three or four stories. What’s left, especially if the east side of 101 is out of the equation?

And what can be done in the face of political pressure to do nothing?

At the same Redwood City Council meeting, a couple of public speakers told the council that last year’s election meant that the council was supposed to hit the pause button, and by pause, they mean stop. Putting aside whether that is an accurate analysis of the most recent city council race, it’s clear the most vocal sentiment is for a citywide pause on development, and not just on commercial property, but housing.

It is an interesting dilemma: we all know there’s a shortage of housing and everyone thinks it ought to be built somewhere else. Finding a solution is going to mean some council members up and down the Peninsula will incur the wrath of an energized opposition.

Contact Mark Simon at mark.simon24@yahoo.com.

*The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Climate Online.

San Mateo County deputy charged with inmate assaults

in Crime/Featured/Headline by

A sheriff’s deputy has been accused of multiple inmate assaults at the Maguire Correctional Facility in Redwood City, according to the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office.

About six months ago, the sheriff’s office received a complaint from a former inmate accusing 42-year-old deputy Black Lycett of assaulting him. After the inmate described the attacker, an internal review identified Lycett as potentially responsible, the sheriff’s office said.

The San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office took over the case while the sheriff’s office continued its internal investigation. The internal investigation uncovered two more incidents of “potential assaultive conduct involving Deputy Lycett,” both of which also allegedly took place at the Maguire Correctional Facility, the sheriff’s office said.

Lycett, who has served as deputy sheriff for the last six years, was placed on administrative leave pending the completion of a criminal and administrative investigation, the sheriff’s office said.

“This is not conduct we condone or believe represents the dedicated personnel here at the Sheriff’s Office”, San Mateo County Sheriff Carlos Bolanos said in a statement. “We take these allegations very seriously and want to thank everyone who came forward.”

Ownership, management of planned express lanes decided

in Community/Featured/Headline by

A joint powers authority consisting of the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) and the City and County of Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG),  will own and set policy for the roughly 22 miles of express lanes planned for U.S. Highway 101 in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties.

Expected to be completed in 2022, the San Mateo US 101 Express Lanes Project would build an express lane in each direction on highway 101 from the San Mateo/Santa Clara county line to Interstate 380. Carpools with three or more people will be allowed to travel for free, while others can travel in the lane for a toll while maintaining targeted 45 mph traffic flow.

On Thursday, the TA Board of Directors, along with the C/CAG, voted to form a joint powers authority in order to retain ownership of the San Mateo U.S. 101 Express Lanes facility.

As owner, the joint powers authority will set tolling policy, issue violations, adopt incentive programs, budget and pay of operation and maintenance, assume liabilities, adopt an expenditure plan and provide and operating and capital reserves to ensure state of good repair of tolling equipment, according to TA.

Also Thursday, the governing bodies voted to have the Bay Area Infrastructure Financing Authority (BAIFA) operate the San Mateo US 101 Express Lanes facility, managing its day-to-day operation.

Thursday’s decisions were necessary in advance of the final design phase for the project that will determine its technical requirements.

“As C/CAG chair, I was both relieved and inspired by (Thursday) night’s board action approving the direction to approve the San Mateo County/BAIFA owner/operator model and form a JPA with equal representation from both boards,” C/CAG Chair Maryann Moise Derwin said in a statement. “After much difficult discussion, the joint ad hoc committee and staff worked collaboratively to come to a consensus recommendation that everyone felt comfortable with. My board takes it on good faith that the ad hoc committee will work out such JPA details as staffing in a way that represents a true equitable partnership between C/CAG and the TA, as has been demonstrated thus far.”

Redwood City sets date for State of City

in Community/Featured/Headline by
Minimum wage in Redwood City set to increase

Redwood City Mayor Ian Bain is set to deliver the State of the City address on Monday, March 18.

The State of the City, which will go over the city’s past accomplishments and goals for the coming year, will occur at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1017 Middlefield Road.

The event is free to attend, and will also be televised and live streamed online at the cities website.

For more information, go here.

Crack’d Toffee: Love, Toffee & Second Chances

in Featured/Food/Headline by

In the beginning it wasn’t all love and sugary treats for Alex and Cherlene Wright, owners of Crack’d Toffee. Their first round at love was dramatic and implosive, ending with Alex thinking Cherlene was crazy, and Cherlene thinking Alex was a jerk. Standard stuff for college romances. But then years later a love letter brought them back into each other’s arms. Despite initial shock and skepticism from friends and family, they’ll be celebrating their 23rd wedding anniversary this year. In this month of love, the Wrights are an example of second chances, of tweaking the recipe to get it just right.

The same goes for their toffee, those deliciously addictive, sweet, buttery shards of chocolate-coated, hand-cracked candy. The original recipe is a family one from Cherlene’s best friend, and it came steeped with rules and traditions. The recipe could be shared, but it couldn’t be written down. If someone new wanted the recipe, he/she had to watch it be made. It was long beloved, which made what happened next a bold, potentially catastrophic move: Cherlene started adjusting the recipe. The saving grace of her intrepid experimentation? Her version was better, and quickly became the new gold standard — even for her best friend’s family.

For years, Alex and Cherlene would toss around the idea of selling the toffee, but it was always in more of a dreamy, “wouldn’t it be amazing” kind of way. When an injury jolted Cherlene out of her career in Redwood City’s public service sector, selling toffee suddenly became a viable adventure. Since opening up their “toffice” almost three years ago, Cherlene has developed five unique toffees. But whether it’s coated in dark chocolate or white, the original, premium dark roast or vegan, one thing is certain: one bite won’t be enough.

Crack’d Crispy Chocolate Toffee Cookies

Makes 50-55

This recipe is courtesy of Cherlene Wright. Her secret tip? Mix and match-dark toffee and white chips or vice versa, for a fun, tasty contrast.

Ingredients

1/2 cup softened butter

1/2 cup softened butter Crisco

3/4 cup packed brown sugar

3/4 cup white sugar

11/2 teaspoons good vanilla extract

2 eggs

2¼ cup flour

1 teaspoon baking soda

1 teaspoon salt

11/2 cups Crack’d toffee (any kind), chopped into

small chunks (think chocolate chip size)

1 16oz package of chocolate chips

Directions

1.  Preheat the oven to 350ª.

2.  Prepare a few baking sheets with parchment.

3.  In a standing mixer, beat the butter, Crisco, and sugars until fluffy.

4.  Add the vanilla, and then the eggs one at a time, mixing in between additions. Scrape down the sides of the bowl and make sure everything is combined.

5.  In a separate bowl, mix the flour, baking soda and salt.

6.  Add the dry ingredients to the wet ingredients, and mix until just combined.

7.  Add the chocolate chips and toffee, mix until just combined.

8.  Pop the cookie dough in the fridge for 15-30 minutes. This isn’t a requirement, but it will make scooping the cookies easier.

9.  Scoop the cookie dough into roughly tablespoon-sized balls. Make three rows of three on each cookie sheet, leaving at least 2” between each dough ball — these cookies will spread so you want to give them plenty of room.

10.  Bake for 12-15 minutes at 350ª.

11.  After removing from the oven, let them sit on the cookie sheet for a minute or two, and then use a spatula (because they may still be soft) to transfer to a wire cooling rack. They will crisp up as they cool.

Did you know? Ten percent of Crack’d Toffee’s quarterly proceeds go to charity. For more about Crack’d and to place your order, head to crackdtoffee.com.

This story was published in the February print edition of Climate Magazine.

4 Peninsula cities make Bloomberg Richest Places list

in Community/Featured/Headline by

For a third straight year, Atherton was ranked as America’s richest community on the Bloomberg Richest Places annual index, with a household income averaging $450,696 in 2017.

Hillsborough ranked fifth on the index, with an average household income of $373,128. Los Altos was 26th at $280,162. Los Altos Hills in Santa Clara County came fourth at $386,174.

To produce its list, Bloomberg says it evaluated inflation-adjusted household data for Census-defined U.S. places with a minimum of 2,000 households.

Atherton Mayor Bill Widmer told Bloomberg the community’s close proximity to Stanford University, Google and Facebook, along with its semi-rural environment with property sizes of at least an acre, are reasons for attracting wealthy households. High-profile Atherton residents include Google’s Eric Schmidt and Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg.

Proximity to major cities, such as San Francisco and New York, were cited as reasons for high household income results.

“More than half the top 100 richest places in American were either in the New York City area or California,” Bloomberg reported.

Read Bloomberg’s report here.

  1. Atherton – $450,696
  2. Scarsdale, NY – $417,335
  3. Cherry Hills Village, CO – #394,259
  4. Los Altos Hills – $386,174
  5. Hillsborough – $373,128
  6. Short Hills, NJ – $367,491
  7. Highland Park, TX – $358,994
  8. Darien, CT – $341,090
  9. Bronxville, NY – $340,448
  10. Glencoe, IL – $339,883
  11. The Village of Indian Hill, OH – $338,267
  12. Old Greenwich, CT – $336,692
  13. Winnetka, IL – $331,231
  14. West University Place, TX – $330,459
  15. Larchmont, NY – $313,586
  16. Great Falls, VA – $309,599
  17. University Park, TX – $304,898
  18. Westport, CT – $304,439
  19. Rumson, NJ – $303,542
  20. Paradise Valley, AZ – $300,521

City Council hears public comment on draft EIR for Harbor View project and project alternatives

in Community/Featured/Headline by

The proposed project by Jay Paul Company includes 1.2 million square feet of office space within four seven-story buildings at 320-350 Blomquist St., east of Highway 101. A general plan amendment would be needed to approve the project.

At Monday’s hearing, no formal action was taken by council. Some residents expressed concern over the potential imbalance of jobs and housing resulting from the project, along with the prospect of amending the general plan and also sea level rise.

The project’s commitment to affordable housing, along with $50 million in community benefits, are welcomed by some on council and in the public.

“This project is talking about is changing the nature of our community,” said Jim Burt, a 15-year Redwood City resident. “We would like it to go through the general process and for people to agree upon what our community should look like instead of granting decisions by exception.”

Kris Johnson, a resident and community activist, brought a presentation of his own to the council.

“The draft EIR only confirmed the incredible jobs housing imbalance that is an unavoidable by product of this project,” he said.

Alice Kaufman from the Committee of Green Foothills spoke on her concern about sea level rise.

“We should not double down on the fact that we have so much vulnerable development by making more of it,” she said. “What we can expect with sea level rise is that long before the average water level gets high enough to over top the shoreline, we will start to see seasonal impacts. We are already seeing water backing up through storm drains, during king tides. This happens on Maple Street just down the road from the Harbor View site.”

Alongside the voices of concern were supporters of the project, including Sister Christina Heltsley of the St. Francis Center and Lydia Ramirez of Casa Circulo Cultural.

Sister Christina touted the project’s community benefits, which includes $12 million to support affordable housing.

“I am here this evening because I am driven by our mission to serve the economically poor,” Sister Christina said. “One significant piece of that mission, especially in the face of rents that have become exorbitant, is to find, build, rehab, create and scrounge for every possible unit of housing that will provide safe, dignified, and clean spaces for our families.”

In the last three years, St. Francis Center has added 93 units of housing, with Jay Paul assisting with the purchase of 48 of those units.

Lydia Ramirez of Casa Circulo Cultural cited the labor that will come from the proposed project.

Councilmember Dianna Reddy expressed her concern about the project’s impacts, but thanked the Harbor View team for walking her through the project and for seeking community input.

Said Councilmember Giselle Hale, “I think it is helpful when people can concretely wrap their arms around what a benefits look like and I’m excited that the affordable housing is a shovel ready project, with a partner that has a lot of credibility in the community.”

While the council mentioned numerous public comments submitted online over concern for the Port community, no one from the Port has reached out expressing their opposition to the project.

At the end of the meeting consensus from the council was that while the community benefits are appreciated and recognized as significant contributions,  project alternatives are needed from the Jay Paul Company. 

Political Climate with Mark Simon: What Gov. Newsom’s announcement really means for High Speed Rail

in Featured/Headline/PoliticalClimate by

In the vast panoply of confusion, cost overruns, delays and miscommunication that is the California High Speed Rail project, it is entirely fitting that no one can figure out what Gov. Gavin Newsom’s major announcement about the project means.

I think he wanted to look like he’s against it without being against it. Anyway, it was not his finest hour in communicating, and that’s entirely in keeping with the finest traditions of High Speed Rail.

The people who hate the project – and, boy, do they hate the project – were dancing in the streets to the tune of, “Ding, Dong, the Witch Is Dead.” Its defenders, and there are many, were perusing the governor’s statements like it was some ancient, oracular text that would reveal untold secrets to the universe.

All Newsom did was acknowledge the obvious – the only part of the project that is capable of going forward is the Central Valley stretch, and it is meaningful that he wants it to be a high-speed rail, and not a regular rail line as initially proposed by the Wizards of High Speed Rail.

The rest of the HSR project was a mess, at best, and, despite the nightmares of Peninsula opponents, the statewide rail system was not coming to the area in the foreseeable future.

That it won’t go from San Jose to San Francisco is particularly amusing given the hilariously ambitious desires of those two cities at either end of the bay. Each of them is so hungry to have the train (and be Very Important) that they went ahead and planned (SJ), or built (SF), two versions of the “Grand Central Station of the West.” It should be noted that the rail station in New York City does not call itself the Grand Central Station of the East. As an aside, it’s an interesting and longstanding tradition in American history for communities to lust after train service, so some things never change.

Anyway, all you HSR-haters in Atherton, I’m sorry to tell you that High Speed Rail is not dead. The organization has not been dissolved. The project has not been repealed.

In fact, the betting is that once an actual high-speed system is in place, in this case in the Central Valley, public attitude will shift dramatically, people will want to know why they don’t have it and it will spring back to life. That’s not just my opinion, but one held by a lot of people who are frustrated that the United States is a Third World country when it comes to rail.

So, it could be argued, Newsom actually has saved High Speed Rail. Not incidentally, there’s another reason Newsom doesn’t want to be killing the project, which our president seized upon immediately – there is $3.5 billion in federal funds in the project.

Meanwhile, this is good news for our favorite railroad, Caltrain, which is known as the Caltrain of the West. Full disclosure: I worked at Caltrain for 13 years.

Because the Caltrain right of way seemed an ideal path for the final northern leg of the statewide rail system, High Speed Rail struck a deal that made the two rail agencies partners: High Speed Rail would help pay to electrify Caltrain, so that when HSR was ready, it would have a necessary infrastructure in place.

It has been a bumpy relationship, largely because the subsequent Wizards of High Speed Rail didn’t like the deal made by their predecessors. What the successors didn’t fully grasp is how ready Peninsulans were to fight HSR and that the only way the rail line was going to be allowed to go from San Jose to San Francisco was under the umbrella of goodwill enjoyed by Caltrain. In short, it was the only deal HSR could make at the time.

The agreement left Caltrain in charge of its own right of way and HSR wanted more authority over how many trains they could run on the Peninsula, how often and where the train could stop. It has led to some odd decisions, the strangest being an argument over the height of the platforms at the shared rail stations, which resulted in an absurd multi-door design on the new electric rail cars Caltrain is buying.

Newsom’s announcement also means many of those arguments are likely to continue. High Speed Rail backed Caltrain’s electrification project to the tune of $713 million or nearly one-third of the total cost of the project. And the state kicked in another $165 million for the new electric rail cars. The state is a substantial investor in Caltrain’s electrification project and, understandably, some officials think they should have some sway over how electrification can affect the ultimate destiny of High Speed Rail.

Right now, though, the Peninsula is one of the few places that will benefit from the High Speed Rail project in the form of a modernized Caltrain with more service, more frequently and rail cars fully armed with WiFi. All in all, High Speed Rail has been a good deal for the Peninsula and the modernization of Caltrain would still be little more than a plan without the HSR money.

Contact Mark Simon at mark.simon24@yahoo.com.

*The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Climate Online.

Photo credit: California Governor’s Office

Redwood City makes progress in creating district election map

in Community/Featured/Headline by
Minimum wage in Redwood City set to increase

Redwood City officials made progress Monday in the complex quest to create a map that divides the city into separate voter districts.

Since September of last year, the city has been transitioning under threat of legal action from an at-large election system for city council members to a district-based system, which will have voters electing only the council candidates who reside in their district. As part of the transition, the city must create a map that divides the city’s 17 neighborhoods into seven council districts. The city has until March 31 to identify the map and complete the transition process.

During the third of five required public hearings on Monday, City Council narrowed down 24 proposed maps of varying district boundaries to five. Three of the maps were submissions by community members. They can be viewed at 7-007, 7-013, and 7-019. The other two were submitted by the city’s consulting demographer, the National Demographics Corporation (NDC). They can be viewed at 7-021 and 7-022.

NDC will revise those maps further based upon Monday’s direction by council. The revised versions will then be posted on the city’s website here, by Monday, Feb. 18.

Council will conduct a fourth public hearing on Feb. 25, as well as a fifth on March 11, when it is expected to adopt a final map.

The city aims to hold its first by-district elections in four of the seven districts in November 2020, and then, after redrawing the map based upon 2020 Census data, the remaining three districts will hold their first elections.

The city has conducted a wide-reaching public outreach campaign that included providing community members with online mapping tools to create proposed boundaries.

Monday’s public hearing yet again revealed the complexity of drawing up those boundaries, particularly in terms of location of schools, busy transit corridors and downtown.

By law, each council district must contain a nearly equal population, and they must not be drawn with race as the predominant factor, a violation of the Federal Voting Rights Act. There are also a set of criteria on drawing up boundaries fairly and sensibly.

However the map is drawn up, several councilmembers noted it will likely be redrawn in two years. U.S. Census data, which is collected every 10 years, becomes available in 2020.

“I do think there is an opportunity to learn and to make adjustments,” Councilmember Giselle Hale said. “And think about the neighborhoods that barely existed in 2010. Bair Island and downtown would have had very small populations [in 2010] relative to what we know them to be today.”

The city’s demographics are continuing to evolve, said Councilmember Shelly Masur, who stressed the importance that the district map follows “the letter of the law.”

“There are young families not just in Centennial,” Masur said. “In every single one of those neighborhoods, if you talk to realtors and renters, there are new families moving into all of our neighborhoods, which is amazing, and that’s how our city is changing.”

Mayor Ian Bain, who will term out of office before district elections take effect, said he “hates that we’re dividing up our city after doing so much to bring it together.”

“Once you’re elected…you represent the whole city,” Bain said.

The city is moving toward a district-based election system following threats of legal action that alleges the current at-large system violates the California Voting Rights Act in discriminating against minorities and minority candidates. Redwood City is among a growing list of jurisdictions transitioning because of this legal challenge.

Opponents of district elections argue they create an environment in which elected officials favor district issues at the expense of the city as a whole, and eliminate viable candidates who happen to live in the same district.

San Mateo County board approves safe gun storage ordinance

in Community/Featured/Headline by
San Mateo County Board votes to restrict County resources from assisting immigration authorities

Guns stored in homes in unincorporated San Mateo County must be kept in a locked container or disabled with a trigger lock as part of new safety requirements adopted by the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.

The new ordinance, passed 5-0 by the board, also states that lost or stolen firearms must be reported by their owners to law enforcement within five days of their knowing that the firearms are missing. Failing to do so could lead to prosecution for violating the locked container provision.

The consequences for failing to safely store firearms in homes is up to six months in County Jail and a fine of up to $1,000.

Supervisors Dave Pine and David Canepa introduced the ordinance as a way to prevent tragedies.

“Many instances of gun violence occur in the home,” Pine said in a statement. “To help prevent accidental shootings, gun-related homicides and suicides, and the theft of unsecured firearms, the County of San Mateo is seeking commonsense requirements for secure storage of firearms in the home, requirements which are not explicitly required for all gun owners under California state law.”

If the ordinance passes a second reading on Feb. 26, it will take effect 30 days later.

In 2013, Sunnyvale voters approved similar safe storage regulations that also included a ban on ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Its regulations survived a court challenge by the National Rifle Association.

1 84 85 86 87 88 146
Go to Top