Environmentalists oppose development
Nature: Activists say housing plan would destroy tidal lagoon’s habitat
REDWOOD CITY » Environmentalists are rising up against a developer’s plan to dredge part of a San Francisco Bay tidal lagoon and use the fill to cover marshes around it so a 350-unit apartment complex can be built on top.
Saying it would would destroy a natural habitat and expose apartment dwellers to sea-level rise, the environmentalists said they would sue to stop the project at 199 Seaport Blvd., near the Port of Redwood City.
Before the development proposal could even go before the
Redwood City City Council, however, Menlo Park-based Laguna Sequoia Land Company must obtain building permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
According to San Mateo County assessment records, the tidal lagoon, known as Ferrari
Pond, is owned by Abernathy Valley Inc. and controlled by Ray Ferrari of Mountain View.
The 21.9-acre tidal lagoon is adjacent to a PG&E substation and a concrete production plant. It is mostly underwater and was formerly used for salt production until Bay water poured in
through a gap in the dike three years ago, flooding the property and beginning a process described as organic re-naturalization.
Though nowhere near as massive as the controversial 12,000-home development once proposed for the nearby Cargill salt ponds until finally dropped after decades of political and legal battles, the Ferrari Pond development faces major hurdles.
San Francisco Baykeeper executive director Sejal Choksi-Chugh, who opposes the project, said it’s widely recognized that “restoring wetlands is one of the most effective ways to stem the global climate crisis,” yet the “ill-conceived” Ferrari Pond project “does just the opposite.”
“The South Bay has numerous inactive salt ponds that have been restored to their natural state, and that’s exactly what should happen with Ferrari Pond,” Choksi-Chugh added. “Baykeeper fully supports more affordable housing around the Bay Area; however, we don’t need more poorly planned housing and commercial developments that will flood during major storm events, add to the Bay’s pollution problems, and endanger the people living on and near them.”
Proponents counter that the project would be consistent with the city’s goal of providing more desperately needed housing while conserving the natural environment and benefiting the wider community.
Laguna Sequoia Land Company managing partner Wallace Murfit said in a statement his company has a contract to purchase the property from the Ferrari family and build the apartments. The property price was listed at $10 million, according to an offer summary by real estate brokerage firm Marcus and Millichap.
The proposed project would restore 12 acres of wetlands, expand Steinberger Slough and create a two-acre public waterfront park. But it also calls for a 500-space underground parking garage that, if built, would require significant changes to the lagoon.
As part of the plan, about 100,000 cubic yards of bay muck would be dredged roughly 12 feet deep from a six-acre section of the tidal lagoon and spread over 1.3 acres of tidal marsh around the periphery of the lagoon so the apartment complex could be built on top.
The developer also proposes to establish a 4.8-acre tidal wetland and enhance 1.2 acres of existing wetland on the western dike, according to a public notice by the San Francisco District office of the US Army Corps of Engineers.
“The Bay restoration portion of the project was designed by a prominent fish habitat biology consultant,” Murfit said. “That firm has prepared a report which shows that our proposed expansion of Steinberger Slough will provide fish habitat at least as viable as the existing condition.”
Murfit also noted the Bay Area Council and the Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County have both written letters to the Corps of Engineers supporting the project because it would bring more housing to the area. Other waterfront communities along Redwood Creek are “very successful,” Redwood Creek, Murfit said.
“Clearly I think the authorities should approve our project. It would provide 350 units of muchneeded housing, while at the same time enhancing the environmental value of the site,” Murfit said. “The city has expressed its vision for the site through its General Plan. There are very few opportunities in the Bay Area for waterfront living, and the city has encouraged this through its Mixed-Use Waterfront zoning.”
But for Alice Kaufman, legislative advocacy director for Palo Alto-based environmental group Green Foothills, the Ferrari Pond project is the wrong place for housing. She warned against the effects of sealevel rise on a potential development there.
“It’s a proposal to build housing in a restorable wetland right in the path of climate change and sea-level rise,” Kaufman said. “We shouldn’t be putting homes and people in the path of sea-level rise, not when we have more appropriate locations inland. This is a perfect example of how if we simply allow nature to take its course, we can easily restore these to their wetland status.
“What we need to see is tens of thousands more acres of wetlands being restored for the health of the Bay. We can’t afford to lose another piece.”