Blog Post < Previous | Next >
public domain
Comment on proposal to fill the wetlands pond at the Corte Madera Inn
This comment letter has been sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in response to the public notice for comment on the application to destroy the pond at the Corte Madera Inn.
Attention of: Sahrye Cohen, Regulatory Permit Manager
Re:
PUBLIC NOTICE NUMBER: 2000-255330N
PUBLIC NOTICE DATE: May 16, 2016
COMMENTS DUE DATE: June 16, 2016
APPLICANT: Reneson Hotels, Inc., agent Zentner & Zentner
SITUS: 56 Madera Boulevard, Corte Madera, Marin County CA
PROJECT: Army Permit to Discharge Fill into Jurisdictional waters of the United States
June 10, 2016
Dear Ms. Cohen:
I write to urge the USACE to deny the permit requested in this application. Permitting fill in this irreplaceable local wetland area is environmentally irresponsible and politically unwise. The proposed offsite mitigation is inadequate and irrelevant because the Applicant has neglected to consider practicable, feasible onsite alternatives that preserve the pond. The ‘fiscal feasibility’ upon which the developer, bases the project, is unproven, incomplete and as such, evaded public scrutiny. Per FWPCA’s Section 404 (b)(1) Guidelines, I believe an applicant’s desire to maximize profits is not an allowable consideration for permitting the destruction of special aquatic sites. USACE should not enable efforts of unsavory consultants supporting profit-minded owners.
As a federally charged permitting authority, USACE should protect an invaluable environmental, cultural, local wetland resource. The existence of this historic aquatic environment and ecosystem predates hotel development of the site.
1. The pond, though only 0.64 AC, has been declared worthy of preservation “to the maximum extent possible “by the SF RWQCB. A USACE permit allowing the requested discharge of fill would result in the permanent loss of submerged aquatic vegetation, open water and fringe wetland that presently serve as valuable habitat for local birds and other wildlife. Because such loss is irreversible, destruction of special aquatic sites is to be considered as among the most severe environmental impacts covered by the FWPCA Guidelines.
2. During the two-year public EIR process, alternative plans for hotel development that preserve the onsite pond have not received adequate consideration. For example, Alternative 2, which preserves the wetlands and allows the project to be expanded to a financially feasible 147 rooms, has been ignored by the Applicant and Town staff. Alternative 2 is practicable and has less adverse effect on this special aquatic site than the Applicant-chosen plan.
3. The process of public review and scrutiny of fiscal and environmental requirements of the Alternative 2, which preserves the pond, have been circumvented. The Town’s expert biologist has stated in his public testimony that he never was asked to evaluate preserving the pond because filling the pond was a “goal” of the developer. Thus, USACE grant of a fill permit would support malfeasance by those responsible for disenfranchising public review and comment regarding the project alternatives.
4. Indicative of the importance of this area in its current state is the fact that Corte Madera must amend its General Plan and change its zoning in order to allow this development to proceed. The current hotel owner does not have zoning rights to expand his hotel, and has not presented any credible, relevant financial analysis to support a contention that expansion is needed, except to increase his personal profits.
5. Substantial local concern and interest caused the Town of Corte Madera to impose a moratorium on development in the immediately adjacent areas. The cumulative impacts of this proposed development merit full public review and comment even though the Town has exempted this site from the moratorium.
6. Distant non-tidal mitigation at the Burdell Mitigation Bank is not equivalent, and cannot satisfy local interest, concern and benefits derived from preservation of this wetlands resource. To claim otherwise is an outrage against wildlife refuge, vegetation restoration, and wetland preservation in the local area.
7. The pond is indisputably a jurisdictional “Special Aquatic Site” subject to the FWPCA/Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1). The application has been dumbed down to a permit for fill; however, the loss of this pond exceeds the restricted scope of such an Army permit. The pond is historically correct, contributes to environmental education, and remains an irreplaceable physical reminder of this area’s origins. Preservation of this small wetland matters every bit as much as the archaeological, cultural and historic resources that the USACE considers in assessing projects. Permitting fill of the pond means loss of opportunities for restoration along with the scientific and educational qualities of this special site. The Applicant asks to destroy a unique asset without proper environmental regard for either the property or the community.
I urge full consideration of the importance of this invaluable local resource and recognition of the wisdom of its preservation. The application of Reneson Hotels, Inc., carried by agents Zentner & Zentner should be rejected because the loss of this special aquatic site is avoidable.
Granting a fill permit places USACE in conflict with both the RWQCB and environmentally concerned people of Marin.