You’ve paced the floor. You’ve waited by the phone. You’ve cast guilty eyeballs on your trusty old hammer. But joy of joys, Christmas is coming early this year!
The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for big-box-enthusiast Rob Arkley’s Home Depot-anchored “Marina Center” project on Humboldt Bay will hit public libraries and City Hall December 1. You computer savvy folks can snag it from the city website starting that same day.
No need to push or shove. There will be plenty of copies to go around.
RSS - Posts
November 22, 2008 at 7:26 am
MARINA CENTER DRAFT EIR
Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Report
MARINA CENTER
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15087 and 15105, the City of Eureka is providing Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) SCH# 2006042024 for the Marina Center Project as described below. All interested persons are invited to comment on the DEIR pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. The comment period is 60 days starting on December 1, 2008, and ending on January 31, 2009. Comments must be in writing, including submittal by email, and must be submitted prior to the close of the comment period to the Community Development Department at the address and email noted below.
Project Title: MARINA CENTER
Project Applicant: CUE VI LLC
Project Location: The project site is located in the City of Eureka on a 43 acre site that is generally bounded by Waterfront Drive to the north and west, Washington Street to the south, and Broadway (Highway 101) to the east. Assessor Parcel Numbers: 001-014-002; 003-021-009; 003-031-003; 003-031-008; 003-031-012; 003-031-013; 003-041-005; 003-041-006; 003-041-007; and 003-051-001.
Project Description: The project applicant, CUE VI, LLC proposes a mixed-use development that would include approximately 313,500 sq. ft. of Retail/Service/Furniture including 28,000 sq. ft. of Nurseries/Garden; 104,000 sq. ft. of Office; 72,000 sq. ft. of Multi-Family Residential (54 dwelling units); 70,000 sq. ft. of Light Industrial use; 14,000 sq. ft. of Restaurant; and 12,500 sq. ft. Museum. The new buildings would be between one and five-stories. The project would include approximately 1,590 parking spaces, including about 462 spaces in a four-level parking structure.
The project would include remediation of the brownfield project site to meet federal and state environmental cleanup and water quality standards.
The project would also include the creation of an 11.89 acre wetland reserve. This area would include landscaped buffers surrounding the slough and created wetlands area providing protection for native wildlife. The proposed habitat area would include a perimeter walkway with a kiosk or interpretive signs at vantage points to view native flora and fauna.
The project would also include pedestrian and roadway improvements, including a proposed extension of Fourth Street into the site, connecting to and terminating at Waterfront Drive; and the proposed extension of Second Street into the site, connecting to and terminating at the Fourth Street extension. Additional access would be provided via driveway access from the Sixth Street and Broadway intersection. The project would also include the construction of a landscaped pedestrian and bicycle path parallel to Waterfront Drive, as well as landscaping throughout the site. On-site landscaping would incorporate native plants, ranging from restored slough and wetland aquatic plants to upland trees, shrubs, and grasses indigenous to the region. Figure III-2 presents an illustrative project site plan.
The four parcels which roughly make up the tract of land know as the Balloon Track have an existing general plan land use designation of Public/Quasi Public (PQP) with a corresponding zoning designation of Public (P). Five of the existing remaining parcels have an existing land use designation of Light Industrial (LI) with a corresponding zoning designation of Limited Industrial (ML). The last two parcels have an existing land use designation of Highway Service Commercial (HSC) with a corresponding zoning designation of Service Commercial (CS).
The project proposes to amend the certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) to a combination of designations that include General Service Commercial (GSC), Professional Office (PO), Waterfront Commercial (WFC), Limited Industrial (LI), and Water Conservation (WC). The LCP amendments would include amendments to both the Land Use Plan, which is the relevant portion of the local general plan, and the Implementation Plan, which includes the zoning ordinance and zoning district maps.
The proposed project design would draw from the site’s maritime and industrial heritage, as well as from the contemporary influences of the Eureka waterfront, Old Town and downtown areas. Development of the site would seek to maximize views of Clark Slough, as well as Humboldt Bay, the small-boat marina, and the developing waterfront west of the site.
Lead Agency/Contact Person:
City of Eureka
Community Development Department
Sidnie L. Olson, AICP
Principal Planner
531 K Street
Eureka, CA 95501-1165
Phone: (707) 441-4265
Fax: (707) 441-4202
E-mail: solson@ci.eureka.ca.gov
Send written comments via ‘snailmail’ to Sidnie Olson at the address above, submit email comments to DEIRcomments@ci.eureka.ca.gov
The project file is available for review during regular office hours at the City of Eureka Community Development Department. The Draft Environmental Impact Report is available for review during regular office hours at the City of Eureka Community Development Department at 531 “K” Street in Eureka, and also at the following locations:
Humboldt County Library, Main Branch
Humboldt County Branch Libraries in Arcata, Blue Lake, Ferndale, Fortuna, Garberville, Hoopa, McKinleyville, Rio Dell, Trinidad and Willow Creek
Humboldt State University Library
College of the Redwoods Library
Humboldt County Community Services Development Department, 3015 H Street, Eureka
The Draft EIR will also be available at the City of Eureka’s website.
The potential significant environmental effects anticipated as a result of the project include effects related to air quality and transportation. The following categories of impacts were determined, after any mitigation, to be less than significant: Aesthetics, Agricultural Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology, Soils, and Seismicity, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Urban Decay, Utilities and Service Systems.
This is not a notice of public hearing. Future public hearings regarding this project will be duly noticed as required by law.
November 22, 2008 at 7:27 am
Nothing frosts a progressive more than actual progress, eh, H?
November 22, 2008 at 8:16 am
Chris will lobby hard for this project because he personally holds a huge grudge against Mr. Pierson for supporting Kerrigan when he managed Rex’s failed campaign.
November 22, 2008 at 8:17 am
I got a peak at this recently. What a fantasy. No wonder why it took over two years. I’m sure they had to sub contract with Walt Disney.
November 22, 2008 at 8:17 am
Throw out that stupid store idea and you have a winner. Retail is dead. retail is dead….we have all the cheap crap from china we need. in fact, most of mine is in the landfill already. I realize the economy is tanking because I have not yet replaced the cheap crap I bought, that actually wasn’t cheap at all, that lasted less than a year and had to be thrown away, which cost money. But I’m not buying anymore of it. If it isn’t made for some other market than ours, it is a waste of time and money. My Father-in-Law buys a TV in France, made in Germany, it lasts forever. buy one at target, it might not make it home. This idea of making things out of shit and designing them to fall apart at the appointed time, is just another way the “Corps” are screwing us. So now a bunch of lap-dogs want more retail?
I realize it is un-American to not want to buy a new TV every other year, or cars that are designed so that you couldn’t fix a problem or remove a part without a box of special tools that you will never get your hands on.
Anything made for the American Market, is junk. that is how these “Stores” made so much, appealing to the lower classes desire to keep up with the Jone’s and own some of their shiny crap. Retail is dead, retail is dead, retail is dead…
November 22, 2008 at 8:20 am
So what is their plan for traffic congestion relief at Broadway?
November 22, 2008 at 8:29 am
Only nine days until the secret is revealed.
November 22, 2008 at 8:50 am
So the City has decided for us that
aren’t significant impacts? How nice.
Does that mean that any comments we might want to make that fall into these categories will be met by City staff with a “What – EVER!”
November 22, 2008 at 9:04 am
How could they possibly pardon hazardous materials, geology, & soils as insignificant impacts? The place is a former railyard, saturated with toxins from decades of neglect.
November 22, 2008 at 9:26 am
I think it IS going to come down to traffic, and I have a feeling a lot of people are not going to be pleased. So it IS that stupid big box store that poisons the project. Get rid that and clean up the site and we will be good to go. Lets hope this EIR process has integrity, and if so we may still get a happy outcome.
November 22, 2008 at 9:42 am
DUH! nobody has decided anything. That’s why it’s called a DRAFT EIR.
November 22, 2008 at 9:43 am
Science in the service of profit and industry.
EI EI uh oh.
November 22, 2008 at 9:55 am
What happened to the soccar fields?
November 22, 2008 at 10:38 am
It will be interesting to see how the impacts are proposed to be mitigated to less than significant. It will also be interesting to see who designed the proposed mitigations. I heard that Arkley recruited a consulting company from Santa Rosa to open an office in Eureka to consult on his various projects because he thinks all the local consultants are untrustworthy.
November 22, 2008 at 11:19 am
This is a truly dreadful time to be adding new retail space. I anticipate continued contraction in retail demand over the next year in Humboldt County, with no real recovery in retail for probably more like two + years. Meanwhile, look for even more retailers to be going out of business in the coming months.
How does the above reality square with the Marina Center proposal? Any new retail space cannot be absorbed by growth in retail demand in the current recessionary environment. The implication is a substantial likelihood of inducing additional physical blight in existing retail districts of Eureka that are already on the ropes. I don’t see how a DEIR can avoid making that determination.
I look forward to reviewing the DEIR when it comes out, to see if Arkley was successful in finding an EIR consultant who, through some miracle, finds that the Humboldt County retail market can somehow absorb all this new supply.
November 22, 2008 at 11:30 am
The EIR Consultant was the City of Eureka who rewrote the EIR. There is something bothersome about that.
November 22, 2008 at 11:31 am
Good point Steven–esp. when you factor in the proposed big box mall in Fortuna and the proposed mall outside Cutten (the Forster-Gil project). Not to mention the impending bankruptcy of the largest mall owner in the U.S. which owns Bayshore Mall. See
http://ncjournal.wordpress.com/2008/11/13/bayshore-mall-owners-face-possible-bankruptcy/
Of course we can’t assume that these projects won’t all be pushed through just because the economy is in the tank for the next 1-2 years–developers often get projects approved and then wait for years to build.
November 22, 2008 at 11:48 am
“Chris will lobby hard for this project because he personally holds a huge grudge against Mr. Pierson…”
Could it possibly be that Mr. Crawford simply sees development on the waterfront as a good thing?
Why can’t the anonymous mind-readers around here just argue the merits of their case, instead of proffering their brilliant and penetrating psychological analyses of folks they disagree with?
While I’m at it, “Chris Crawfish” should show some respect for Mr. Crawford, who is unafraid to post under his own name. At least make up an original name for yourself.
November 22, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Chris Crawford was right Rex does more for the community than Kerrigan as our elected official has done as an elected official.
November 22, 2008 at 12:08 pm
okay… wait… huh?
November 22, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Rex was busy gouging Humboldt residents at the gas pump during his Renner days
November 22, 2008 at 12:17 pm
“Rex was busy gouging Humboldt residents at the gas pump…”
Would Anonymous want to explain exactly how Mr. Bohn somehow managed to do this?
November 22, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Just a guess, but maybe the fact that the land is polluted is in their favor because some cleanup is a better environmental impact than no clean up at all.
November 22, 2008 at 12:35 pm
11:31 is smoking something. The Forster project is not a mall. It has a small mixed retail component as spelled out in Plan A & B (the most environmentally friendly plans) in an area that is ground zero for county growth.
November 22, 2008 at 1:16 pm
you mean it has 327,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial, not a small mixed retail component, don’t you?
November 22, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Fact wrote: “Chris Crawford was right Rex does more for the community than Kerrigan as our elected official has done as an elected official.”
Yeah, just the other night Rex Bohn was dressed up as Santa Claus at the Henderson center Christmas street celebration…thingy. Has Kerrigan ever dressed up as Santa Claus in Eureka? In fact, I recall seeing Rex dressed up in a ballerina outfit this past year too. I think it was for a fund raiser of some sort. And again, has Chris Kerrigan ever dressed up in a Ballerina outfit for the greater cause of our community. I think not!!
November 22, 2008 at 1:18 pm
you mean 327,000 square feet of retail at Forster, don’t you?
November 22, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Rex was doing something for his community, all right. He was a presence at the last City Council meeting, lurking in the back though, interestingly, saying nothing in the form of public comment, yet consulting with the four cell company lobbyists that, it is rumored, he summonsed here from out-of-county to testify against the proposed cell tower moratorium in Eureka, that failed because Mike Jones and Polly Endert indicated they were against it. Wow, Rex, what a help to your community, fighting to put in more residential cell towers in Eureka when a strong grassroots neighborhood movement has arisen in opposition to it.
What exactly IS your relationship, paid or otherwise, to the cell companies, and particularly, T-Mobile, which has now gone on record as seeking two new towers in Eureka? And you, Mike Jones: are you a paid lobbyist for the cell companies? Are they sending money your way, in the form of business with you as an insurance agent?
W
November 22, 2008 at 1:31 pm
“He was a presence at the last City Council meeting, lurking in the back though, interestingly, saying nothing in the form of public comment…consulting with the four cell company lobbyists…it is rumored…”
The passive voice sure makes Mr. Bohn look suspicious. It’s too bad we don’t have a slow-motion video of him “lurking in the back” to go along with the comment.
November 22, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Look, Rex needs a job. You can’t judge him for having an interest in a meeting that involves his future employment options.
November 22, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Some women need a job too. Can’t judge them for hanging out on 3rd street to survey their employment options.
November 22, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Why are people against the marina center?
November 22, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Where have you been for the last three years?
November 22, 2008 at 6:00 pm
I would rather see Chris Kerrigan in a ballerina outfit than Rex Bohn.
November 22, 2008 at 6:00 pm
CP Ranger, it’s not the lurking I’m opposed to. It’s working with cell companies to put cell towers in residential Eureka neighborhoods, when cell phone coverage within the city is universally recognized to be excellent, and when there is a large and vocal movement opposed to it.
How ’bout a tower 100 feet from your house? Would you have anything to say?
November 22, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Rex Bohn really dressed up in a ballerina outfit?
November 22, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Rex plays the nice guy card to gain traction in local business deals
November 22, 2008 at 6:31 pm
First comes Home Depot, then Walmart, then Best Buy, etc. etc. Local businesses cannot compete with these global behemouths.
If you believe in this type of “progress” then prepare yourself for the worst.
November 22, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I always thought people were exaggerating about the effects of WalMarts etc. But then I went back to my grandma’s hometown in the Midwest and saw for myself: 1/4 to 1/3 of the downtown businesses were vacant, including the coolest hardware store that used to be the hub of downtown. Around the WalMart–outside city limits, so there’s no city sales tax–was a cluster of what my relatives called “city food”–McDonald’s, Burger King, Sizzler, etc. Now the only places to buy groceries are WalMart or the gas station–in the midst of America’s Dairyland. It had been transformed in just 10 years. Unbelievable.
November 22, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Odd that the “red” states have been so plundered by corporations, and yet many of their local governments are willing to welcome, even subsidize big box stores.
Let’s not.
November 22, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Here’s a nightmare for ya, general growth corp declares chapter 7, then they start selling off the properties. Who’s the only big box turn a profit right now? Wal-mart! Wal-mart buys the land levels the buildings and boom there goes Eureka. Of course there’s nothing to stop Arkley from getting his project approved and moving Wal-mart in instead. then there is forester-gill who says they can’t make they’re project pay without 327,000 square feet of retail, maybe that’s where home depot lands.
OMG
November 22, 2008 at 11:57 pm
OMG you’re making stuff up again. It wouldn’t be cost effective to demolish the mall and put up Wal-mart because it would destroy community goodwill. Wal-mart lovers would resent losing the mall.
Meanwhile, Forster has said up front it doesn’t want a big box. Neighborhood commercial is not a big box. It’s Old Town, except not old. You’re fear mongering.
November 22, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Ohh, scratch that. Neighborhood commercial is not Old Town. It’s Henderson Center.
November 23, 2008 at 7:18 am
Dang. I was hoping for a higher class of hookers in Cutten if neighborhood commercial was Old Town.
November 23, 2008 at 7:53 am
wouldn’t be cost effective based on what, your extensive background in commercial permitting and construction? If you consider not having to go through much of a permitting process to change retailers, it might be a great deal.
November 23, 2008 at 8:06 am
What constitutes higher class? Fewer venereal diseases?
November 23, 2008 at 8:43 am
6:54 Your midwest observation is exactly what Mayor Whitchurch and Rigge invision for Fortuna. Sad, but it will happen. Clueless
November 23, 2008 at 11:12 am
Don’t forget Mel Berti, King of the ‘Necks.
November 23, 2008 at 11:19 am
Remember Target? See any garbage cans in the parking lot? Do you see garbage blown up against the ugly chain link fence alonh HWY 101? Garbage is a PUBLIC NUISANCE that Sidney O. does not recognize apparantly.
A simple list of impact pros and cons needs to be established from this report since Sidney is the lead planner. She can’t be trusted, period. She used to work for the County when internal department fraud was caught and then advertised in the Times Standard back in 1995 – 1996 ish. Microfiche at the library the weekly editions’ articles to research anything historically. Much of the department was fired/let go quietly after several meetings with Supervisor Fulkerson, Neely and company. The former planning director (Conlon) was given a quiet two year vacation until Bonnie and Johnny finished the Girard implant; then, Bonnie and Johnny got the former a job as Arcata’s Planning Director. History is full of truths, spoils and political insider conspiracies. Some of the former employees also became project managers and consultants for the private sector, go figure who opened up their wallets for this service?
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
November 23, 2008 at 11:27 am
I forgot,
RETAIL + GARBAGE = PUBLIC NUISANCE.
Time to clean up this town/small city! Don’t forget the abutting freeway/highway wetlands and sloughs either! Plastic kills other life too. Garbage stinks, no pun intended. Then, you see all that which is recycleable treated as garbage – shameful.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
November 23, 2008 at 11:34 am
Now that you mention it, no. The Target parking lot is very clean. There are garbage cans near the store entrance and people seem to be very good about using them.
November 23, 2008 at 11:40 am
“Anonymous Says:
November 22, 2008 at 11:57 pm”
“OMG you’re making stuff up again. It wouldn’t be cost effective to demolish the mall and put up Wal-mart because it would destroy community goodwill. Wal-mart lovers would resent losing the mall.
Meanwhile, Forster has said up front it doesn’t want a big box. Neighborhood commercial is not a big box. It’s Old Town, except not old. You’re fear mongering.”
Anonymous November 22, 2008 at 11:57 pm, your ignoring the fact that Wal-mart has done exactly that all over the country.
Forester-Gill said they need 327,000 square feet to make it it fly that’s not “Neighborhood commercial” that’s a large shopping center.
Forester-Gill is proposing a southern-california “smart growth” project otherwise know as “sprawl.”
November 23, 2008 at 11:53 am
11:40, how about you actually read Plan A & B, then come back to us when you have a clue.
November 23, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Mr. OMG is not being open about his true opposition. It sounds like he wants no growth. Or maybe he’s a good ol’ NIMBY.
All of the county plans call for developing Cutten. The plans he’s poo-pooing involve the least sprawl and are the one progressives are embracing. Well, Plan A is what progressives want, but from what I understand, the Forest-Gill development jives with both Plan A and B, and if it’s Plan A, it actually means more open space in Cutten that is slated for subdivisions under the other plans.
November 23, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Could it be environmental complaints were transmitted? Just saying, look at the report for THOSE LITTLE THINGS. Documenting the impacts after the process is over is only for damage control; not intended prevention.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
November 23, 2008 at 1:44 pm
If we get Forster-Gill, and the other development projects proposed in the Cutten area, plus a Big Box at the Marina Center we are going to see a huge increase in traffic on Eureka city streets. Until we get a road infrastructure to support it, we should never allow these projects.
November 23, 2008 at 2:20 pm
I see the NOA says no “Urban Decay,
Ha ha ha ha ha!
Even without seeing the document we know that conclusion is pure bullshit.
November 23, 2008 at 4:24 pm
I think 1:44 got his and doesn’t want anyone else getting theirs. He’s getting vaguer by the minute as his NIMBY excuses get shot down. Now he’s trying to link an eco-groovy project in with the monster Marina Center. Won’t work.
November 23, 2008 at 6:36 pm
I think I’ll read the report first, make snide comments later.
November 24, 2008 at 10:52 am
We find it most interesting that BOTH the Marina DEIR and the DEIR for the Forster-Gill Project are coming out in December……just the time when many are away or are too busy with the holidays to read and comment on EIRs. Timing is everything! For months, a group of Cutten residents have been writing letters and attending Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors’ meetings. We have also formed a website to try to inform the public about developments proposed for Humboldt County. Check us out and think about joining us. http://www.humboldtccrd.org
November 24, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Yes, how devious, unleash EIRs right when people have plenty of time to read them. Devils they are. Devils I tell you!
World to G&N. World to G&N. EIR comment periods last 60 days. If you’re going on a two month vacation, umm, go buy a private island somewhere, do whatever the hell you want there, and stop whining to us.
November 24, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Home Depot has no place on our watefront. The rest of Marina Center is a welcome development without the big box component.
November 24, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I’ll take Home Depot over Pierson’s any day.
If a big box puts a “mom and pop” out of business, that “mom and pop” was not providing good service, selection, products, or pricing, or a combination of the mentioned…
November 24, 2008 at 3:41 pm
You wanna see bad service 3:16? Head to any Home Depot in the country. You’ll be lucky if they know where the Hardware Department is- and any basic constructive knowledge is out of the question.
November 24, 2008 at 4:21 pm
My Lytle,
Might I suggest a hardy dose of a good laxative, because based on that slanderous invective at 081123.11:19, it’s quite apparent that you’re backed up so bad your eyes are brown.
This just in from the nearby reality-based universe:
1. The Cirty’s initial approval of the Target redevelopment project was appealed to the California Coastal Commission whom, after coercing some design changes primarily expanding the setback from Eureka Slough, eventually granted the coastal development permit, not the City of Eureka. Any grievance you may have with inadequate solid waste management is preciptated from the CCC having signed off on a site plan that didn’t provide for such recepticle amenities. Nevertheless, if you feel so strongly about marine pollution, perhaps you could file a complaint with the City requesting abatement pursuant to Municipal Code Section 54.052:
WATERCOURSE PROTECTION.
Every person owning property through which a watercourse passes shall keep and maintain that part of the watercourse within the property reasonably free of trash, debris and other obstacles that would pollute, contaminate or significantly retard the flow of water through the watercourse. In addition, the owner or lessee shall maintain existing privately-owned structures within or adjacent to a watercourse, so that such structures will not become a hazard to the use, function or physical integrity of the watercourse.
2. Your historical revisionism regarding the slings and arrows directed toward the then-Planning and Building Department, Tom Conlon, and other staff back in the 1990s is full of FAIL. I would submit a review of the excellent articles publish in the May 1997 Northcoast Journal that covered this mini-drama as a good starting first step toward recovery from your cerebral-fecal dysfunction.
If you want to bandy about some names for the cast of some oogedy-boogedy conspiracy theory about local backroom-dealing from a decade-and-a-half ago, you should stop slurring current and retired reputable public servants and try on the likes of Bill O’Neill, Bill Davis, Vic Guynup, Rob Mc Laughlin, Kurt Kramer, Tim Hooven, Charlie Hansen, Tom Sutton, certain sychopantic senior department lackeys, e.g., John Murray, and the mid-90s ward-heeling triumverate composed of Paul Kirk, Roger Rodoni, and Bonnie.
November 24, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Ultimately the battle between Piersons and his minions for his approved/herados sanctioned monopoly and Arkley and his shocktroops for a home depot is well out of the pay scale of most us state workers, and section 8ers that have time to read and post to this blog.
The decision shall be made by the ones on a higher pay scale, but I wouldnt count anything out, successful people have a way of making things happen.
November 24, 2008 at 5:25 pm
I like Home Depot for big projects to save some money, but the truth is, they have spotty customer service. You had better know what you need, exactly, and not need help. Usually, the help they employ is not as knowledgable as you are, as a contractor or landlord, regarding the items you need for your building improvement. Piersons and other local places like The MillYard will practically jump in your lap to help you complete your project . If given a choice, I do want both, but if we have to have only one, I will go with the locals every time. The money stays here. I go out of town if needed but have found the locals want to be competitive, and meet the prices pretty much when needed. Help save them by buying there. I am talking about all the local businesses, from jewelry and furniture to lumber and building materials.
November 24, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Ditto on that midwest observation. S. Indiana: In little town after little town, the downtown areas with all the nice brick and stone buildings had many vacancies, and just outside of town would be the bigboxes and junkfood strips.
The way of the small businessman looks a lot like the way of the small farmer in AmeriCo.
November 24, 2008 at 6:01 pm
I wonder if that is because the cities don’t want wal-mart and they just go to then closest jurisdiction that allows their construction. after that the cities find out their citizens actually did want a wal-mart and shop at the new one just out of town. The argument that people don’t want wal-mart because it puts local business out of business doesn’t make sense. If people didn’t want wal-mart, they would go out of business themselves.
November 24, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Anony.Miss, well said.
November 24, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Thanks. My family lost their business. I thought it was a sign of the times, the need for different kinds of services, more of a chain store need, but guess what? My family’s service is no longer available here. The mall business that replaced it is gone and so is the service my family provided for many decades. I guess it’s personal for me but on a more general level, our community loses out overall. It’s bigger than our community. It’s happening everywhere.
November 24, 2008 at 6:47 pm
The people who think more retail space in Eureka and Humboldt Co. have to get. new glasses. At the very least, they need to remove the rose tint from their existing glasses. If you want to really tank the local economy, and that may be what the grand poobah really wants, just add more businesses to a very weak local economy and build shiny new buildings for them. That should do it. At our best in recent good times, we were still not strong. Our traditional industry has been on the downturn for years, so how is this crazy balloon tract supposed to help? I don’t get it.
It is like Palin rambling on about how to grow Alaska while slaughtering all the turkeys in sight right behind her. We are in the greatest economic blood letting of our time and some idiot wants to build more retail space to choke off what ever fragile economy we already have. Somebody build me a woodshed where we can take this so called business man and teach him reality from fantasy.
Hasn’t he noticed the second largest mall chain in the USA, General Growth, Is not growing at all and is in big trouble? He probably hasn’t been into Bayshore Mall lately and noticed a 40% vacancy rate. I guess he can’t wait to spend himself into bankruptcy and take the rest of us with him.
November 24, 2008 at 6:48 pm
What category of business? That need is not being filled anywhere in the Humboldt Bay region today?
November 24, 2008 at 6:59 pm
I think if I said it, it would reveal who my family is. There are probably quite a few areas not served. I’m trying to think of others… I bet there are a lot of areas not served here…. Sorry to be evasive. I should have written more anonymously. Let’s try to think of a list of areas this community needs more services. In the medical field we need more dermotologists (sp?). We need more dentists who take MediCal. More speech therapists. More ear, nose, throat doctors. In retail, more high end women’s and men’s. More children’s?? Wedding registry type shops. Whatever happened to places like Walsh’s and Lincoln’s and Robert’s? These are just off the top of my head.
November 24, 2008 at 9:32 pm
A second kitchen store, trader Joes, a lobster house, medium sized retail spaces that locals could lease, 5000 sq. feet or smaller, spaces for manufacturing, say 7000 to 15000 sq. feet. The manufacturing component is really important to Eureka as these types of business usually have higher paying jobs and we don’t have enough space to attract industrial here. It is retail that is maxed out in Eureka unless we can attract a company that fills an area not already filled.
November 24, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Part of the reason retail has been the go-to sector for growth in Eureka over the years is that it has always been the place people in Humboldt go to shop. It’s the biggest town in Humboldt and that means bigger stores and more diverse, which for the shopper translates as choice and lowest price. Referencing the 1999 Bay Area Economics report commissioned by the city for the Wal-Mart application, it revealed that sales tax revenue per capita in Eureka was something like three times the average of Humboldt as a whole, meaning that “leakage,” or the concept that some locales take business and sales tax revenue away from other locales, was very much the case here. And as we all know, Eureka lives and dies on those inflated sales tax revenues.
Problem is, there’s only so much money that’s being spent in the county. Too many people have gone to retail as a sector reflexively to make their nickle here. With all due respect to Mr. Arkley, making the Marina Center a retail destination, especially with a Big Box store, will only serve to twist the knife deeper into the Mall, Old Town, Downtown, and Henderson Center.
We would do well to do as Arcata does and really focus on attracting those small manufacturing businesses, with an incubator and light manufacturing park integrated as an essential component into any large new development in the city.
November 25, 2008 at 9:40 am
Sorry, I upset an insider:
Who accepted the application for development of a Target Store? City of Eureka. Then, who submits, forwards and releases the appropriate documents to other city departments and third parties for further inside and outside reviews in accordance with the building and planning process, CEQA process, etc..? City of Eureka.
Government documents are legally reviewable for all to research no matter how received.
CLEARLY AGAIN,
when it comes to GARBAGE, Sidney can’t be trusted until it is shown that these types of bigger retail projects that she and others work on get the GARBAGE IMPACTS resolved BEFORE signing off on the project and issuing the certificate of occupancy. History shows GARBAGE and it’s impacts have apparantly been exclusively singled out as unnecessary for retail developments. Shameful conduct by ALL parties involved regarding such lapses in containing refuse and recyclables. Rubbish
lapsus linguae?
P.S. – from the time this thread came out, the comments and Dec. 1, how many changes will take place? Further, to understand these changes during the process, look at the timelines of “ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS” not “photocopies” while researching. It is quite normal, constitutionally legal and appropriate to have subtle changes during a project’s course of development provided adverse impacts are not created or special conditions mitigated are not circumvented.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
November 25, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Why does anyone care if this Little Jeff moron is from the “5th District?”
November 25, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Henchman, Sidney is also responsible for the timing of traffic lights, recycling, air traffic control with Seattle Center, and dog licenses for the County. She is all powerful. Now just take your laxative and wait for your brains to hit the porcelin.
November 25, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Garbage is a “no brainer” impact that apparantly misses the review process. An experienced Project Planner should understand enough of any project’s associated paperwork to a point that garbage should never be a concern because it becomes a problem turned into nuisance. Sidney seems competent enough to learn from past project inadequacies. Hopefully, the garbage concern will be met for the project scope because of the plethora of natural resources adjacent to the project site. There is just too much garbage blowing around creating BLIGHT. Past retail projects clarify this fact.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
November 25, 2008 at 11:22 pm
All Arkley would have to do to win the approval of the majority of Eurekans is to drop Home Depot as a concept and shift to light industrial spaces. We have no viable industry and that is the engine that will drive the local economy. Timber peaked some time ago and we are left with little industrial base. What good is retail if people are not making a living wage? We need an economic generator. Why do you think the auto industry is so important to the economic health of the nation? If it goes we need to fill the void with other industry, not more retail.
November 25, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Yes Monitor, that’s a viable idea. Clean the land, put down a parking lot, construct a lot of buildings and then wait several decades for the place to be fully occupied by light industrial. Because that’s what developers want to do, wait and cross their fingers that unknown entities will appear and buy what they’re selling. Forget market research that indicates precisely who wants to use the land today.
November 25, 2008 at 11:53 pm
11:22: industry IS retail
November 26, 2008 at 8:08 am
I always though the location would be perfect for a brewery like Lost Coast to set up their full production. If we could attract a few different breweries in there, it could become a destination for tourists.
November 26, 2008 at 10:06 am
Look at the Airport Business Center to see how well that idea works.
November 26, 2008 at 10:19 am
From the NC Journal today-
“It’s the same as all the others,” said Cockburn. “Circuit City’s gone. Linen ’N Things, bankrupt. Borders, in trouble. They’re all going bankrupt — this is a depression. How long can you keep going when you can’t sell anything? There’s too much retail here — it’s overblown for the population and the money they have. How can you possibly keep all these stores going?”
So someone please tell me why adding a Home Depot to an already saturated building supply market is a good thing?
November 26, 2008 at 12:35 pm
That’s right Watchout. We’re coming for you right now! Up against the wall.
November 26, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Be careful everyone.
I think HERALDO is a Big Brother Infomant.
November 26, 2008 at 12:38 pm
I just realized that now. It explains alot of incidents.
November 26, 2008 at 12:45 pm
“The owner and the editor are fake names. The address is fake.”
Whom are we speaking about here?
November 26, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Hey H,
It’s out early.
http://www.ci.eureka.ca.gov/depts/cd/marina_center/default.asp
Scroll down…
November 26, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Thanks 1:47 pm
The first thing I looked at was the development mapping of the site. Off hand, until I review the WHOLE report, one concern is the parking lots. Vehicle barriers should be placed between each tier of parking zones so that drivers can’t cause safety concerns by cutting through parking spaces instead of taking the DEFINED ROUTEs – too many just have white striping and not a concrete planter bed, etc..
Also, the traffic leaving the site looks as if it COULD become a log jamb from a long line of vehicles which COULD cause problems for semi-trucks taking a left hand turn after entering the site from 4th Street. Same thing on southern edge of site.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
November 26, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Thanks, Seriously. Let the fun begin.
November 26, 2008 at 10:02 pm
I wonder if the renderings in the “aesthetics” section show the intended architecture- If so, then this Disneyland type idea of a Victorian “Monterey like” Seaport is no where to be found. It looks like any generic big box strip mall in the central valley. Lots of parking inbetween cheaply designed buildings. I didn’t really expect something that would add much interest to the site, but I also didn’t think it would be this bad.
Should have hired a local architect.
November 26, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Oh come on, it fits right in with the dreadful Co-op facade.
November 27, 2008 at 9:18 am
how do you know if the buildings are cheaply designed? oh, because you don’t like it. they look fine to me.
November 27, 2008 at 10:20 am
look at the photos in the EIR
November 27, 2008 at 10:30 am
1351 parking spots. Just what we need on the waterfront.
November 27, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I did see the photos and it is difficult to judge the price of the architecture, but it looked fine to me. I suppose the “Bob’s Fine Cars” building is more of what you’re looking for? also it is not on the waterfront, it is on waterfront drive the waterfront properties are across the street. at least judge the thing on facts, not on hearsay.
Fact: You have no idea if the buildings will be cheaply designed
Fact: it is not on “the waterfront”, it is adjacent to it, across the street
November 27, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Huge mess to look at on line, but a number of things jump right out at you.
1) NOTHING has changed since the original proposal (except the token wetland increase that was added early).
2) The traffic analysis is a sham and not only is the mitigation inadequate but one location remains a unsolvable problem.
3) It does not take into consideration the Forster-Gill EIR which is coming out at almost the same time. The cumulative effects may be totally unacceptable
I think this EIR is DOA.
November 27, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Of course it is “on the waterfront”. The boat basin is 60′ away.
November 27, 2008 at 12:28 pm
“On” the waterfront or “adjacent” to the water front is a semantic argument. This is in the coastal zone and everyone knows it is “on the bay”. It will be perceived as such, and the Coastal Commission will be involved (thank goodness).
November 27, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Look Buddy, Cherie herself described the proposed aesthetic as “fashioned like Cannery Row.” This bring to mind an aesthetic that is completely missing from the images provided. It looks exactly like any strip mall with light steel framing and cheap veneer cladding. And no it’s not on the waterfront in the sense that it’s a pier building over water, but it is only separated by a narrow road at the shoreline. To me, that’s on the waterfront.
Upon further review, the traffic mitigation plan seems pretty ridiculous as well. They propose adding traffic signals at Hawthorne and Harris Streets to help guide traffic away from 4th and 5th streets. What a joke. Atleast the study concludes that these plans will result in, “”significant and unavoidable” traffic congestion.
If this project belongs anywhere, it should be at the Bayshore Mall, where the infrastructure is already in place.
November 27, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Funny you bring up the Bayshore Mall, which is actually closer to the water. A small part of the property is across the street, 60′ from the water as you say, by the boat ramp and docks but the bulk of it is across the street and a long ways from the bay, separated by properties that are actually “waterfront”. If a real estate agent sold you that property and called it “waterfront”, they would get sued when the new owner discovered his or her property does not actually “front” the “water” and there is no access to the water from the property. When people state it is waterfront, that is not accurate. I don’t know if it is on purpose or accident, but it serves to misinform people who either have not been to the property or who do not have access to Google Earth, where one can clearly see where this property lies in relation to the water. BTW – how can you tell veneer from a drawing?
November 27, 2008 at 8:58 pm
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081127/meltdown_coming_soon.html
November 27, 2008 at 9:06 pm
My mistake at 8:58.
Jeffrey Lytle
McKinleyville – 5th District
November 27, 2008 at 9:52 pm
The Bayshore Mall, or old Hammond Lumber Company site, was the best site on the bay for a deep water port facility. Rail and road close by. Oh well.
November 30, 2008 at 3:44 pm
mr. olphart, i have been reading your posts about all the nay-saying going on about the deepwater port possibilities. here is a sunday chron link to a story about west coast deep ports that pretty confirms the truth of the situation that you have been hearing here. big plans are afoot for anywhere but california ports in order to save money getting it to the east coast. not trying to put you down, this is just how bigmoney is looking at the situation. “ship cargo volume slumping at west coast ports” http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/30/BUC814CTLU.DTL
November 30, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Yep poser, that article describes the West Coast shipping industry and its prospects very well. Any new nonlocal shipping business in Humboldt will depend on overall growth in California shipping. As the article describes, thats not happening now due to near term factors and not expected to happen after 2014 due to long term factors.
However, shipments intended for the West Coast and to the Rockies will continue, some of that could come to Humboldt if the port were cost competitive. So far, no cost competitive business plans have been developed. Maybe short sea shipping will become viable. The only “sure” cargo here is what is produced locally or needed locally, like gasoline already is and paper pulp and old growth redwood were.