Oppose Development

51 petitions

This petition won 2 years ago

Petition to Tom Tidwell

Stop the destruction of Wolf Creek Pass, an irreplaceable Colorado treasure

Wolf Creek Pass in southwestern Colorado forms the pristine headwaters of the Rio Grande and San Juan Rivers. Bridging the South San Juan and Weminuche Wilderness Areas, the pass is beloved for stunning vistas and ample opportunities for backcountry recreation along the Continental Divide. It is also one of the most biologically-important areas in the Southern Rockies, providing habitat and migration pathways for elk, deer, black bear and the threatened Canada lynx. In fact, Wolf Creek Pass hosts some of the best remaining, critical and high-functioning lynx habitat in the state. Recently, the U.S. Forest Service approved a land exchange with a private developer, which will set the stage for a large scale development – 8,000 year round residents in over 1,700 units -- in some of the most important wildlife habitat in the heart of West. Impacts of the proposed development threaten local businesses in nearby Archuleta and Rio Grande Counties, unspoiled backcountry recreation opportunities along the Continental Divide, water supply and water quality for downstream communities, rare and ecologically valuable fen wetlands, one of the most critical wildlife corridors in the Southern Rocky Mountains, and the scenic beauty of our Colorado wild spaces. Please tell USDA Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell to stop the destruction of Wolf Creek Pass, an irreplaceable Colorado treasure.

Friends of Wolf Creek
81,698 supporters
Update posted 11 months ago

Petition to Chairman Mandelik and Members of the Planning Board, Jo-Ann Raia, Frank Petrone, Mark Cuthbertson, Susan Berland, Eugene Cook, Tracy A. Edwards

Stop the MegaMall -- Sign the New Petition that goes to the Huntington Town Board

***** IMPORTANT UPDATE ********** MARCH 2018 **************** THIS IS AN OLD PETITION TO THE HUNTINGTON PLANNING BOARD. THE BOARD APPROVED A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD TO ALLOW A CHANGE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ZONING THAT PAVES THE WAY FOR THE MEGA-MALL ON JERICHO TURNPIKE. YOU NEED TO SIGN THE NEW PETITION THAT WILL BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE TOWN BOARD AT: *************************************   Below is the language from the old petition you signed that went to the town planning committee.  It is null and closed now that the planning committee recommended that zoning change so the mall can be built.  Still, it provides important background information.  To continue the fight, though,   SIGN THE NEW PETITION AND GO TO TOWN HALL FOR THE HEARING ON MAY 15, 2018 at 7 PM - HUNTINTON TOWN HALL ************************************* The Town of Huntington, Mark Mediavilla, and real estate developer Kouros Torkan want to change our zoning laws and build a Mega-Mall - larger than Nassau Coliseum - just 3 miles from the Walt Whitman Shops. The $80 million, 485,000-square foot Mega-Mall would be located at the corner of East Jericho Turnpike and Manor Road in Elwood (See Appendix B below).  To accomplish this, the Huntington Town Board will alter the town's Comprehensive Plan and change the zoning at this location from R-40 Residential and C-6 General Business to C-5 Planned Shopping Center (Appendix C).   The 50+ acre property - owned by Mediavilla - is zoned residential 1 acre lots with the exception of a small, 4 store building at the corner of Jericho and Manor.  The Mega-Mall would be constructed by Kouros Torkan's for-profit company, Villadom Corp. This company applied for $18.8 million in tax breaks from the Suffolk IDA, bringing into question lower property taxes or school budget benefits for residents. By signing this petition you are letting our elected officials know that you want to maintain our current zoning laws and want the Mega-Mall plans to cease.  Our reasons include the following: ·       Altering the Town's Comprehensive Plan and changing zoning laws takes away one of the most crucial reasons why families live and move to Huntington.  We choose to live here for residential neighborhoods with good schools and green space. If the residential zoning is changed, it would set dangerous precedent for more unwanted development. This means property in our neighborhoods can be sold and developed for multiple-dwelling housing, shopping centers, and other for-profit venues.   ·       We need solutions to current traffic problems in Huntington; we do not need to create more.  The proposed development is located in an awkward area of Jericho Turnpike.  The Mega-Mall would generate an additional 1,000 vehicles PER HOUR on Jericho which has been deemed "the deadliest road" on Long Island by Newsday.  Getting to the Mega-Mall from the Northern State Parkway or Long Island Expressway would require driving on Deer Park Avenue, Park Avenue or Deer Park Road.  This will adversely affect commuters who drive to Huntington Station LIRR.  Further, the initial report on the development calls for widening of lanes in order to handle increased traffic.  This is worrisome as there are residential neighborhoods along Deer Park Road to the south, Manor Road to the west and Warner Road/Elwood Road to the east with young children and school busses whose safety is of utmost importance.  Of note, the intersections on Deer Park Road/Avenue at Old Country Road and the fork near the Dix Hills Fire Department are very dangerous (Appendix I).   ·       A Mega-Mall is absolutely unnecessary as it will hurt local, small businesses currently in existence on Jericho Turnpike and in the rest of Huntington.  There are a myriad of articles and analyses written from other towns of how malls destroy downtowns and small businesses.  Simply put, we already have a high-end mall at Walt Whitman, just 3 miles away from the proposed site, and we need to support the shops in Huntington Village! ·       The proposed development would change parts of Mediavilla Orchard, affect the steep slope area bordering Berkeley Jackson County Park and destroy natural sand dunes from glaciers, verdant tall woods and open land for commercial buildings and a parking lot consisting of 1,700 parking stalls. The full environmental impact remains unknown.  There are long-term questions regarding air and water pollution, particularly since the location sits on all three parts of our aquifer and is just across the street from the Greenlawn Water District tower and pump.  Wildlife preservationists are concerned about the Red Tail Hawks, Great Horned Owls, and Box Turtles that live in this area.  The threatened Pink Lady's Slipper Orchid grows there in the spring. Perhaps Mark Mediavilla could work with concerned residents to find a more beautiful and responsible use for this space according to its residential zoning set forth in the Comprehensive Plan?  Perhaps developer Kouros Torkan can just simply leave Huntington alone and build a 50+ acre Mega-Mall near his multimillion dollar homes in Nassau and the Hamptons instead? Our elected officials serve the residents of the Town of Huntington first.  As such, they need to think of the quality of life of those who put them in office.  The Comprehensive Plan is clear: Leave zoning at Mediavilla Orchard as it is. Please sign this petition to support maintaining our zoning laws and stop Mega-Mall development.  Spread the word and let Huntington officials know its citizens love the town and want to make it more beautiful for current and future families – Lets do this together! --- FYI:  Documents related to the development can be found on Huntington's government website.  Below is the link to the Town's Comprehensive Plan and an independent traffic report.  They are followed by the reports submitted by the developer, Nassau County's Kouros Torkan.  These are NOT independent reports: Horizons 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Huntington(FYI the mall proposal violates several parts, most notably zoning, but also the vision statement and plan elements)  Greenman - Pedersen INDEPENDENT TRAFFIC REPORT(Completed after developer put forth his bc of quality issues) REPORTS FROM DEVELOPER:Draft Environmental Impact Statement Appendix A: Environmental Assessment Form Appendix B: Planning and Zoning Analysis Appendix C:  Photographs Appendix D: SONIR Computer Model-Related Documents Appendix E: Ecology-Related Documentation Appendix F: Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis and Assessment of Needs and Benefits Appendix G: Community Service Correspondence Appendix H: Cultural Resource Reports Appendix I: Traffic Impact Study Appendix J: Greenlawn Water District Groundwater Quality Data Appendix K: Reduced Density Site Plan    

Laura DiGrande
3,213 supporters
Update posted 1 year ago

Petition to Eric Garcetti, Michael LoGrande (Director, L.A. City Planning), Mike Bonin, Eric Garcetti, VNC Board, LUPC , Tricia Keane, Kevin Jones


We the undersigned call for the following:  - an immediate moratorium on the  'McMansionization' of VENICE - an immediate moratorium on Small Lot Subdivisions (SLS) in VENICE - a denial of all Small Lot Subdivisions currently pending for VENICE - no building permits to be issued for Small Lot Subdivisions prior to recordation of final map In VENICE - FULL public notification and participation, as set forth by Federal, State, and Local Law, in any and all proposed developments in VENICE. Additionally, we the undersigned call for full enforcement of  the California Coastal Act, the Mello Act, and the Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan, because the cumulative effect of recent development in VENICE is diminishing the quality of life for it’s residents, and negating the purpose of said protections put in place to preserve the Coastal Zone. Here are 3 consistent and repeated ways that the City is ignoring and violating Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan (VCZSP):1. City Planning is interpreting the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance (SLSO) to trump the Specific Plan, although the law says that specific plans always trump ordinances. The City is interpreting the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance to allow more units on lots than the Specific Plan allows, and is not requiring any guest parking at all, and is allowing tandem parking that people often don't use, rather than side-by-side parking.2. Allowing buildings to be constructed to the maximum possible size even when the proposed building is totally out of scale with the neighborhood i.e. three story buildings that block all of the neighbors' sunlight in a one-story or two-story neighborhood. The Specific Plan requires an evaluation of the compatibility of the mass and scale of the proposed building with the other buildings in the neighborhood. The Planning Department does not do this, and they have set up a process where there is no appeal. If the Planning Department continues to get away with this, soon Venice will be all 3-story compounds with very little sun or air between the buildings. 3. The Planning Department is issuing illegal DIRs that blatantly violate the Specific Plan. Then the City says that there's no appeal because the 14-day deadline has passed. The community has no real notice and no opportunity to respond. The City refuses to email citizens a .pdf of the DIRs as they are issued, they only send a mailed copy.Whereas per The CA Coastal Act. Section 30116 Sensitive Coastal Resource Areas – Venice has the following characteristics:b.  areas possessing significant recreational value.c. Special communities or neighborhoods which are significant visitor designation areas.Areas that provide existing coastal housing or recreational opportunities for low- and moderate income-persons.The public has a right to fully participate in decisions affecting coastal planning, conservation and development.From Section 30250 Location; existing developed area:“In addition, land divisions, other than leases for agricultural uses, outside existing developed areas shall be permitted only where 50 percent of the usable parcels in the area have been developed and the created parcels would be no smaller than the average size of surrounding parcels.”Section 30251 Scenic and visual qualities:“Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect views to and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas. Section 30252 (e) and enhancement of public access:Where appropriate, protect special communities and neighborhoods that, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational uses.”

875 supporters