Topic

Oppose Development

111 petitions

Update posted 1 month ago

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

CALLING FOR A MORATORIUM ON MANSIONIZATION & SMALL LOT SUBDIVISIONS IN VENICE, CA

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.”

VENICE COALITION TO PRESERVE OUR UNIQUE COMMUNITY CHARACTER (VC-PUCC)
868 supporters
Update posted 3 months ago

Petition to Steven R. Schuh

PROTECT BEVERLY-TRITON BEACH - NO DESTRUCTION OF HABITAT, NO MORE DEVELOPMENT, NO PAVING!

The Anne Arundel County Department of Recreation and Parks, in conjunction with the Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works, have proposed to create an approximately 3.3 acre swimming beach along a fragile and eroding shoreline of the Chesapeake Bay, construct restrooms/changing rooms/septic drain field for 400 people/per day, and pave 1.3 acres of the 4.7 acres of developable park land to create approximately 152 parking spaces on the Park. Recognizing the fragile and environmentally sensitive nature of the Beverly-Triton Beach Park, the County originally programmed this Park for passive uses that would work with the environment while preserving the Bay shoreline and natural areas for significant wildlife and vegetation.  The County specifically did not recommend swimming and sought to minimize uses that would require disturbing and clearing the natural vegetation and forest. Creating a swimming beach along a fragile and eroding shoreline of the Chesapeake Bay, constructing restrooms/changing rooms/septic drain field for 400 people/per day, and paving 1.3 acres to create approximately 152 parking spaces on the Park will be destructive to this environmental gem of Anne Arundel County and probably the largest remaining undisturbed shoreline along the western Chesapeake Bay.   We believe that there is no need to create a swimming beach, bathing facilities and parking at this Park when those very same facilities exist at the Mayo Beach Park less than 1 mile away and are open to the Public for swimming.  We ask AACO County Executive Steven R. Schuh to instruct the Department of Recreation and Parks and the Department of Public Works to withdraw the plan to create a swimming beach, bathing facilities and parking at this Park. In essence: PROTECT BEVERLY-TRITON BEACH - NO DESTRUCTION OF HABITAT, NO MORE DEVELOPMENT, NO PAVING!

Patrick Schmitt
992 supporters
Update posted 3 months ago

Petition to Kishore Rao, cc'd Regina Durighello

Help stop the destruction of my home, Lhasa, Tibet

My name is Ngawang Sangdrol and I am a Tibetan born in Lhasa, the capital city of Tibet. Today I live in exile, unable to return to my beloved homeland as a free person. I share my story with you now as my home, Lhasa, is under severe threat.This magnificent city has stood on the top of the world for 1,500 years.  It stands not only as the physical capital but also as the spiritual capital for Tibetan Buddhists.  The old city of Lhasa has been the site of many freedom protests and is a symbol of the Tibetan resilience against China’s occupation. When I was 13 years old, I joined a peaceful protest in Lhasa calling for the long life of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and for Tibetan independence. As a result, I served 11-years in prison for my political actions.But right now, I am afraid this sacred city faces destruction, environmental risks, and forced evictions to make way for a shopping mall and parking garage.Please help me defend my home. We must not let Lhasa, a city of immense cultural and historical importance, be destroyed.The UNESCO World Heritage Committee can help prevent China's wilful destruction of the old city of Lhasa by designating the site as “World Heritage in Danger”.  Lhasa’s status as a World Heritage Site is a huge source of pride for China. If Lhasa is listed as being in danger, China must either stop the construction or face losing a World Heritage Site, which would be a major embarrassment.Don’t let the beauty and historic significance of Lhasa be destroyed!

Lobsang Yangsto
106,043 supporters
Update posted 3 months ago

Petition to Aaron Bean, Dennis Baxley, Elizabeth Porter, Daniel Raulerson, Herschel Vinyard, Albert Gregory, Rick Scott, Lewis Scruggs

Stop the "Special" Monument at Olustee

In 1912 a Monument commemorating the Battle and Forces of BOTH sides was erected by a Monument Commission established by State of Florida. Current ‘balanced’ text on the current Federal/Confederate/Battle Monument erected in 1912 by the Commission established by Florida Law:  “The Battle of Olustee was Fought on this Ground February 20th 1864 Between 5,000 Confederate Troops Commanded by General Joseph E. Finegan and 6,000 Federal Troops under General Truman Seymour.  The Federals were defeated with a loss of 2,000 men.  The Confederate loss was less than 1,000.”   Now, on the 150th anniversary, the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War feels a special monument is justified, claiming that there is no monument to Federal forces on the site.  Visitors to the site know that a large monument only to Federal Forces was dedicated in 1962  - the Centennial of the Battle by the same group, making this a disingenuous claim. The land the monument sits on was procured by the United Daughters of the Confederacy and eventually donated to the State of Florida for this re-unification monument.  Some modest additions have been made over the years, but the balanced text is the prominent feature.   There are many reasons to object to this Special monument:   1.  disruption of hallowed ground, 2.  if one 'special' monument is allowed, how many more 'special' monuments must then in fairness be approved, possibly creating a checkerboard of monuments on the site,  and many more. Appeals have been made to the Park Service but they seem to be dead set, so its is time for the citizens voice to be heard.   Please sign this petition, and then share it with you likeminded friends and family.

Kirby Smith
515 supporters