Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
UCSC to log 150 acres of trees for expansion...?
The following email from the Coalition for Limiting University Expansion (CLUE) shows that UCSC is preparing to cut down approximately 150 acres of trees on upper-campus to make room for all the new buildings that are part of the much-criticized expansion plan. This would be one of the most serious logging operations on UCSC's campus in decades. While almost everyone is against it, almost no one besides CLUE is organizing to stop it.
In 1991, approximately 100 redwood trees were logged on a 14-acre campus forest called Elfland. 42 people (including a KSBW reporter and a legal observer) were arrested by dozens of UC Police from Berkeley and Davis as they protesting UCSC and Big Creek's destruction of the sacred Ohlone ground (including a shell site). Colleges 9 and 10 now stand where Elfland was. If 100 redwood trees were logged in 14 acres, 150 acres of logging could mean well over 1,000 trees - mostly 2nd generation redwoods and mixed evergreens.
Once these trees are logged, there's no going back on UCSC's Expansion. For all those that care about preserving the alternative nature of UCSC, ensuring that students get quality education, and protecting the City of Santa Cruz, this logging cannot happen.
Note: It will likely happen during the summer, winter break or spring break - the school has long since learned to stop cutting down trees when students are around to protest.
In 1991, approximately 100 redwood trees were logged on a 14-acre campus forest called Elfland. 42 people (including a KSBW reporter and a legal observer) were arrested by dozens of UC Police from Berkeley and Davis as they protesting UCSC and Big Creek's destruction of the sacred Ohlone ground (including a shell site). Colleges 9 and 10 now stand where Elfland was. If 100 redwood trees were logged in 14 acres, 150 acres of logging could mean well over 1,000 trees - mostly 2nd generation redwoods and mixed evergreens.
Once these trees are logged, there's no going back on UCSC's Expansion. For all those that care about preserving the alternative nature of UCSC, ensuring that students get quality education, and protecting the City of Santa Cruz, this logging cannot happen.
Note: It will likely happen during the summer, winter break or spring break - the school has long since learned to stop cutting down trees when students are around to protest.
You can read more about the Elfland protests here:
http://geocities.com/scpeopleshistory/files/elfland-pressrelease.html
with a few pics here:
http://juteux.net/rory/elfland.html
More on the LRDP here:
http://ventana.sierraclub.org/conservation/local/ucsc_unsustain.shtml
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SantaCruzCLUE.org
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:13 PM
To: info [at] santacruzclue.org
Subject: Public Urged to Attend Meeting to Comment on UCSC's Timber Harvest Plan
Dear CLUE supporters,
We need your help to come to a hearing about UCSC's plan to begin logging as explained below in a press release that just went out.
So please come to the hearing if you can and spread the word to anyone who can be persuaded to attend. We need as many people as possible to pressure CalFire/CDF to not allow UCSC to begin logging until we have our day in court.
The hearing is this coming Wednesday, June 13, 6:30pm at the Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors chambers.
Please forward this email to others and/or write a letter to the Sentinel asap.
Thanks,
Don Stevens
NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 7, 2007
For more information contact: Don Stevens, 425-4721
Or email: info [at] santacruzclue.org
Public Urged to Attend Meeting to Comment on UCSC's Timber Harvest Plan
The California Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) should holdoff on approving the University of California-Santa Cruz's logging any trees related to its Long Range Development Plan until the legality of the plan's Environmental Impact Report is established in court, says Don Stevens, co-founder of CLUE, the Coalition for Limiting University Expansion.
The validity of the LRDP EIR is the subject of several court suits brought by the City and County of Santa Cruz, CLUE and other community groups. The first court hearing on the suits was scheduled to be heard in Santa Cruz Superior Court on June 11, but has been postponed until at least mid-July.
UCSC has submitted a Timber Harvest Plan to CDF to clear land for the first projects under the LRDP, a huge Biomedical building and a tower to provide building cooling. UCSC has claimed it has no obligation to provide an EIR for the projects, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), asserting they are covered by the LRDP EIR. CLUE's position is that no work should be done on any of the projects under the LRDP until the legality of the EIR is established in court. "Once they are cut down, these trees can't be replaced," says CLUE's Don Stevens. "If the EIR is decertified there is no legal basis for the timber harvest."
UCSC eventually plans to log about 150 acres of trees for its expansion projects.
CalFire will hold a public meeting on the UCSC Timber Harvest Plan at 6:30 p.m.on Wed., June 13, 2007 in the Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors chambers. People concerned about the issue should attend.
http://geocities.com/scpeopleshistory/files/elfland-pressrelease.html
with a few pics here:
http://juteux.net/rory/elfland.html
More on the LRDP here:
http://ventana.sierraclub.org/conservation/local/ucsc_unsustain.shtml
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SantaCruzCLUE.org
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:13 PM
To: info [at] santacruzclue.org
Subject: Public Urged to Attend Meeting to Comment on UCSC's Timber Harvest Plan
Dear CLUE supporters,
We need your help to come to a hearing about UCSC's plan to begin logging as explained below in a press release that just went out.
So please come to the hearing if you can and spread the word to anyone who can be persuaded to attend. We need as many people as possible to pressure CalFire/CDF to not allow UCSC to begin logging until we have our day in court.
The hearing is this coming Wednesday, June 13, 6:30pm at the Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors chambers.
Please forward this email to others and/or write a letter to the Sentinel asap.
Thanks,
Don Stevens
NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 7, 2007
For more information contact: Don Stevens, 425-4721
Or email: info [at] santacruzclue.org
Public Urged to Attend Meeting to Comment on UCSC's Timber Harvest Plan
The California Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) should holdoff on approving the University of California-Santa Cruz's logging any trees related to its Long Range Development Plan until the legality of the plan's Environmental Impact Report is established in court, says Don Stevens, co-founder of CLUE, the Coalition for Limiting University Expansion.
The validity of the LRDP EIR is the subject of several court suits brought by the City and County of Santa Cruz, CLUE and other community groups. The first court hearing on the suits was scheduled to be heard in Santa Cruz Superior Court on June 11, but has been postponed until at least mid-July.
UCSC has submitted a Timber Harvest Plan to CDF to clear land for the first projects under the LRDP, a huge Biomedical building and a tower to provide building cooling. UCSC has claimed it has no obligation to provide an EIR for the projects, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), asserting they are covered by the LRDP EIR. CLUE's position is that no work should be done on any of the projects under the LRDP until the legality of the EIR is established in court. "Once they are cut down, these trees can't be replaced," says CLUE's Don Stevens. "If the EIR is decertified there is no legal basis for the timber harvest."
UCSC eventually plans to log about 150 acres of trees for its expansion projects.
CalFire will hold a public meeting on the UCSC Timber Harvest Plan at 6:30 p.m.on Wed., June 13, 2007 in the Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors chambers. People concerned about the issue should attend.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
A great resource, UCSC now threatens to become a dangerous colossus. Its huge 15-year growth plan (an impending 45% increase in students, faculty, staff and their families) presents tremendous problems:
• Unbearable Traffic: Unlike other campuses, UCSC is isolated from dining and shopping areas, and from freeway access. Only a few residential streets serve it. Students lack adequate campus parking now. UCSC growth will produce Westside gridlock. Driving times could double on Mission Street, which is already near capacity, and increase response times for emergency vehicles.
• Negative Economic Impact: The proposed expansion will absorb much of the city’s capacity for growth and economic development, without adding to our tax base. The city lost over $550,000 in revenues when UCSC bought the Texas Instruments building and leased the Holiday Inn.
• Biggest Project In History: The growth will double UCSC’s square footage in buildings and add 10,000 more people (students, staff, faculty and their families).
• Endanger Water Supplies: UCSC expansion will have a huge impact on a limited water supply, especially during droughts. Part of the reason the City must build an expensive desalination plant is to accommodate UCSC thirst.
• Make Housing Even More Expensive: This expansion will absorb the entire projected growth in our housing stock. It will put upward pressure on already sky-high housing prices. Over 1,600 more units will be needed for UCSC students, staff and faculty in the City, and over 2,100 in the County, driving out middle- and lower-income families.
• Impact on Neighborhoods: More students means more traffic and more cars parked on neighborhood streets, more loud parties, etc.
• Environmental Degradation: State authorities are already investigating questionable storm drainage systems at UCSC that have silted Westside ponds, and endangered protected species’ habitats. Upper campus development will breach the City’s Green Belt and compromise the quality of life in Bonny Doon.
• Broken Promises: UCSC began as a small, undergraduate, liberal arts centered campus. The City of Santa Cruz has passed resolutions calling for growth to be moderate and limited. UCSC promised to offset previous growth with measures to lessen its impact, but has failed to make the significant mitigations a reality.
Unchecked growth of a comparatively inaccessible campus, that lacks adequate parking and other mitigations already, is not the solution to the UC system’s need to serve a rising population of students. Alternatives— the new campus in Merced and growth in areas that can sustain it—must be explored first.
Copyright © 2006 by Santa Cruz CLUE - All Right Reserved
http://santacruzclue.org/issues.html
• Unbearable Traffic: Unlike other campuses, UCSC is isolated from dining and shopping areas, and from freeway access. Only a few residential streets serve it. Students lack adequate campus parking now. UCSC growth will produce Westside gridlock. Driving times could double on Mission Street, which is already near capacity, and increase response times for emergency vehicles.
• Negative Economic Impact: The proposed expansion will absorb much of the city’s capacity for growth and economic development, without adding to our tax base. The city lost over $550,000 in revenues when UCSC bought the Texas Instruments building and leased the Holiday Inn.
• Biggest Project In History: The growth will double UCSC’s square footage in buildings and add 10,000 more people (students, staff, faculty and their families).
• Endanger Water Supplies: UCSC expansion will have a huge impact on a limited water supply, especially during droughts. Part of the reason the City must build an expensive desalination plant is to accommodate UCSC thirst.
• Make Housing Even More Expensive: This expansion will absorb the entire projected growth in our housing stock. It will put upward pressure on already sky-high housing prices. Over 1,600 more units will be needed for UCSC students, staff and faculty in the City, and over 2,100 in the County, driving out middle- and lower-income families.
• Impact on Neighborhoods: More students means more traffic and more cars parked on neighborhood streets, more loud parties, etc.
• Environmental Degradation: State authorities are already investigating questionable storm drainage systems at UCSC that have silted Westside ponds, and endangered protected species’ habitats. Upper campus development will breach the City’s Green Belt and compromise the quality of life in Bonny Doon.
• Broken Promises: UCSC began as a small, undergraduate, liberal arts centered campus. The City of Santa Cruz has passed resolutions calling for growth to be moderate and limited. UCSC promised to offset previous growth with measures to lessen its impact, but has failed to make the significant mitigations a reality.
Unchecked growth of a comparatively inaccessible campus, that lacks adequate parking and other mitigations already, is not the solution to the UC system’s need to serve a rising population of students. Alternatives— the new campus in Merced and growth in areas that can sustain it—must be explored first.
Copyright © 2006 by Santa Cruz CLUE - All Right Reserved
http://santacruzclue.org/issues.html
For more information:
http://santacruzclue.org
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Chambers are at:
701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz, CA.
Everyone should come if they can.
(pretty sure that's the County Building)
701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz, CA.
Everyone should come if they can.
(pretty sure that's the County Building)
Considering how much the city has been altered by UCSB, I don't think more growth will matter - but they better build another entrance into the university if they do this...
I don't want to go to a school; that has no trees, that has no soul, that has only money for stupid crap had it self . That is not an education.
Of course what is in the US?
Of course what is in the US?
The University is growing because you and your parents require it to. By law, the University has to have spots available for the top 12% of graduating seniors in CA each year. With the populatoin going up, that means UC is required by law, the law you passed, to grow.
So either quit having kids, or vote to reduce the eligibility rate. Make it 7%, or 8% of the top students, and it won't have to grow.
Until then? Drop out. Do your part to save the trees. Make room for another who will appreciate the education they can get there.
So either quit having kids, or vote to reduce the eligibility rate. Make it 7%, or 8% of the top students, and it won't have to grow.
Until then? Drop out. Do your part to save the trees. Make room for another who will appreciate the education they can get there.
number one way to stop the regents? Stop writing them checks.
and then after we drop out, we can stop paying yearly taxes, and stop buying food or anything that has a sales tax, and then stop buying anything made by anyone irresponsible, and then drop out from the system and grow our own food in the middle of the woods, and stop using computers and.. and.. and...
get real. There's no way to completely 'drop out' of the system. Telling people to drop out is an obvious reflection of your privilege. Some people have responsibilities to their families and their communities...
get real. There's no way to completely 'drop out' of the system. Telling people to drop out is an obvious reflection of your privilege. Some people have responsibilities to their families and their communities...
The density of the Berkeley campus is pretty high. What I'm struck by is that Berkeley is able to accommodate thousands of students in off-campus apartments in the surrounding 6 blocks from campus, and one would barely even feel this. They aren't driving and can bike and take buses for everything they need.
If you visit Santa Cruz, the entire surrounding upper-westside area is big single family homes with a prominent garage facing the street. There are even big lots with horses within two blocks of campus. The upper-westside homeowners constantly whine about traffic and partying students and the university being a 'newcomer' which is imposing on them, but this results from the fact that there are barely any apartments in town, and it is much easier to throw parties in shared rented houses. The university has been around since 1965 which is longer than most people have been alive. If they rezoned just a few streets on bus corridors, and the adjacent two blocks from campus, an amazing number of students could live affordably without creating traffic. Santa Cruz essentially gets what it deserves for refusing to understand the basics of city planning.
California is growing tremendously, and unless you want to exclude immigrants, they need to create university slots.
If you visit Santa Cruz, the entire surrounding upper-westside area is big single family homes with a prominent garage facing the street. There are even big lots with horses within two blocks of campus. The upper-westside homeowners constantly whine about traffic and partying students and the university being a 'newcomer' which is imposing on them, but this results from the fact that there are barely any apartments in town, and it is much easier to throw parties in shared rented houses. The university has been around since 1965 which is longer than most people have been alive. If they rezoned just a few streets on bus corridors, and the adjacent two blocks from campus, an amazing number of students could live affordably without creating traffic. Santa Cruz essentially gets what it deserves for refusing to understand the basics of city planning.
California is growing tremendously, and unless you want to exclude immigrants, they need to create university slots.
I'm not proposing you drop out of society entirely; just the UC system specifically.
The UC system is specifically growing due to population growth and in keeping with it's commitment to the state mandate that it have space available to the top 12%.
What would your proposed solution be to stop the growth but at the same time ensure available spaces for students? I don't see a solution that doesn't entail growth.
The UC system is specifically growing due to population growth and in keeping with it's commitment to the state mandate that it have space available to the top 12%.
What would your proposed solution be to stop the growth but at the same time ensure available spaces for students? I don't see a solution that doesn't entail growth.
To the guy above who points out that some homes on west side of SC have a couple of acres and horses. So what? Thats how the land use/ownership evolved. UCSC has thousands of acres that may be covered in beautiful redwoods now, but could be used to house students ON CAMPUS! Ive also seen cows in a feild belonging to UCSC. How does a bunch of dam trees contribute to the eductional experience anyway? Plenty of schools turn out top graduates that have more concrete than dirt. The forrests are just more places to smoke bowls and trip out on the "elves". Build the high density crap on the campus please, not on the westside. If there is a demand for density among SC residents it will happen for economic reasons. So.....drop enrollment or build out the campus. I agree that the land is majestic, but so are Henery cowell park and pogonip and other open spaces that are nearby.
If you're not a pro-development idiot and are actually interested in opposing the LRDP, the Undo UCSC website exposes some of the responsible individuals and companies that can be held accountable. The course of action is up to you, but the time to resist is NOW!
For more information:
http://resist.ca/~undo_ucsc
OK, Anonymouse, where do you propose that the burgeoning population of CA educates its students? Should UC enrollment be restricted to an even smaller percentage of the elite?
If you can't answer these questions honestly, why should anyone support your cause?
If you can't answer these questions honestly, why should anyone support your cause?
is that undo UCSC website being updated? To wish for people to monkey in the night is great, but are there any above-ground campaigns to protest this logging and UCSC expansion? Does anyone have any good ideas? What can we do with the information on the undo website? A home demo sounds "fun" but what will it actually do for the trees and animals? Other ideas are welcome.
What's needed is a campus coalition effort to halt expansion. The group should force the university acknowledge all of its current problems rather than create new ones.
A Community Burdened With Columbia's Need to Expand
Columbia University moves to the next stage of its proposed expansion into West Harlem.
http://nyc.indymedia.org/or/2007/06/87383.html
Columbia University moves to the next stage of its proposed expansion into West Harlem.
http://nyc.indymedia.org/or/2007/06/87383.html
It seems that the project in question is really three acres, not 150 as stated above. Research on these matters are easy. Not as easy as making things up, but still easy.
Log on.
Log on.
"UCSC eventually plans to log about 150 acres of trees for its expansion projects."
While at the last public meeting, it was only 3 acres being discussed, the total that would be logged for the various projects that make up expansion is around 150. It's better to talk about it all together than just project-by-project.
While at the last public meeting, it was only 3 acres being discussed, the total that would be logged for the various projects that make up expansion is around 150. It's better to talk about it all together than just project-by-project.
So in The Sentinel today there is a large article about this situation. It gets everyone all fired up about cutting down trees on campus. Similar to the post here.
Scan all the way down to the bottom of the article and there are some interesting facts.
The area being spoken about is 1.5 acres, NOT 150 acres.
UCSC needs to cut down 6 trees, NOT 1000 trees.
Scan all the way down to the bottom of the article and there are some interesting facts.
The area being spoken about is 1.5 acres, NOT 150 acres.
UCSC needs to cut down 6 trees, NOT 1000 trees.
>is that undo UCSC website being updated? To wish for people to monkey in the >night is great, but are there any above-ground campaigns to protest this logging >and UCSC expansion? Does anyone have any good ideas? What can we do with >the information on the undo website? A home demo sounds "fun" but what will it >actually do for the trees and animals? Other ideas are welcome.
From appearances, the Undo UCSC website has not been updated for awhile (one or two years); however, the general viewpoint and analysis and research they offer, the companies and (I think) the high-ranking bureaucrats they point out are still relevant--I don't know whether updates are really necessary or not, though they certainly would be nice. I'd like to point out that home demos are not what are being prescribed or even suggested as the course of action, and that more immediate actions are necessary.
Also, whether or not there are any *relevant* above-ground campaigns or not (I suspect not, unless someone can show me that something is actually happening publicly), "monkeying around" should be considered a viable tactic in this struggle. Any one development on UC campus (and there is a lot of it) is part of this overall plan of expansion, and should be considered a target. It is vitally important to strike at the apparatus of development before the places we love are paved over. More than this I can't really say, but hopefully this directs some people's thoughts in a more strategic direction.
P.S. Given police surveillance and the prevalence of idiots on this site, this thread probably isn't the best place to actually plan out any actions, even above-ground ones. Find people you trust, organize, communicate through secure channels with as much encryption and concealment as possible.
From appearances, the Undo UCSC website has not been updated for awhile (one or two years); however, the general viewpoint and analysis and research they offer, the companies and (I think) the high-ranking bureaucrats they point out are still relevant--I don't know whether updates are really necessary or not, though they certainly would be nice. I'd like to point out that home demos are not what are being prescribed or even suggested as the course of action, and that more immediate actions are necessary.
Also, whether or not there are any *relevant* above-ground campaigns or not (I suspect not, unless someone can show me that something is actually happening publicly), "monkeying around" should be considered a viable tactic in this struggle. Any one development on UC campus (and there is a lot of it) is part of this overall plan of expansion, and should be considered a target. It is vitally important to strike at the apparatus of development before the places we love are paved over. More than this I can't really say, but hopefully this directs some people's thoughts in a more strategic direction.
P.S. Given police surveillance and the prevalence of idiots on this site, this thread probably isn't the best place to actually plan out any actions, even above-ground ones. Find people you trust, organize, communicate through secure channels with as much encryption and concealment as possible.
So...maybe the university should build in a space where they would not have to cut down 6 trees. The meadow?
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$230.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network