Downtown San Rafael housing plans are needed

After reading coverage in the IJ news section about new potential housing developments in downtown San Rafael, I can say I firmly disagree with several recently published letters in opposition. In fact, I find the proposals encouraging.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion; it’s the opinion page after all. But after spending three years as the steering committee chair for San Rafael’s General Plan 2040, I learned only 10 housing units were built from 2011 to 2021. I think that fact supersedes those opinions as San Rafael confronts this crisis. Building only one unit per year for 10 years is clearly not enough.

While we may not want San Rafael to become a “big city like San Francisco or Oakland,” we do want it to stay vibrant. We want it to have a lively downtown attracting new businesses and restaurants. We want it to be a town for future generations.

But if you don’t build it, they won’t come.

A recent article (“San Rafael’s latest housing prospect: High-rise with 180 apartments,” Jan. 15) describes a 180-unit apartment proposal for 700 Irwin St. as one example of high-rise development generating outcry to keep San Rafael a “low-rise community.”

Opponents might focus on details in the story about the developer’s performance on projects in other cities. I think the focus should be on San Rafael’s need for housing. This would still be 20 times more units than in that previous 10-year period.

The current state of the site is notable. It’s no longer the bustling title company it was years ago. It sits empty and surrounded by cyclone fencing. Let’s be open to the possibility that redevelopment can bring, because housing is needed and welcome, in all forms.

— Stephanie Plante, Tiburon

Make sure Marinwood cleanup is completed first

A recently published letter by Marinwood resident Mike Allen raised concerns regarding the planned 125-apartment, Marinwood Plaza affordable-housing project. He wrote that construction activity could result in health impacts to existing residents from dust and vapor associated with prior site contamination.

A portion of the property was once occupied by a dry-cleaning business. It resulted in a perchloroethylene contamination of the soil and groundwater. While the property owner has completed initial remediation of two “hot spots” on the property, as required by California Regional Water Quality Control Board, full site remediation remains to be completed. Board records indicate that one hot spot was treated with multiple injections of an oxidizing agent to bioremediate contamination and the other hot spot resulted in the removal of 510 tons of contaminated soil.

According to a recent article in the IJ (“Marin supervisors allocate $6.25M for Marinwood housing,” Dec. 21), county planners have been told that “the regional water board will make sure their requirements for cleanup are satisfied before any housing development occurs on site.”

Marinwood neighbors need to hold the county and the board accountable. The most recent order established amended final site cleanup requirements. They need to be completed prior to any site development.

— Bill Ramsey, San Rafael

Smaller units most important for housing

I am concerned that the proposed Oak Hill Apartments, a 135-unit workforce housing project near San Quentin (“Marin workforce housing complex edges toward construction phase,” Jan. 24) continue the mistakes of the past.

The complex is described as providing one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments. This ignores studies of the needs and uses of housing by most people in developed countries. Anthropological and archaeological studies of societies show that, as societies become more populous and richer, average size of dwellings increases.

The average U.S. house has doubled in size since the 1970s to a 2023 average of 2,500 square feet. Studies of space use by people show that most use one or two rooms at most and the patterning of use is about 500 square feet. This should be the amount of space mandated for builders who enjoy the new building exemptions from local planning.

The Oak Hill project needs to include studio apartments. These are most affordable. Additionally, it should include congregate housing. Current population surveys show trends for housing to be occupied by one or two people, on average. Why are we dedicating scarce housing resources to larger apartments, especially when our birthrate has been dropping over the past three decades?

Housing in Marin should be built for working populations and should reflect our demographics and current risk factors (such as fire and disaster events, especially those which can be projected to result due to climate change). County officials should mandate a moratorium on new construction in the urban-wildland interface, and define no new construction along escape corridors for disaster evacuation. We should be studying the fires in Santa Rosa and Los Angeles with these risks in mind.

— Niccolo Caldararo, Fairfax

Bishop’s words to Trump were inspiring

We are deeply dismayed by President Donald Trump’s recent executive orders and frequent pejorative language. On the other hand, Bishop Mariann Budde inspired us (“Trump demands an apology from bishop who asked him to ‘have mercy’ on LGBTQ+ people and migrants,” Jan. 23) by requesting that our president show mercy — tolerance, kindness and care — toward the people of America.

Her comments addressed to the president lifted our spirits and provided us with an example of true leadership.

— Donal Brown and Brenda Brown, Corte Madera

Pardons are an insult to law-abiding citizens

It is an outrage to have the criminals and vandals who terrorized the nation’s Capitol get pardoned (“Trump pardons upend massive Jan. 6 prosecution by freeing rioters and dismissing cases,” Jan. 21).

The heinous attack that resulted in injuries and death for police officers is inexcusable. I consider this to be an attempt to “white wash” the most embarrassing chapter in our current history. These pardons are an insult to law-abiding citizens and law enforcement personnel.

— Peter Tiernan, Novato

Blaming state for fires shows ignorance, cruelty

Suggestions by Republican leaders, including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, that disaster aid to California should be conditioned on changes to the state’s forest management practices and water supply, while questioning why other states should help California recover from the devastation that continued to inflict Southern California, are stunning in their hypocrisy, ignorance and outright cruelty.

California sends far more tax dollars to Washington, D.C., than other states, and these same Republican leaders appear to be quick to use California tax dollars to provide relief to those in politically “red” states who choose to live in areas repeatedly subject to floods, tornados and hurricanes.

The Los Angeles fires weren’t raging in forests; most of California’s forests are managed by the federal government (the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service), not the state; drought and climate change are making it more vulnerable to these sorts of disasters; and low water pressure in hillside fire hydrants was due to plumbing, not to state management of its water resources.

Republican leaders are using this and other tragedies to advance selfish and destructive policies for the short-term financial benefit of a select few, while consigning the rest of the population of the United States and, in fact, the rest of the world, to ever-increasing misery.

As long as voters in other states continue to elect representatives who espouse these views, our country’s — and the rest of the world’s — problems will only get worse.

— George Forman, Nicasio