Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Wetlands topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and environmental groups urge Newark to reject ‘Mori/Maori Village’ housing plan on wetland grounds
Summary
Multiple Newark residents, environmental groups and coalition members addressed the council during public comment on Oct. 23 urging the city to oppose a proposed 29‑acre housing development known as Maori Village on land currently occupied by a Pick‑n‑Pull auto dismantler and surrounded by wetlands and flood channels.
Dozens of residents and environmental advocates told the Newark City Council on Oct. 23 they oppose a proposed housing project on the Pick‑n‑Pull site west of the Silliman Center and Union Pacific tracks, arguing the land is a poor place for development and should be restored as wetlands and used for climate resilience.
Speakers including Cara Madden, an East Bay resident who collected petitions, said volunteers gathered signatures from thousands of Bay Area residents opposing the 29‑acre development. “Out of all the people that I spoke with personally, only one individual thought that this development was a good idea,” Madden said, and she delivered stacks of petition signatures to the council.
Conservation and climate advocates emphasized flood‑control and carbon‑sequestration benefits of wetlands. “One acre of marsh can sequester more than 10 times the carbon of an acre of forest,” said Yo Yo Yeh, a local tree‑planting organizer, who urged preservation of the marsh for climate mitigation rather than building new housing on it.
Speakers noted the site is bounded on three sides by existing wetlands and two flood channels and that the Pick‑n‑Pull operation holds a conditional‑use permit that includes cleanup obligations when it closes. Johnna Soquel, a long‑time resident, said the conditional‑use permit requires the business to clean up the land at closure and urged the city to position itself to pursue grant funding for acquisition and restoration instead of approving development there.
Greenbelt Alliance and other organizations urged the city to preserve the site and seek state and regional grants, including funds that can be used for nature‑based climate resilience projects. “Maori Village does none of this,” Andrew, speaking for Greenbelt Alliance, said of the developer’s plan. He and others recommended infill housing elsewhere in Newark and said the proposed plan relies heavily on single‑family homes rather than dense, transit‑oriented multifamily housing.
Speakers cited recent wet winters and local flooding, noted nearby neighborhoods that already experience inundation and warned that paving the marsh would reduce the city’s natural buffers to sea‑level rise and storm surge. Several speakers referenced state funding opportunities for restoration and urged the council to reject the proposal when it comes to a future council hearing.
Council members and staff did not act on the project at the meeting; the remarks were part of the public‑comment period. Speakers said they will continue outreach and petitioning and expect to submit written comments to the city’s planning docket when the proposal reaches a formal public hearing.
