My rural life

This guys a kook

George Clark maybe a resident of Eureka and he is a complete Wanna Be with only air between his ears. His neighbors can't stand the man.

It's sad when those of no growth ideologies use KOOKS like this to scare others into agreement and into becoming sheep that follow.

Rural residents provided answers at the June 11, 2009, Humboldt County Planning Commission hearing at College of the Redwoods.

Clark Paints all rural land owners as polluters......most rural people are some of the most ardent enviromentalists. That's why they live in the country.

The vast majority of the Rural Residents that attended the meeting overwhelmingly were against Plan A that "healthy humboldt" advocates for.
Adopting Plan A would abolish Humboldts time honored tradition of rural living. Adopting Plan A would dissallow building your cabin on a LEGAL rural parcel........
Plan A is nothing short of making Humboldt county one huge Preservation Zone and that's what "healthy humboldt" is trying to do.

Repub wrote:

This guys a kook

Man, you got that right.

"Humboldts time honored tradition of rural living."

Expulsions, massacres, massive environmental destruction...

Outside of the Healthy Humboldt folks, I think most everyone else agrees that you should be able to build a house on TPZ property, but there needs to be some strict rules regarding subdividing these properties. A minimum parcel size of 160 acres makes sense. A single house should be allowed on each 160+ parcel.

Common sense will prevail-

Advice for Mr. Clark: why don't you move to Washington State? Sell your BIG house on the hill to someone who appreciates Humboldt County. If you do move, don't expect anyone to shed a tear.....or even notice, for that matter.

Eureka resident wrote:

"Humboldts time honored tradition of rural living."
Expulsions, massacres, massive environmental destruction...

Meth, weed, guns, banjos..........

"Affordable housing is essential for individuals and families to save the capital required to have options for where they live, where they work, how they commute, what they eat, and their access to education, good health and health care."

I agree, and mr Clark should heed his own advice. Individuals and families have the right to have options for where thy live, work, commute, eat.......rural or urban.

"Repub": Alternative A calls for what you call common sense: A minimum parcel size of 160 acres and a single house allowed on each parcel.

These rules would be for owners of Non-Industrial Timberlands (ownerships of less than 5,000 acres). Ownerships over 5,000 acres would be zoned Industrial Timberlands with a minimum parcel size of 160 acres but only 1 house allowed per 600 acres.

And Healthy Humboldt apparently supports the above.

This is fine as long as there is no gray area regarding the ability to build a house. It should be crystal clear, so there is no costly process to prove that it meets this criteria.

Word is that it was actually David Cobb that wrote the article and George Clark just signed his name to it.

I don't know- the ramblings definitely sounded like George. Without knowing the author, I'd have guessed that it came from George.

there are hundreds of parcels of land labeled TPZ that are various sizes. 20 acres, 40 acres 90 acres etc..........these people should be allowed to build their cabin on their land. To rule that only people with 600 acres+ are allowed to have a house is absolutely ridiculous. Only VERY rich land barons can afford this NEW RULE.
thanks "Healthy Humboldt" for not understanding this. You seem to be very out of touch with how much this will affect Humboldt families.

If you currently have a parcel under 160, then you should have the right to build a home. Moving forward, any lot at 160 or more should have the right to build a home. Subdividing to lots smaller than 160 shouldn't be given the right to develop an additional homesite.

Thanks my opinion. Seems very reasonable-

George Clark is bonkers. Why he feels the need to constantly remind us he is bonkers by writing this drivel is beyond me. I would think that a family intervention is in order.

Actually, the draft GPU calls for smaller TPZ parcels to be rolled out with a much easier process than the current process, which requires a vote of the Board of Supervisors. So though you'd have to start paying regular property taxes, you'd be allowed to build a house with no conditional use permit, just a ministerial permit (meaning building codes apply, whether AOB or regular).

No one is even proposing that only people with 600+ acres should be allowed to build a house--this is one of the Great Lies HumCPR is spreading. Read the GPU for yourself, don't believe the hype! It's time to talk abut the actual issues under consideration, not the paranoid fear frenzy that HumCPR is whipping up.

Repub: that is essentially what is being proposed:
If you currently have a parcel under 160, then you would have the right to build a home (but might have to roll out of TPZ and pay regular property taxes). Moving forward, any TPZ lot at 160 or more would have the right to build a home, unless the owner has more than 5,000 acres, meaning the timber companies. Subdividing to lots smaller than 160 wouldn't be given the right to develop an additional homesite, they would just have one per parcel.

It's a given that there will always be rural dwellers who pollute the land.
Are they the majority or not is questionable.
They are out there and they do not care one iota about the land, water, buildings, etc. Many ignore whatever laws apply and often get away with it because there are more of them than county officials.
It's not just Humboldt it's everywhere.

Eureka resident wrote:

"Humboldts time honored tradition of rural living."
Expulsions, massacres, massive environmental destruction...

Your a kook also. Only destructive aspect of Humboldt Co. is Bay Area idiots that moved up here after the timber wars