Thursday, December 27, 2012

Novato succeeds in reducing affordable housing density


 
 

Editor's note:  Citizens are making a difference in Novato.  This article was from 2011 asking for 20 units per acre in Novato.  This lessens the impact on the community.  Marin County is proposing for Marinwood/Lucas Valley 50% MORE DENSITY at Marinwood Village at 30 units per acre. 

We need you to voice your concern and join us.

Novato needs more answers

I need some answers about some of these affordable housing ground rules from the state.
I want clarification about building 30 units per acre of housing plus a bonus of 35 percent equaling 40 units to more than 100 units with few or no constraints. In addition, does the state require that 50 percent of the units be for market rate? Does that mean that 200 or more units will be developed on sites around Novato?

The state, high-density groups, plus supervisors, builders, and developers favor few or no constraints for traffic, design, or concern for impacts on schools, safety and infrastructure in Novato. “Build, Baby, Build” is their motto as long as there are federal and state tax dollars for their political and economical agendas.

Forget about the social impacts on the quality of life in Novato when the threshold of high density is paid by the next generations.

Forget about drought, earthquakes, water quality, community gardens, trees, deer, flowers, wildlife, wetlands, watersheds, shade, valleys, forests, red roses and blue skies, too
.
Forget about knowing your neighbors, your community and religious institutions.

Forget about the social, economical and environmental costs to the rural and suburban residents.

 One solution for the future is plan for 20 units per acre or less on some locations.
The city staff is apparently afraid or reluctant to do this without the Novato City Council saying the buck stops here (I am from Missouri, home state of Harry S. “Buck Stops Here” Truman, where conservation was ingrained into our souls in school). A solution of 20 units or less needs a feasibility study to show the state that the sites are buildable. Building 30-40-100 units per acre plus adding 50 percent market-rate units to the low-income units do not require any feasibility studies from cities and costs less for the city planners. For whom do they work?

  In addition, the county now wants the Atherton mobile Home park on the east side of 101 for multiple low-income housing. 300 or more units on that site plus additional 50 percent market rate units will wreak havoc on Novato’s vision of a small-town atmosphere.

Furthermore, the county has added back to their quota list the St. Vincent’s parcels near Marinwood, which would add another 1,200 units plus the 50 percent market rate units, plus cars in the future for the county’s quotas.

Examples of high density in our rural, suburban county are the Millworks/Whole Foods complex on De Long Avenue in downtown Novato and the large buildings in downtown San Rafael.
Moreover, massive high-density buildings and millions of dollars for a passenger train system deny respect for humans and our need for open spaces, fresh air, clean water, parks, uncrowded schools, safety and cultivated land. Will robots and politicians replace conservation?
Novato must be the poster child for common sense and 20 units or less per acre. Feasibility studies will show we can do this and have a community that thrives now and in the future.
No more passing the buck.

 

Brenda

Nicely done Eleanor! Thank you
Reply

Bob Ratto

Eleanor
The whole things does make one's head spin...There are 10-12 people in the County that are the main "pushers" of this, and it does boggle the mind how far this all gets taken...using the income models proposed, most of Novato could qualify for this, and maybe that very same majority could come to their senses and decide what is appropriate for our community. Wishful?, maybe. The proposed sites just keep getting bigger and bigger.
Reply

janna nikkola

Well said, Eleanor! What bugs many of the taxpayers in Novato is how the entire concept is being shoved down our throats ("you have to build the number of units we tell you to build, but you can choose where to build"). What also grates is the number of people who are advocating this high density housing who don't even live in Novato or Marin County. They should have no say about where to build this high density housing and how many units "we the people" of Novato allow to be built. I'd like these people to be excluded from City Council meetings entirely. Let them do their politicking in their own communities. There's so much going on here that is not being made public. There are huge profits and tax incentives for the developers who build these projects and the number of units initially approved can be increased by the developers, all to the detriment of the neighborhoods where they're built and to the detriment of the Novato taxpayers and residents whose neighborhoods will change forever after the high density housing is built. Most people who live in Marin County moved here to escape overcrowded cities and to enjoy a bucolic, country-like lifestyle with a low crime rate and being surrounded by open space. The taxpayers, residents and homeowners of Novato have nothing to gain by these high density projects and much to lose. Why is no one defending our right to say "no" to these projects?
Reply

Edwin Drake

Definitions of Metropolitan and suburban come from the US Census Bureau.
This needs to be changed at the federal level.
(Who's running to replace Woolsey?)
Please see parts of: California Government Code Section 65583.2
(d) For purposes of this section, metropolitan counties, nonmetropolitan counties, and nonmetropolitan counties with micropolitan areas are as determined by the United States Census Bureau. Nonmetropolitan counties with micropolitan areas include the following counties: Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Nevada,
Tehama, and Tuolumne and such other counties as may be determined by the United States Census Bureau to be nonmetropolitan counties with micropolitan areas in the future.
(e) A jurisdiction is considered suburban if the jurisdiction does not meet the requirements of clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) and is located in a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) of less than 2,000,000 in population, unless that jurisdiction's population is greater than 100,000, in which case it is considered metropolitan. Counties, not including the City and County of San Francisco, will be considered suburban unless they are in a MSA of 2,000,000 or greater in population in which case they are considered metropolitan.
Reply

Edwin Drake

More
Definitions of Metropolitan and suburban come from the US Census Bureau.
Please see parts of: California Government Code Section 65583.2 and nearby
(f) A jurisdiction is considered metropolitan if the jurisdiction does not meet the requirements for "suburban area" above and is located in a MSA of 2,000,000 or greater in population, unless that jurisdiction's population is less than 25,000 in which case it is considered suburban.
Reply

Bob Minkin

Thanks Eleanor. It's disgusting what these "housing advocates" and working groups are trying to ram down our throats and destroy Novato. The only people who stand to gain are the developers. It's all about money and not helping anybody truly in need.
Reply

Sylvia Barry

I was looking at the same section – I think the problem with Marin is it's part of San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area), which includes San Francisco, San Mateo and Marin counties The combined population is over 2,000,000 in 2014. Since Novato has over 50,000 populations, its designation is ‘Metropolitan’, same as San Rafael.
Petaluma is part of the Santa Rosa-Petaluma MSA, which includes Sonoma County with just over 480K population. Even though Petaluma's population is similar to Novato, due to different MSA it belongs to, it's designation is Suburban.
If what I interpreted is correct, Petaluma’s suburban designation allows them to have 20 units per acre, while Novato’s Metropolitan designation forced it to have 30 units per acre in the context of what we are talking about here.
Unfortunately, the removal of Jared Huffman’s AB1103 eliminated the part to “allow a local government to petition the regional governing body for a density designation that more appropriately reflects the area.” which affects Novato and San Rafael. The part about conversion of 2nd units help Southern Marin towns more than Novato (only 13 units projected for the next four years in Novato).
Reply

Brenda

Didn't Katie Crecelius "work" with Huffman recently in Sacramento on AB1103? SUNN founders say they are in favor of the bill? They are in the pocket of the investors/developers......Marin Community Foundation- the bill works in their favor not Novato's.
Reply

Sylvia Barry

Hi Brenda - Politics is not my forte. I can only tell you what I learned as I research this. The original AB1103 did include the language but was stripped of that first item at the request of the Assembly HCD committee chair towards the end.
Reply

Austin Morris

Let us revert back to the basics of the matter and build the case from there. We first need to start with a level playing field. If ‘we Novato’ are being mandated, then so too all other communities in Marin bar none must take their share. We must not think of this as the community with open or buildable space; but assignment of x-number of Affordable Housing Units and obtain equity from that standpoint.
Novato must stand tough, hold the line and stop any further discussions until the County & 100% of the cities that comprise Marin County are onboard. Then and only then do we walk into the water holding hands. Sausalito, Mill Valley, Tiburon, Ross, et.al. to the north may claim they don’t have buildable space/acreage, that is not our problem find it, condemn it by ‘Imminent Domain’ if need be; but get those properties on the books and then Novato will take this matter into consideration.
They won’t, and thereby we should not be dictated to. Can you see some nice AH units being constructed on Belvedere Lagoon, I don’t think so, and that is what democracy is all about. We can not have voices in Belvedere, who won’t do their share, casting ballots to dictate to us within even the same County of Marin. Stop it here, and then widen the ring to the County, to ABAG (were they to be recognized) then to the State, when we have Representatives who know our voices.
Reply

Trish Boorstein

Thank you Eleanor for your Op-ed piece and to everyone else who has been participating in this forum to educate our community. Thank you everyone for your cheers of support during the Parade today! Let's stay active this summer in any way possible and be ready to organize petitions or any other necessary action. Way back when I attended an ABAG meeting in San Rafael one of the Reps said something about every jurisdiction should just turn in a housing element and show good intent. I agree Lloyd, Novato has probably done more than any other Marin jurisdiction in putting together a community involved Housing Element. That's why I asked Tina if all the cities in CA that have been sued have actually submitted a City approved Housing Element. We have to convince the City Council to accept the lower densities and Working Group Sites and deal with the fall out afterwards. Novato has demonstrated good intent over and beyond.
Reply

Edwin Drake

An idea occurs: The "metropolitan" designation does somewhat rely on population. Let's split Novato into two cities, that would drop us below the threshold. I know it's crazy but, as always, trying to think outside the box here to get fresh perspective.
Reply

Trish Boorstein

Edwin, Lloyd had also mentioned this same idea some time ago. If we ultimately can't change our designation then I think this needs to be looked at. Keep thinking outside the box!
Reply

Jerome J Ghigliotti Jr

Please, please, browse Palo Alto Patch for the article about housing requirements. The Palo Alto city council and staff have taken a stand against Sacramento leftists and told them "this is our town, we are going to plan for our future". Why not Novato? Because the Novato City Council uses sanctuary social engineering as a tool against their own constituents. Vote the bums out. Screw leftist "affordable housing" social engineering mandates.
Reply

 

Loading...

No comments:

Post a Comment