A blog about Marinwood-Lucas Valley and the Marin Housing Element, politics, economics and social policy. The MOST DANGEROUS BLOG in Marinwood-Lucas Valley.
Showing posts with label Mark Luce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Luce. Show all posts
Sunday, September 4, 2016
Sunday, May 1, 2016
The Great Debate, "Plan Bay Area, Is it good for Marin?"
In
case you weren't there, or if you were there and are still talking about it and
want to share the highlights here is an HD video of The Great Debate.
Timepoints for reference:
00:00 Host, Robert Eyler, CEO, Marin Economic
Forum
03:17 Panel Introductions
05:46 Is PBA good for the region and Marin??
06:57 Pledge of Alegiance
07:29 Mark Luce, ABAG, supports PBA, 10 minute presentation
18:06 Thomas Rubin, opposes PBA, 10 minute presentation
28:25 Steve Kinsey, Marin County Supervisor, supports PBA, 10 minute presentation
38:10 Randal O'Toole, CATO Institute, opposes PBA, 10 minute presentation
47:04 PUBLIC QUESTIONS
47:25 Should PBA be put to a vote? Liz Manning
47:54 - Luce
49:16 - Rubin
50:52 What are the social implications for minoritys in High Density Housing? Chris Pareja
51:05 - Kinsey
51:58 - O'Toole
56:00 What are the mplications of agreement between Marin County and HUD? Basia Crane
56:23 - Kinsey
57:43 - O'Toole
59:00 Please explain the mistakes in the Rena calculations. Diane Furst, Mayor, Corte Madera
1:00:10 - Luce
1:01:54 - O'Toole
1:03:54 What does PBA do to help solve climate change? Bill Kearney
1:04:32 - O'Toole
1:05:42 - Kinsey
1:06:36 - Luce
1:07:24 - Rubin
1:08:22 Why is "no plan" option off of the table? Meilin Kurtzman
1:08:42 - Kinsey
1:09:41 - O'Toole
1:11:10 Are the financial projections in the plan realistic? Chris Engle
1:11:28 - Rubin
1:11:49 - Kinsey
1:12:51 - Luce
1:13:39 - O'Toole
1:14:42 Why is Marin being zoned urban; what is the rational behind 30 units per acre? Amie itzgeral
1:15:12 - Kinsey
1:15:46 - Luce
1:16:46 - O'Toole
1:18:23 This appears to be an attack on the middle class. Clayton Smith
1:19:36 - Kinsey
1:20:33 - Rubin
1:21:01 - Luce
1:22:14 Mark - what would it take for you to change your position? Herb Smith
1:22:50 - Luce
1:23:29 - Kinsey
1:24:19 Why do you think this plan is good for Marin? Blaine Morris
1:25:11 - Kinsey
1:26:00 - O'Toole
1:27:50 How will a deisel train compete with fuel efficient cars? Scott Erkhart
1:28:26 - Kinsey
1:29:08 - O'Toole
1:31:00 Why can't a city member of ABAG, simply opt out? Dan Ucher
1:31:59 - Luce
1:33:19 - Rubin
1:34:51 We are close to the AB32 standards - do you recognize this?? Stephen Nestel
1:36:13 - Luce
1:36:55 - Kinsey
1:37:35 - Rubin
1:40:10 Closing Statement - O'Toole
1:42:26 Closing Statement - Kinsey
1:44:48 Closing Statement - Rubin
1:47:15 Closing Statement - Luce
03:17 Panel Introductions
05:46 Is PBA good for the region and Marin??
06:57 Pledge of Alegiance
07:29 Mark Luce, ABAG, supports PBA, 10 minute presentation
18:06 Thomas Rubin, opposes PBA, 10 minute presentation
28:25 Steve Kinsey, Marin County Supervisor, supports PBA, 10 minute presentation
38:10 Randal O'Toole, CATO Institute, opposes PBA, 10 minute presentation
47:04 PUBLIC QUESTIONS
47:25 Should PBA be put to a vote? Liz Manning
47:54 - Luce
49:16 - Rubin
50:52 What are the social implications for minoritys in High Density Housing? Chris Pareja
51:05 - Kinsey
51:58 - O'Toole
56:00 What are the mplications of agreement between Marin County and HUD? Basia Crane
56:23 - Kinsey
57:43 - O'Toole
59:00 Please explain the mistakes in the Rena calculations. Diane Furst, Mayor, Corte Madera
1:00:10 - Luce
1:01:54 - O'Toole
1:03:54 What does PBA do to help solve climate change? Bill Kearney
1:04:32 - O'Toole
1:05:42 - Kinsey
1:06:36 - Luce
1:07:24 - Rubin
1:08:22 Why is "no plan" option off of the table? Meilin Kurtzman
1:08:42 - Kinsey
1:09:41 - O'Toole
1:11:10 Are the financial projections in the plan realistic? Chris Engle
1:11:28 - Rubin
1:11:49 - Kinsey
1:12:51 - Luce
1:13:39 - O'Toole
1:14:42 Why is Marin being zoned urban; what is the rational behind 30 units per acre? Amie itzgeral
1:15:12 - Kinsey
1:15:46 - Luce
1:16:46 - O'Toole
1:18:23 This appears to be an attack on the middle class. Clayton Smith
1:19:36 - Kinsey
1:20:33 - Rubin
1:21:01 - Luce
1:22:14 Mark - what would it take for you to change your position? Herb Smith
1:22:50 - Luce
1:23:29 - Kinsey
1:24:19 Why do you think this plan is good for Marin? Blaine Morris
1:25:11 - Kinsey
1:26:00 - O'Toole
1:27:50 How will a deisel train compete with fuel efficient cars? Scott Erkhart
1:28:26 - Kinsey
1:29:08 - O'Toole
1:31:00 Why can't a city member of ABAG, simply opt out? Dan Ucher
1:31:59 - Luce
1:33:19 - Rubin
1:34:51 We are close to the AB32 standards - do you recognize this?? Stephen Nestel
1:36:13 - Luce
1:36:55 - Kinsey
1:37:35 - Rubin
1:40:10 Closing Statement - O'Toole
1:42:26 Closing Statement - Kinsey
1:44:48 Closing Statement - Rubin
1:47:15 Closing Statement - Luce
__._,_.___
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Marinwood Village- an ideal home for Napa's Workforce?
[Editor's Note In Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Marin won a grant from Caltrans to study Marinwood Village for housing Napa workforce commuters 36 miles away . As unreal as this sounds, they actually won $91,120 for the study which became the "Marinwood Village Collaborative". The hand picked participants were sworn to keep matters secret until it could be presented to the community. Just another example of your tax dollars at work and Supervisor Adams "efforts to redevelop the Marinwood Plaza site"]
Community Outreach – Over the course of this planning project, more than 100 meetings with public interest and advocacy groups were held. In addition to these special purpose meetings were two series of general, open public meetings, in the fall of 2007 and the spring of 2008, each of which had three meetings for a total of six. Also in the fall of 2007 Napa’s Transportation Future hosted a Speakers Series with six outside experts to bring national transportation experts to the community.
- Grant Amount: $91,120
- Grant Recipient: Marin County Community Development Agency
- County: Marin
Project Area – An underutilized shopping center on a five-acre commercial parcel in the Marinwood community.
Project Focus – The Community Based Transportation and Coordinated Land Use Plan (CBT Plan) will concentrate on coordinated transportation and land use within Napa County and into our neighboring Counties which provide Napa with its work force. According to the recent Napa County Community Indicators report, a growing number of Napa County’s residents are retirees who no longer contribute to the work force. As more of Napa’s baby boomer residents retire in their homes, there will be an even greater need for employees to commute into Napa for work. Also according to the Indicators report, there is an increasing trend in retirees relocating to Napa County. The combination of the availability of jobs and higher priced housing or lack of available affordable housing in Napa County has forced many Napa employees to commute into Napa from Solano and Lake Counties
Project Goals – The Marinwood Village project will provide transportation, housing and environmental benefits that support local, regional, and State planning goals. Redevelopment of Marinwood Plaza will also help fulfill the County’s goal of less development in the rural areas of west Marin County and more in the urbanized area along the Highway 101 corridor. The project will
combine housing and employment opportunities on one site, thereby improving the jobs/housing balance in the area; and it will expand shopping opportunities for Marinwood residents, thereby reducing the frequency and length of vehicular trips. The project will also encourage alternative modes of transportation by improving bike and pedestrian routes and providing better access to the bus stops along Highway 101.Community Outreach – Over the course of this planning project, more than 100 meetings with public interest and advocacy groups were held. In addition to these special purpose meetings were two series of general, open public meetings, in the fall of 2007 and the spring of 2008, each of which had three meetings for a total of six. Also in the fall of 2007 Napa’s Transportation Future hosted a Speakers Series with six outside experts to bring national transportation experts to the community.
Saturday, June 7, 2014
Seven million people denied a vote on Plan Bay Area
In an outrageous display of political arrogance ABAG President Mark Luce discuss putting vote of Plan Bay Area before people.
Thursday, March 13, 2014
The Great PDA Debate - Part I
On February 25th the Marin County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing about whether or not to remove the Priority Development Area (PDA) in the Strawberry neighborhood. A PDA is a land use designation that a city or county can assign to indicate a desire for high density growth in that location.
The hearing was led by Kate Sears, the Supervisor for the Strawberry district, who lectured the public in chatty, schoolmarm tones through an ever-present grin that seemed oblivious to the community’s need for her to at least emotionally acknowledge the seriousness of the issue before them.
For months Ms. Sears had tried to dismiss, deflect and derail the need for such a hearing. At first she tried to divide and conquer by refusing to attend any large community meetings: she would only meet with small groups to diffuse dissent. But her attempts didn’t work. She had ignored requests to put the topic on the agenda of the weekly BOS meetings for 14 consecutive weeks, but the public wouldn’t let up. She had even tried to shift the decision’s responsibility to entirely different agency, the Transportation Authority of Marin, but to no avail. Her curious obstructionist tactics only fanned the flames. By now her constituents were fully informed and actively engaged in making their opinions known.
And so it began.
After a variety of somewhat long winded, defensive and off topic remarks by most of the Supervisors it was time for a presentation by Community Development Director, Brian Crawford.
Mr. Crawford’s staff report was ostensibly about the history, locations and ramifications of PDAs in Marin, but it ended up being a good deal of confusing disinformation and “planner- speak” gibberish (see video here: Item 16). But as innocuous as his report may have seemed, it was in some ways one of the more important things that occurred at the meeting because it touched on, or perhaps more appropriately failed to touch on, larger issues we are facing about PDAs.
Mr. Crawford showed the Board a map of the County’s Priority Development Areas. On it, it showed that the entire north-south corridor within a half mile of highway 101 was designated as the “Highway 101 PDA Corridor” (indicated by hash marks). Mr. Crawford went on to explain that the County had “volunteered” this entire swath of land as a PDA back in 2006 and 2007, during the Pre-Plan Bay Area “Focus” sessions led by ABAG. He then noted that in 2010 to 2011 the BOS had voted to confirm this PDA designation for the 101 corridor and to include what the map called “Transit Neighborhoods,” which included the Strawberry PDA.
Oddly, his presentation and charts made it sound as if (1) the county had the authority to dictate land use for property that was located within other cities in Marin, and (2) that everything within a half like of highway 101 was a PDA, as defined by Plan Bay Area.
This, of course, is completely wrong.
The areas noted as Transit Neighborhoods were in fact the only actual PDAs. But the map was still incorrect because the outlines of the areas noted as Transit Neighborhoods did not correspond accurately to the areas of the actual PDAs noted in the County’s Housing Element. In places like Marin City, for example, this is significant because his map showed County Housing Authority-owned projects, like Golden Gate Village, as being in a PDA, which it is not.
Why the map was presented at all remains a mystery.
However, predictably, not a single Supervisor raised an eyebrow or seemed to care enough to question his misstatements even though they should have all known that the County’s Housing Element only recognized a few remaining areas as actual PDAs: Strawberry, Marin City and California Park (Marinwood and the Tam/Almonte area having already been removed).
But okay, so the map was wrong. What’s the big deal?
Following the passage of SB375, our metropolitan planning organization (ABAG and MTC) had to craft a “Sustainable Communities Strategy,” which became a known as Plan Bay Area. Plan Bay Area was not adopted until June of 2013.
Whatever the County might have done prior to the adoption of Plan Bay Area was not officially connected to federal and state transportation funding that Plan Bay Area brought with it targeted for PDAs.
It’s important to also know that it was SB375 that clearly defined the state’s intention of promoting and incentivizing zoning changes for high density transit oriented development (TOD). SB375 and Plan Bay Area make it emphatically clear (in fact it’s pretty much their sole purpose) that 80 percent of the TOD that occurs is targeted for
The hearing was led by Kate Sears, the Supervisor for the Strawberry district, who lectured the public in chatty, schoolmarm tones through an ever-present grin that seemed oblivious to the community’s need for her to at least emotionally acknowledge the seriousness of the issue before them.
For months Ms. Sears had tried to dismiss, deflect and derail the need for such a hearing. At first she tried to divide and conquer by refusing to attend any large community meetings: she would only meet with small groups to diffuse dissent. But her attempts didn’t work. She had ignored requests to put the topic on the agenda of the weekly BOS meetings for 14 consecutive weeks, but the public wouldn’t let up. She had even tried to shift the decision’s responsibility to entirely different agency, the Transportation Authority of Marin, but to no avail. Her curious obstructionist tactics only fanned the flames. By now her constituents were fully informed and actively engaged in making their opinions known.
And so it began.
After a variety of somewhat long winded, defensive and off topic remarks by most of the Supervisors it was time for a presentation by Community Development Director, Brian Crawford.
Mr. Crawford’s staff report was ostensibly about the history, locations and ramifications of PDAs in Marin, but it ended up being a good deal of confusing disinformation and “planner- speak” gibberish (see video here: Item 16). But as innocuous as his report may have seemed, it was in some ways one of the more important things that occurred at the meeting because it touched on, or perhaps more appropriately failed to touch on, larger issues we are facing about PDAs.
No Wonder Everyone Is So Confused
Oddly, his presentation and charts made it sound as if (1) the county had the authority to dictate land use for property that was located within other cities in Marin, and (2) that everything within a half like of highway 101 was a PDA, as defined by Plan Bay Area.
This, of course, is completely wrong.
The areas noted as Transit Neighborhoods were in fact the only actual PDAs. But the map was still incorrect because the outlines of the areas noted as Transit Neighborhoods did not correspond accurately to the areas of the actual PDAs noted in the County’s Housing Element. In places like Marin City, for example, this is significant because his map showed County Housing Authority-owned projects, like Golden Gate Village, as being in a PDA, which it is not.
Why the map was presented at all remains a mystery.
However, predictably, not a single Supervisor raised an eyebrow or seemed to care enough to question his misstatements even though they should have all known that the County’s Housing Element only recognized a few remaining areas as actual PDAs: Strawberry, Marin City and California Park (Marinwood and the Tam/Almonte area having already been removed).
But okay, so the map was wrong. What’s the big deal?
Some Backstory
The ABAG Focus sessions that Brian Crawford referred to happened prior to the passage of Senate Bill 375 in September of 2008. SB375 was the legislation that made the terms “Priority Development Area” (PDA) and “Transit Priority Project Area” (TPA) meaningful legal terms and connected them to federal and state transportation funding. That funding was the primary argument the BOS had been making as to why the Strawberry PDA should remain.Following the passage of SB375, our metropolitan planning organization (ABAG and MTC) had to craft a “Sustainable Communities Strategy,” which became a known as Plan Bay Area. Plan Bay Area was not adopted until June of 2013.
Whatever the County might have done prior to the adoption of Plan Bay Area was not officially connected to federal and state transportation funding that Plan Bay Area brought with it targeted for PDAs.
It’s important to also know that it was SB375 that clearly defined the state’s intention of promoting and incentivizing zoning changes for high density transit oriented development (TOD). SB375 and Plan Bay Area make it emphatically clear (in fact it’s pretty much their sole purpose) that 80 percent of the TOD that occurs is targeted for
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
Mark Luce, ABAG President doesn't want a Priority Development Area in HIS Backyard!
![]() |
| Mark Luce, Association of Bay Area Governments, President and Napa County Supervisor |
see the Napa County Register:
City, Luce settle ABAG flap
City, Luce settle ABAG flapPETER JENSEN Napa Valley Register
July 11, 2012 6:20 pm • PETER JENSEN
(13) Comments
After more than a month of sparring with city of Napa officials over the city’s pursuit to become a priority development area, Napa County Supervisor Mark Luce said he’s backing off pledges to fight the city’s application at the Association of Bay Area Governments.
At the suggestion of ABAG staff, the Napa City Council voted Tuesday night to revise the city’s application for downtown and the Soscol Gateway Corridor, shifting from a request to become a “transit town center” priority development area to a “transit neighborhood” designation.
The transit town center designation has a guideline of 3,000 to 7,500 housing units, while transit neighborhood has a guideline of 1,500 to 4,000 units. [Editor's note: Marinwood Priority Development Area is designated as a "transit neighborhood. Can you imagine 4000 units of housing east of Las Gallinas?see PDA to Urbanize Marinwood-Lucas Valley ]
Luce, the president of ABAG, said Wednesday the revision was enough to placate some of his concerns, and he’s removing his opposition to the application before it goes before ABAG’s executive board for a decision on July 19.
“I personally don’t like a PDA in the city of Napa,” Luce said. “But that’s just my opinion. I will remove my opposition and respect the council’s wish.”
Luce’s change of opinion also comes on the heels of ABAG staff affirming support for the city’s application this week. Because the city meets the criteria for a PDA, it should be approved, ABAG Principal Planner Miriam Chion has said. [Editor's Note: Is this the "local control" that ABAG president Luce said we will have at "the great debate". It sounds like coercion to me]
City officials have rejected Luce’s argument that becoming a priority development area would require the city to assume a greater ABAG housing allocation in the future.
“That’s a fear tactic,” said City Councilman Mark van Gorder, who’s running to unseat Luce in the Board of Supervisors’ 2nd District.
Dozens of Bay Area cities have had the transit town center designation approved, ranging from areas of San Francisco to cities as small as Cotati in Sonoma County, whose population is approximately 7,000 residents.
City officials and ABAG staff said that housing guidelines don’t carry much weight when designating priority development areas. The only basis for approving a transit PDA is whether the town is in an urban area, has a density of 20-units per acre, and a transit service comes every 20 minutes, they have said.[Editor's Note: Is this the real reason Marin County Supervisor Susan Adams has insists on running empty buses through our neighborhood?]
The city contended throughout the dispute that it’s only planning for 1,300 housing units in downtown and along Soscol Avenue, which is fewer than either of the transit designation’s guidelines.
The city easily met the PDA criteria, but was the only town to meet the criteria and have its application blocked. At a regional planning committee meeting June 6, Luce moved to block the request.
“It appears, as the president of ABAG, (Luce is) not a fan of it for Napa, but didn’t have a problem with it for Cotati?” van Gorder asked Wednesday. “He didn’t block Cotati. It feels like political gamesmanship to me.”
Van Gorder said at Tuesday’s council meeting that he preferred the city not revise its application from “transit town center” priority development area to a “transit neighborhood” designation.
“I think we had a very good application in place,” van Gorder said. “I see no reason to change our application.”
The change to a transit neighborhood designation doesn’t change the amount of money the city stands to receive if the application is approved.
From 2012 to 2015, Napa County has been allocated to receive $2.6 million in grant funding through ABAG and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Half of that, or $1.3 million, has been earmarked for priority development areas, meaning only American Canyon, currently the county’s only PDA, could lay claim to that money.
City Councilwoman Juliana Inman said Tuesday she favored changing the application because it would better secure access to transportation funding, which could be used to pay for planning along the Highway 29 corridor between American Canyon and Napa.
“Let’s see if we can get some grant funding to help with that process,” Inman said. “I think this would be a good direction.”
While the showdown between Napa and Luce likely won’t materialize at the July 19 ABAG meeting, van Gorder said he doesn’t expect the issue to go away.
“I think the issue’s going to come up in the campaign,” said van Gorder. Luce’s earlier stance at ABAG could have cost the city major transportation funding, he said.
Luce said he didn’t believe the issue would resurface in the campaign, but it could remind voters of how he’s representing them in regional government.
“I think what it has brought home is that my role as ABAG president is relevant,” Luce said. “It’s not just housing. There’s a lot of regional government issues.”
At the suggestion of ABAG staff, the Napa City Council voted Tuesday night to revise the city’s application for downtown and the Soscol Gateway Corridor, shifting from a request to become a “transit town center” priority development area to a “transit neighborhood” designation.
The transit town center designation has a guideline of 3,000 to 7,500 housing units, while transit neighborhood has a guideline of 1,500 to 4,000 units. [Editor's note: Marinwood Priority Development Area is designated as a "transit neighborhood. Can you imagine 4000 units of housing east of Las Gallinas?see PDA to Urbanize Marinwood-Lucas Valley ]
Luce, the president of ABAG, said Wednesday the revision was enough to placate some of his concerns, and he’s removing his opposition to the application before it goes before ABAG’s executive board for a decision on July 19.
“I personally don’t like a PDA in the city of Napa,” Luce said. “But that’s just my opinion. I will remove my opposition and respect the council’s wish.”
Luce’s change of opinion also comes on the heels of ABAG staff affirming support for the city’s application this week. Because the city meets the criteria for a PDA, it should be approved, ABAG Principal Planner Miriam Chion has said. [Editor's Note: Is this the "local control" that ABAG president Luce said we will have at "the great debate". It sounds like coercion to me]
City officials have rejected Luce’s argument that becoming a priority development area would require the city to assume a greater ABAG housing allocation in the future.
“That’s a fear tactic,” said City Councilman Mark van Gorder, who’s running to unseat Luce in the Board of Supervisors’ 2nd District.
Dozens of Bay Area cities have had the transit town center designation approved, ranging from areas of San Francisco to cities as small as Cotati in Sonoma County, whose population is approximately 7,000 residents.
City officials and ABAG staff said that housing guidelines don’t carry much weight when designating priority development areas. The only basis for approving a transit PDA is whether the town is in an urban area, has a density of 20-units per acre, and a transit service comes every 20 minutes, they have said.[Editor's Note: Is this the real reason Marin County Supervisor Susan Adams has insists on running empty buses through our neighborhood?]
The city contended throughout the dispute that it’s only planning for 1,300 housing units in downtown and along Soscol Avenue, which is fewer than either of the transit designation’s guidelines.
The city easily met the PDA criteria, but was the only town to meet the criteria and have its application blocked. At a regional planning committee meeting June 6, Luce moved to block the request.
“It appears, as the president of ABAG, (Luce is) not a fan of it for Napa, but didn’t have a problem with it for Cotati?” van Gorder asked Wednesday. “He didn’t block Cotati. It feels like political gamesmanship to me.”
Van Gorder said at Tuesday’s council meeting that he preferred the city not revise its application from “transit town center” priority development area to a “transit neighborhood” designation.
“I think we had a very good application in place,” van Gorder said. “I see no reason to change our application.”
The change to a transit neighborhood designation doesn’t change the amount of money the city stands to receive if the application is approved.
From 2012 to 2015, Napa County has been allocated to receive $2.6 million in grant funding through ABAG and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Half of that, or $1.3 million, has been earmarked for priority development areas, meaning only American Canyon, currently the county’s only PDA, could lay claim to that money.
City Councilwoman Juliana Inman said Tuesday she favored changing the application because it would better secure access to transportation funding, which could be used to pay for planning along the Highway 29 corridor between American Canyon and Napa.
“Let’s see if we can get some grant funding to help with that process,” Inman said. “I think this would be a good direction.”
While the showdown between Napa and Luce likely won’t materialize at the July 19 ABAG meeting, van Gorder said he doesn’t expect the issue to go away.
“I think the issue’s going to come up in the campaign,” said van Gorder. Luce’s earlier stance at ABAG could have cost the city major transportation funding, he said.
Luce said he didn’t believe the issue would resurface in the campaign, but it could remind voters of how he’s representing them in regional government.
“I think what it has brought home is that my role as ABAG president is relevant,” Luce said. “It’s not just housing. There’s a lot of regional government issues.”
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Plan Bay Area adoption set for July 18. Citizens react.
See article here
Posted: 07/12/2013 05:30:31 PM PDT
Updated: 07/12/2013 05:30:32 PM PDT
ORINDA -- A regional plan some Bay Area residents say could lead to overcrowded schools, taxed infrastructure and high-density development in cities struggling to fulfill affordable housing requirements is up for adoption Thursday.
Drafted by One Bay Area, a collaboration of agencies including ABAG and MTC, the highly debated plan envisions how cities in the Bay Area's nine counties can fulfill guidelines outlined in Senate Bill 375. That bill requires the state's 18 metropolitan areas to do their part in cutting down pollution as part of a "Sustainable Communities Strategy." One of the plan's 10 targets, according to One Bay Area's architects, is a 15 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, including those from cars and light duty trucks in the Bay Area by the year 2040; another is housing for the projected population growth in all income levels. Both are mandated by state law.
ABAG executive board president and Napa County supervisor Mark Luce said officials hope to minimize traffic congestion and provide housing choices that benefit everyone.
"Ideally, less time will be spent commuting to work which will reduce our environmental impacts and allow more time for caring for families and personal health," Luce said in an e-mail. "(The plan) will also avoid housing overcrowding where multiple families are forced to share housing due to an imbalance between job opportunities and housing availability."It is the plan's housing component, in which cities follow state housing element law that requires them to zone housing for all income levels -- but not build it -- that is drawing the ire of many residents in the East Bay. They object to growth forecasts, housing requirements in locations near jobs and transportation, known as "priority development areas," and what they say is a loss of local control.
MTC Chair and Orinda mayor Amy Worth has a different view. "Local control is preeminent in this plan. All the land use and zoning decisions are left solidly with the city council," Worth said.
Earlier this year, Danville residents pushed back on a proposal by city leaders to alter the town's general plan to encourage higher density affordable housing. In March, the city of Corte Madera withdrew its membership from ABAG in response to targets set for affordable and market-rate housing units there.
Discontent with Plan Bay Area has also been growing in Lamorinda, where the group Orinda Watch has held town hall meetings to discuss the plan's potential impacts.
The group is also ratcheting up pressure on the city council to withdraw Orinda's state-mandated housing element identifying where future housing could be accommodated. Orinda residents are decrying a city proposal to double housing density in one location in order to accommodate affordable housing, among other issues.
"The location of housing (in the plan) is not that efficient," said Orinda Watch member Chris Engle. "It's crowding people into multistory developments right next to highways."
There's been less public outcry in neighboring Lafayette, where 1,420 additional households have been projected in the final plan.
Lafayette Vice Mayor Don Tatzin and his council colleagues have pushed back on estimates in the "Regional Housing Numbers Allocation" through correspondence and discussions with ABAG officials. Their persistence has resulted in an adjustment of housing, projected jobs and other numbers officials argued were not realistic.
"If we hadn't paid attention to the (housing) numbers, we wouldn't have gotten the reduction. People have to pay attention and be willing to go back and voice their concerns consistently," Tatzin said.
About $14.6 billion in funding over the Plan's life span is available through the One Bay Area Grant program to support infrastructure in cities with "priority development areas."
Officials say they have held about 250 public meetings and workshops during the three-year planning process.
if you go
What: Plan Bay Area adoption at special meeting of MTC Commission and ABAG executive board
When: 6:30 p.m. Thursday
Where: Oakland Marriott City Center, West Hall, 1001 Broadway St.
Contact: www.mtc.ca.gov; www.abag.ca.gov
When: 6:30 p.m. Thursday
Where: Oakland Marriott City Center, West Hall, 1001 Broadway St.
Contact: www.mtc.ca.gov; www.abag.ca.gov
Special buses are leaving Marin County at 5:30 PM. For details :Get on the Bus, Gus!
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Even the President wants no part of a Priority Development Area!
![]() |
| Supervisor Mark Luce, Napa County and President of ABAG |
On January 17, 2012, both my opponents voted to designate parts of the City of Napa as “Priority Development Areas” for housing in the Bay Area. This will require that the City zone for significantly more housing in the future. I oppose this designation as it is contrary to our efforts to limit housing growth in our community.
As the name implies, a "Priority Development Area" (PDA) is an area designated to receive a greater allocation of the Bay Area's housing in return for the promise of more transportation funding. It is expected that over half of the Bay Area's housing units will be allocated to PDAs.
Why won't our District One Supervisor Susan Adams, admit that the Marinwood Priority Development Area is a massive scheme to turn all land East of Las Gallinas into a dense urban corridor?
Marinwood-Lucas Valley in the future?
Marinwood PDA for Urban Growth will bring 1500 to 4000 housing units to all land east of Las Gallinas. Supervisor Susan Adams has confirmed that she supports minimum densities of 30 units per acre in this area but lower densities elsewhere.
Why won't Supervisor Susan Adams tell us why she recommended the Marinwood PDA while serving on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)?
Why has Mark Luce, ABAG fought a PDA in his hometown of Napa?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)







