Last weekend I had the privilege to attend the annual New Partners for Smart Growth conference in Kansas City. Mayors, activists, councilmembers, and the odd blogger came out to share successes and failures in their communities in the hopes that others could learn from their examples. And after it all, one thing is clear: Marin has it pretty good.
Smart growth came about in the early 90s as the response to auto-oriented sprawl. Though it can mean many things, the basic purpose is improving access for walking and bicycling. Within a 15 minute drive is a certain number of residences and businesses. Within a 15 minute walk there is less. In a place with high access for walkers, however, there is too much density for everyone to move around in cars, leading to congestion if that demand isn’t well-managed. Similarly, in a place with high access for cars, there is too little density for people to be able to walk with any efficiency.
While there have always been low-density places for the people who want peace and quiet away from the town center, the last 60 years has seen a great proliferation of such places. In cities like Tulsa or Houston, the city centers themselves were transformed to improve automobile access at the expense of walking access. What activists term sprawl was the outward growth of this style.
In Marin, we rebelled in the 1960s after we saw what freeways were doing to the rest of the Bay Area. Though our beloved trains and ferries were long gone, destroyed by the Golden Gate Bridge and Highway 101, we refused to allow West Marin to be built over. We developed our landmark Corridors plan, ensuring sprawl would not rule our day.
A centerpiece of smart growth is a commercially strong and walkable town, and almost every city and community in Marin has one. These are spaces where you can walk from a nearby neighborhood or park your car once and stroll the strip. They are places with a high density of destinations. They define their community. After all, what would Mill Valley be without Miller Avenue? Or San Rafael without Fourth Street? Other cities aren’t so lucky.
But a place where you can walk isn’t much good if you can’t walk anywhere else, or if it’s unsafe to bike around town. On this, too, Marin has a leg up on its peers.
Surprising though it is, the fact that we have sidewalks on nearly all but the most rural streets and arterial roads is a rarity, and it shows in the pedestrian fatality rates. Across the US, there are 1.38 pedestrian deaths per 100,000 people. In California, it’s 1.6 per 100,000, but in Marin it’s less than half that. In 2008, Marin only had 0.6 pedestrians die per 100,000 people. Though every death is a tragedy, Marin is doing far better than the country at large.
Our focus on smart growth – not to mention the transit-oriented bones left by that rail system – has paid off in how we commute. Our county has the second lowest rate of car commuters in the state, surpassed only by San Francisco. If we add carpools, we are tied with San Mateo County for third. One in three Marin commuters travel by a means other than a single-occupant vehicle. One in ten take transit, third best in the state.
That’s not to say Marin doesn’t have its shortcomings. Our bicycle infrastructure is good but not complete. Our zoning codes needlessly inhibit small units and drive up housing costs. And between those walkable town centers are drivable strips, meant more to be sped through than lingered in.
But Marin has a lot to teach the rest of the country. I was raised on the Marin sense of pride, the understanding that if only the United States would be more like Marin we’d have a more sustainable, prosperous world. Marinites should smile that the movement towards smart growth around the world is in essence an attempt to take the path Marin took 40 years ago. We should smile, that is, and roll up our sleeves.
Marin is what it is, and eventhough it was built up in the 40', 50's and 60's creating all the housing tracts, the building continued down in the flatlands of the urban corridor until about the mid 80's to total buildout. The rest has been infill and remodels for the most part, and BART would have not made a bit of difference in what Marin is today. The changes in Marin are the demographics, Marin is now much more wealthy, and that explains the teardowns and remodels that never happened in the past. It really is the economy that dictates Marin's future, and that includes some natural features like no extra water, budget shortfalls for essential infrastructure maintenance, schools, roads, police, fire , libraries, parks, social services, medical services, public transportation and even electrical power services. We have to face the reality that Marin is completely built out now, and the population growth is declining and will continue to do so. What you call "smart growth" can't happen here in Marin, there is no money, jobs or room for that. It's time for peddlers of smart growth to take their plans somewhere else where it MIGHT pan out. Even you David admit there is no "investment" money for BART, not back in the 90's or now. The BART party never even got started, but it is definitely over now. BART rejected Marin back in the 50's because there was no need and no tax base to suport it.
But I was saying that Marin already is a smart growth community. Hence, "original."
It actually runs underground under the bay from Pt. San Pedro (The Rod and Gun Club) to the central bay BART tube (also underground under the bay). From that intersection, commuters could pick a BART train that would go to the East Bay (Oaktown) , or a train to S.F. This story was before the internet science fiction stories were happening, and now there are many more science fiction stories abounding. But, this story of the secret BART tube being built is not so far fetched. How many other much more expensive taxpayer funded projects that are real have been covered up underwater that we have today ? Think SMART ! How is the taxpayer to know what is really going on behind closed doors ? The only things for sure are population counts (declines), and traffic counts on the freeways (oh, but today on the news it said that the traffic sensors are broken and the electronic message boards on the freeways are not accurate). The promoters of smart growth can easily fudge numbers about anything, especially about estimates of future people wanting to commute long distances underground, the abundance of new high paying jobs, the want of 19th century outmoded trains and the demand for high density apt. boxes as if anyone wants to live like that.
*A regionally funded ferry system on the Bay that connected most bay side towns would stimulate region wide economic growth, ease traffic congestion and create multi purpose clusters near the terminals. Larkspur Landing is a lovely example. *Infill in Marin's towns is important to sustaining vibrant communities. clusters around SMART stations may illustrate that.
If Skip Berg was able to build his proposed ferry terminal at the Port of Sonoma, from there ferries could have been dispatched to : Santa Venetia (Bucks Landing) for Civic Center commuters, central San Rafael (Loch Lomond), Larkspur Landing, Tiburon, Sausalito, Angel Island, Vallejo, Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco, San Mateo and even San Jose. But, since the creator(s) of SMART were so strong and powerful, they had to squelch the Port of Sonoma ferry treminal. The train promoters absolutely had to stop the ferry (and they successfully did), otherwise it would render their grand development plans useless. Just think about all the cush jobs that would not have been created and TOD,s not built. It would have been a crying shame for SMART.
Planning? Maybe to keep open space unused, but many large plans to make Marin more like San Francisco simply failed. There was a rail line out to Bolinas and plans to build a large city out in that area. What happened to it? Planning or just a market failure? Also, the large development on the Headlands area failed to materialize. That development triggered conservation in Marin. I remember going up 101 in the 1960's. Passing through Novato, there were few houses to see, other than the rotating house with a windmill. In the 1970's I rarely went to Marin. "Parks, beaches, two tourist trap cities, and cow pastures" is how I described to Marin. Most of the flat cow pastures have been turned into subdivisions by now. My father-in-law was a developer up in the Novato area. I asked him about Marin's water shortage and got his no so happy reply. Marin could have been part of the Lake Sonoma project to get an ample water supply, but the anti-growth groups made sure Marin was not part of the project. They knew a shortage of water would help keep Marin from developing into an area like San Francisco. Less like planning, more like monkey-wrenching developers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marincello Marincello was a failed development project in Marin County, California that would have put a planned community atop the Marin Headlands, overlooking the Golden Gate. Its upheaval set the precedent for Marin County's rigid anti-development stance and push for open space. http://www.sfgenealogy.com/marin/ourtowns/ot_wm.htm What really stirred up the area was a 1964 master plan for West Marin complete with resorts, marinas, airstrips, a four-lane highway and a planned influx of 20,000 people. http://www.coastalpost.com/96/6/4.htm The Coastal Post - June, 1996 Masterplan Called For Huge Development Along Coast
I still think ABAG and SMART are the "cart before the horse". First create jobs, then build housing to support the workers. Sonoma needs to focus on more business parks that hold multiple companies, like Apple, Google, BioMarin, etc. That last report I read on the MarinIJ projected Marin to grow 10% by 2060. Not the boom ABAG is predicting.
I remember that article in the IJ and wrote down some of the numbers. "Marin's present population is 254,781, and is expected to grow to 272,275 by 2060." That is an increase of 17,494 people in 47 years, or about 372 people per year. Personally I think that is just wishfull thinking, and I think the population will continue to decline in Marin (except for Novato, which has SCWA water). Of course, everything depends on the economy as for building more apartments, but Marin most likely will continue to be a wealthy enclave.
http://www.amazon.com/Saving-Marin-Sonoma-Coast-Battles-Californias/dp/0966168011 The dramatic story of the salvation of the Marin headlands unfolds in Marty Griffin's fascinating memoir, "Saving the Marin-Sonoma Coast." With sharp insight and humor, Dr. Griffin documents the creation of the magnificent Audubon Canyon Ranch wildlife preserves on Bolinas Lagoon and Tomales Bay and their crucial role in rescuing the Pt. Reyes National Seashore, preserving California's unspoiled North Coast, and transforming the political landscape of Marin County.
This bit on Marincello was a very interesting read, thanks for the link. Looking up some growth forecasts for the County for the next 50 years, the county is forecast to grow a grand total of 7.7%...I translated this to Novato, and this would amount to about 32 new households (using 2.5 people per HH) per year. This is not lining up with ABAG at all...whose growth forecasts have been (likely purposely) wildly optimistic for years. The SMART train is the "vehicle" that will allow for this growth, through eminent domain, or whatever they deem necessary. Meanwhile, there is no focus on job creation, additional infrastructure, sewage, water, etc.
What is interesting is to look back 50 years and see how the population has probably trippled (I did not look this up, so it is not a fact that has been verified by me). Needless to say, all indicators say that most of Marin is completely built out, there simply is not much room for more people, or zoning in west Marin will not permit it. If you look back to the last 13 years, Novato is where 99% of the growth in Marin has been, and there are still many undeveloped parcels left in Novato to grow. So, probably most of that 7.7% growth in the next 50 will be mostly in Novato, save out a few mansions proposed for the Tiburon peninsula (The Martha Co. proposal). And, the live births and new families moving into existing houses will not require more commuter housing to be built. Even if SMART manages to slap up commuter apartments (TODs), where will the people who rent them find work to commute to ? That is the big unanswered question.
You will want to read this article. http://sanrafael.patch.com/articles/citizen-groups-rally-against-outdated-housing-plans Repost of post on that link. ABAG and MTC have the cart before the horse. They are adding housing and transportation without looking at the critical factors of jobs, water, and other resources. It is like an old Steve Martin routine, "You.. can be a millionaire.. and never pay taxes!" How do you do it? First.. get a million dollars. What do I say to the tax man when he comes to my door and says, 'You.. have never paid taxes'?" Two simple words. Two simple words in the English language: "I forgot!" The ABAG plan is much like Steve Martin's comic routine. They skip over the hard part, making money. The rest is pretending you don't know of a problem, like a lack of water.
http://goo.gl/ZJOND Then can Google "Sonoma water rationing" which almost went into effect in 2009. The winery business is very water intensive. I guess we can get rid of it for more condos.
I would think that Novato planners were bummed out when the people of central and southern Marin did not build them a new pipeline up in Sonoma county (measure V in 1991). Now maybe they can try it again, but this time they are going to have to pay their own way if Novato wants to continue to grow at the rate that they have been.
Yes and you have been posting false data and drawing strange conclusions from same for a long time. Novato did account for a large part of Marin’s increase from 2000 to 2010 but it was actually 83%, not the 99% you claim. You try to make a point by isolating the decade between 2000 and 2010, while you ignore the rest of the data. Novato had virtually no increase from 1990 thru 2000 while Marin grew by 17,193 (7.5%) during that decade. 1990 Marin = 230,096, Novato = 47,557. 2000 Marin = 247,289 (+17,193), Novato = 47,630 (+73) 2010 Marin = 252,409 (+5,120). Novato = 51,904 (+4,274) Marin’s big boom was 1940’s through about 1980. The census reported growth of 61.8% in 1950, 71.5% in 1960, and 40.3% in 1970. The next few decades showed growth in Marin of 8% in 1980, 3.4% in 1990, 7.5% in 2000 and 2.1% in 2010. I am glad to see you back posting as Ricardo again. Are you going to continue to post under the name Jim as well?
https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=kf7tgg1uo9ude_&met_y=population&idim=place:0652582&dl=en&hl=en&q=novato%20ca%20population#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=population&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=place:0652582:0668364:0647710:0616462:0640438:0670364&ifdim=country&tstart=648198000000&tend=1310886000000&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false This chart shows the same cities as above, and also shows Marin as a whole: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=kf7tgg1uo9ude_&met_y=population&idim=county:06041&dl=en&hl=en&q=population%20marin%20county%20ca#!ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=population&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=county:06041&idim=place:0652582:0668364:0647710:0616462:0640438:0664434:0670364&ifdim=country&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false
Marin residents just don’t want any new construction it and don’t even want to consider it. I don’t see attitudes changing anytime soon.
Marin's population went from 222,568 in 1980 to 252,409 in 2010 = an overall increase of 29,841. During that same time Novato's population increased from 43,916 to 51,904 = total growth of 7,988. Since 1980 Novato has accounted for an incrase of 7,988 of Marin's overall incrase of 29,841. Novato accounts for just under 28% of Marin's growth since 1980. 1980 is a significant census data point for Marin as that marked the end of the big boom years according to the figures.
I made the charts to counter the claim, "They will need to add 2 more lanes to 101 and 2 more lanes and 2 more lanes..." These charts show growth in Sonoma has slowed. The building boom days are over. You can build 30,000 more houses, but then you end up with Stockton, lots of houses, few good jobs. I can't remember when 101 went from 2 lanes to 4 lanes in Marin. I think it happened in the 1960's. Anyone know the exact dates? Here is a photo of 101 in Rhonert Park in 1958. Highway 101 is two lanes. http://cdm15763.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p15763coll10/id/172/rec/20 The other often repeated saying is, "We need affordable housing for police, firemen, and nurses. Asked how many affordable housing units are in Marin and how many police officers and firemen are living in them ends the discussion. People just repeat a popular saying without knowing if it has any validity. I tried out to be a fireman. In Reno, theywork 24 hours for 3 days in 10 days. With 9 commute days in a month, it is easy to live anywhere.
I agree with your conclusion on population and most everything else you posted. I think they need to add lanes to 101 to alleviate the backup at the Novato Narrows. There is already a backup there and it has been miserable for a long time. Our infrustructure should meet current demand.
I have a friend from Marin who bought a house up there in the original "A" tract in the photo, and watched RP grow with the B,C,D and E tracts. RP is a typical flat suburb that could be anywhere, and all that development gave me a lot of work in the 80's. I did a lot of signs and striping for the cities of RP, Cotati and Santa Rosa, on public roads and private property. What ever happened to the development proposal to build hundreds of more homes in RP around 2006 ? I think it fizzeled out. I have been working for developers and public agencies in Marin and Sonoma counties since the early 80's, and I loved all the work created for many of us from this development boom. But the party is over now. All I can say is, I'm glad all that development was up in the north bay, and not where I live (Mill Valley). The commute was a drag, but it was a reverse commute and I often drove company vehicles and got paid for it too ! I worked on the new Fireman's fund building in Novato, laid out all the markings on San Marin Dr, and the 3000 stalls in the parking lot too, and that might be in for a redo in the future. Growing up mainly in west Marin, and southern Marin, I was never concerned about development ruining the area, but when I got a lot of work up in the north bay, I loved all the work. I know firsthand what has been going on, and this new age urbanism is a joke to me, it's plastic, there is no room, water or money to sustain it all.
A lot of the flux in traffic on 101 is contractors. Contractors tend to be on the go early in the morning (5AM to 6AM) and again 2PM to 4PM. They are on the road in the afternoon when school traffic is heavy and before traditional commute traffic. The fact that the construction industry is on the upswing is a good barometer for our economy even though we have a way to go, it does not bode well for traffic.