.
Feedback

Residents Rail Against ABAG

Public meeting on the environmental aspects of the One Bay Area Plan turns into a shouting match.

An angry and frustrated band of North Bay residents found a target for their outrage Wednesday afternoon, describing the Association of Bay Area Governments and its future growth projections for Marin as "communism," Marxism," "socialism" and "treason" at a meeting to discuss ABAG's Plan Bay Area strategy.

The event at the in San Rafael was hosted by ABAG and Metropolitan Transportation Commission to seek community input on a draft environmental impact report for Plan Bay Area, which aims to present guidelines for future growth for the Bay Area.

Those agencies got plenty of input.

The meeting turned into a very one-sided shouting match about the legitimacy of ABAG and SB 375, which was signed into law in 2008 and created the Sustainable Communities Strategy to connect job growth and housing allocations as a way to plan for the future.

"(SB 375) is an affront to democracy and it is a usurpation of local communities and the rights of their zoning and the rights of their building," Mill Valley resident Clayton Smith said. "This whole Plan Bay Area is based on a $250 million bribe by the federal government so as to buy off our local politicians and displace the rights of the actual residents of our community."

Sonoma County resident Jim Bennett added: "I didn't sell my home in Southern California near the beach to come to Sonoma County to live in a human settlement gulag. I came up here to live in the country. … The growth rate postulates are flawed. Your job growth rates are flawed. … Your claim that this plan will create jobs to sustain an equitable economy is flawed."

The One Bay Area Plan, spawned by SB 375, is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create jobs and design safe housing near public transportation hubs. The plan allows for "streamlining" or possibly waiving California Environmental Quality Act requirements if housing projects meet certain conditions.

One thing the One Bay Area Plan has done is to unite two opposite camps. Some claimed global warming was just a government ploy invented to make people afraid and pliable. Others were concerned enough about global warming to protest any development which might endanger the environment or increase greenhouse gases.

Almost all railed against ABAG, MTC and the One Bay Area Plan Wednesday afternoon.

"Will eliminating CEQA requirements or streamlining CEQA weaken the California Environmental Quality Act?" asked Karen Nygren, who hoped the agency would back off its proposed plan.

Residents held aloft protest signs after the meeting, apparently unsatisfied with the process and unsure if their voices were really heard.

There will be three more public meetings about the draft EIR in the Bay Area. Comments may also be submitted in writing by July 11 to Ashley Nguyen, EIR project manager for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Email eircomments@mtc.ca.gov or send letters to her at 101 Eighth Street, Oakland, CA 94607.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Rafael Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Kevin Moore May 11, 2013 at 04:20 pm
It would be nice if the comments section had "Thumbs up / Thumbs down" like the PressRead More Democrat.
Bob April 6, 2013 at 05:20 pm
Check with the San Rafael planning commission and get the low-down on why they turned down aRead More developer who submitted his plans to demolish and rebuild a mixed commercial/residential building at 2nd and B. That's directly across the street from SVDP, and a notorious loitering spot. It's currently a run-down box building that's long past its prime. The developer came in with a beautiful plan, and it was denied for, among other things, because it was not in keeping with the "Victorian era" of the others, and because the city was afraid people would store their bikes on the balconies. Take a look at it. It's the most run-down corner in the downtown area. A great way for a small town to thrive and achieve an identity, is to get people living there. The city makes it extremely difficult with their rigid design board, and archaic operations that remind me of private industry in the 70s. Oh, and then they approved Target - completely disregarding the data from our neighbors up north, as well as other small towns.
Scott Adams April 4, 2013 at 07:08 pm
Tim, I am aware of many who want to increase the housing density downtown. I am also aware thereRead More has been objections particularly around the bus and future SMART station. It seems having commercial use at street level and housing above is favored by the city. It would definitely help bring people downtown. Other elements besides safety, includes maintenance, on going activities and marketing. I made reference to Healdsburg which is a good case study. They endorsed a study by urban planners around 1990. It took until 2000 when Hotel Healdsburg opened and then the downtown took off. They have one big asset and that is their city park which is where they have ongoing activities. Public Spaces such as this offer a sense of place and acts as a magnet. If you go two or three block away from the park, Healdsburg is just another sleepy little town of 11,000. Sure the wine country is a tourist attraction, but according to the County Visitor's Bureau Marin has 12 million visitors a year who enjoy our natural environment and 80% leave and go elsewhere in the evening.
Tim H April 4, 2013 at 04:41 pm
Thank you all for your interest in this topic. Scott, are you aware of any new multifamily or mixedRead More use housing in downtown on the horizon? Someone in another article mentioned the need for greater density in the downtown area. It seems like greater density could make San Rafael a more attractive place to bring business. Maybe it's me being optimistic, but certain areas seem ripe for development which could be a catalyst for improving downtown. Just curious if others had any perspective of this issue.