Blog Post < Previous | Next >
Susan Kirsch For Supervisor
Mill Valley 2040: Land Use, Zoning and Improving Public Communications
This letter was submitted to the Mill Valley City Council, today, commenting on the ongoing discussions about the new Multi-family Residential and Mixed-Use Design Guidelines & Development Standards.
Dear Mill Valley City Council:
I regret that I, perhaps like many others, have a prior work commitment at 3:00 pm on July 15 when the city is convening a second meeting to discuss Multi-family Residential and Mixed-Use Design Guidelines & Development Standards. Here is what I'd like the Mill Valley City Council to consider.
Citizens are in an uproar over the city’s poor communication, especially around issues of utmost importance: zoning and land use. With a shared goal of good government and transparency, I urge you to take action on these three topics:
1. The Blithedale Avenue corridor from Park School to Highway 101
2. Downtown Mill Valley zoning changes
3. Lessons from the Grand Jury findings re: WinCup
Background Information:
On July 8 (and coming up again on July 15) planning staff hosted a meeting on Design Guidelines and Development Standards. They distributed copies of Mill Valley's 2040 Land Use Map and the Proposed Zoning Map Amendments to an audience of about 60 citizens.
These proposals were based on the work of the Zoning and Design Advisory Committee (ZDAC). The fundamental purpose of ZDAC was to update the zoning code and design guidelines simultaneously with the new General Plan update. This is logical and legally required. My comments stem from the meeting of July 8.
The Blithedale Avenue corridor from Park School to Highway 101
April 20 John McCauley made a recommendation and the Council agreed: Restrict traffic-intensive development and high density housing along the East Blithedale corridor from Park School to Highway 101. He noted "there should be a Zoning Map Change or a General Plan Amendment adopted to go hand in hand with these issues."
John’s comments reflected nearly 10 years of citizen engagement about this property and a consistent message to match neighborhood characteristics, avoid adding to traffic congestion, and balance concerns for safety, parking, and ease-of-movement with the quality of life of the neighborhood. Council member McCauley made it clear, and the Council approved, that the zoning ordinance would have to be modified to reflect this new restriction.
May 4 City adopted the city's 2015 – 2023 Housing Element that incorporated a number of significant revisions, making it one of the most important meetings of the year. The community was pleased with the responsive process.
However, the minutes of the May 4th meeting are not posted on the City's website. It seems odd considering the importance of the decisions, the fact it occurred more than two months ago, and that the minutes from the more recent May 18th meeting are posted. Meanwhile, the City fiddles with an online communications survey while citizens describe downtown planning as a disaster on NextDoor or The Marin Post.
July 8 The Land Use Map distributed at the meeting on Design Review and Development Standards shows the corner of E. Blithedale and Camino Alto (the “Richardson” site) as CN (Neighborhood Commercial) zoning, putting it out of compliance with John McCauley’s recommendation on April 20th and the City Council Housing Element adoption on May 4th.
Actions:
1. Add a special restriction in the zoning code that prohibits high-density multifamily development along this entire corridor.
2. Revise the 2040 Land Use map to reflect the corner of E. Blithedale and Camino Alto as SFR-2, to match the adjacent neighborhood and to comply with Councilman McCauley’s recommendation on April 20 and the CC’s adoption of the HE on May 4.
To restate the context of these actions: It is now arguable, legally, that the zoning for the Richardson site must be down zoned to reflect the CC decision to remove those sites along Blithedale from consideration for high density development. Legally, the Housing Element trumps the zoning law and the zoning law is required to conform to the General Plan and HE, not vice versa. Otherwise, a General Plan / Housing Element amendment may now be required to allow all the ZDAC recommendations.
The 2015-2023 Housing Element was adopted with the clear understanding and direction to Staff that high density, multifamily development was to be restricted along Blithedale Avenue from Park School to Highway 101. Councilmember McCauley made it clear, and the Council approved, that the zoning ordinance would have to be modified to reflect this new restriction. It is incumbent upon the City to add a special restriction in the zoning code that prohibits high-density multifamily development along this entire corridor. This would include long contested development on properties such as the “Richardson” property along Blithedale near Camino Alto.
Downtown Mill Valley zoning changes:
Current Situation: Our downtown neighborhoods are predominately single family residential with some small-scaled multi family, and one to two story commercial, mixed use along Blithedale and Throckmorton.
The General Plan 2040, Housing Element "Update Land Use Map and Zoning Code" prohibits future building of single-family homes.
"In order to ensure the efficient use of multi-family properties, development of new single family-residential residential dwellings will be prohibited in multi-family and commercial land use districts."
June 2 Mill Valley Town Hall meeting. Many residents patiently sat in the audience, holding the Land Use Map, eagerly waiting for a time to speak and ask questions about it. However, the meeting wasn’t opened up for comments until the stated time for adjournment because city council members did all of the talking. This continues to be the problem with how the City treats public input as an afterthought.
July 8 60+ residents showed up at a meeting that was poorly noticed (it was the third item on the Home Page and barely visible if you didn’t hunt for it). Again, they wanted to talk about the Land Use map, but were shepherded to a discussion of the Design Review and Development Standards discussion rather than address their concerns.
The newly proposed change to CN zoning, when combined with the new restriction against single family homes, noted above, encourages investment in higher density development which could dramatically change character of our downtown neighborhoods and increase parking and traffic congestion and impact local schools and community services.
The proposal is in conflict with the General Plan. The 2040 Land Use Map doesn’t reflect the values of the General Plan. Multi-Family Residential-1 (w/8-15 units/acre), MFR-2 (17-29 units/acre), and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) conflicts with the description of values and character of our town is described in our General Plan.
Action: Insert restrictions and covenants for the new zoning districts proposed in the downtown Mill Valley neighborhood.
Don’t get the cart before the horse by discussing design elements without aligning land use with the General Plan. The proposed land use plans need to be carefully considered prior to considering changes to heights, setbacks, lot coverage or FAR in the downtown area. Mill Valley’s historically small-scaled, commercial and single-family residential community will profoundly change. The proposal has not been adequately studied or communicated to the general public.
Lessons from the Grand Jury Report about WinCup
The Marin County Grand Jury investigated WinCup and published their findings and recommendations June 24, 2015 (see link below).
Mill Valley is following dangerously close to the Corte Madera footsteps and laying the framework for high density development that will prompt people to ask, “How did this happen? When did the decision to prohibit single-family homes get made? Who was on the City Council at the time? What were they thinking? When and how were citizens notified?
“The Grand Jury recommends that the Town ensure that the public is actually and clearly informed about potential actions to be discussed and taken” (p.2). This is based on their conclusion that posting a nondescript, three line notice in a local newspaper, or similarly on the City web site is grossly inadequate when dealing with issues as complex as zoning and planning.
On page 6 the Grand Jury Report asks, “Was it clear to the public that the process to build the Tam Ridge Residences (and change the zoning to allow it) was part of the General Plan update? Possibly not.”
Actions:
1. Get land use planning aligned with the general plan.
2. Clarify how Mill Valley’s decision-making re: land use and zoning does not mirror Corte Madera’s.
3. Answer the public’s questions:
- What problem is the rezoning map and language intended to solve?
- Who in the community identified this as a problem?
- How did Plan Bay Area, Sustainable Communities Strategies, and Regional Housing Needs Allocation numbers shape the plans?
- What density numbers go with each allocation on the Legend of the 2040 Land Use Map? What triggers allocation of density bonuses? What will the total densities be with density bonuses?
- What cumulative traffic and parking impacts or other environmental impact reviews have been done?
- Why was communication with citizens so ineffective? What steps are you taking to improve it?
Conclusion:
The climate of distrust of local government continues to grow. Planners change the vocabulary and use language for manipulation to fulfill developers’ needs for projects to “pencil out,” but ignore the quality of life wishes of the community. Recent breakdowns in permitting and development oversight (Lowell Avenue, et al) have only served to increase that wariness.
We appreciate your commitment to represent the interests and needs of the community. Please take a stand in support of the years of effort to protect the E. Blithedale/Camino Alto intersection, preserve the small town character and the charm of downtown Mill Valley, and heed the lessons from Corte Madera’s WinCup project.
Best wishes,
Susan Kirsch