The Marin Post

The Voice of the Community

Blog Post < Previous | Next >

C. Cornwell

Streamlining development and Fairfax: A bad match!

The development of 10 Olema Road, School Street Plaza, and the former Lutheran Church sites are proposed to be “streamlined.” The “Streamlining” ordinance essentially bundles three distinct planning steps into one.

Strangely, we have already had one “streamlined” development meeting on Dec 15th 2016 for Victory Village before the ordinance was made law. This meeting was continued and subsequently abandoned due to procedural illegalities that were raised. However, we can look at this meeting and learn from it.

1. Transparency suffered.

At the meeting, we saw a nearly-finished design where each of hundreds of plants had been assigned a specific planting location and more then 70 trees had been earmarked for removal. All the planning for the nearly-finished design took place in back channels with no public oversight or input. Whether that planning was done appropriately will likely never be known.

2. The required "detailed design" had too much momentum by the time of the “streamlined” meeting.

For example, at the “streamlined” meeting, Planning Commissioner Kerhlein suggested modifying one roof panel on the Victory Village design that jutted out above the rest of the building. However, the architect rejected her idea since equipment behind the roof-panel would be exposed. When the design is so refined, it becomes difficult to make simple changes like this – design elements have become inter-linked. This change would have been easier in the earlier meetings that didn't happen.

3. Town Codes were overlooked in haste.

For example, Fairfax has a maximum height restriction of 28.5 feet. This was not enforced at the meeting. It is the job of the Planning commission to research and enforce town codes such as these. In the confusion and haste of the meeting, other topics dominated and this key Fairfax height code was not enforced.

4. A bad result from a cram session.

"No Discretionary Review besides confirming compliance with objective design standards will be allowed on the site/s following rezoning" is what the town’s attorney has written into her report to the town council. Isn’t this what we teach our kids NOT to do in school – their entire project in ONE night! The meeting lasted almost 5 hours. If they had approved the development near midnight, there would have been no chance for a fresh look!

Streamlining is intended to reduce cost for a developer. Streamlining is appropriate in a situation where there is little public involvement and 3 meetings are excessive. For example: it might be appropriate in the planning of a new community in an entirely undeveloped location that lacks bio-diversity. However, in Fairfax where the public is politically active and has considerable institutional knowledge, streamlining is detrimental.

It’s as if Streamlining was made by the developers for the developers.