Could we have buildings with human-scale design elements here in Arcata? Yes we can. Unless we specify what we want for the buildings along the L Street corridor, then it's a free-for-all situation. This potential jewel of Arcata will look like whatever developers want. With a list of GOOD DESIGN ELEMENTS and images of a building project that would fit into the Gateway area.

The Marin County Form-Based code is a thing of beauty. In addition to being a great code for Marin, it is also a valuable teaching tool, for us to read and learn about what a good form-based code can be. Includes samples of the specifications for one neighborhood type, the Core Main Street, somewhat corresponding to Arcata's Gateway area.

This “May 14, 2024” version contains changes that the Planning Commission has never seen or discussed. It contains changes where the Commission said not to change. It contains inadequate changes for things that the Commission wanted changed. It's still missing many things that the Commission brought up and did not fully resolve. It has Inclusionary Zoning wrong. And still no planning for the L Street woonerf and linear park.

WITH VIDEO 44 minutes. The Planning Commissioner's first review of the Gateway Code took place on June 13, 2023 -- 8 days after the first draft of the Gateway Code was released. In this review, the Commissioners spoke and asked questions of Community Development Director David Loya for a total of 2-1/2 minutes. When the time came for questions for Ben Noble, the Gateway Code's author and form-based code consultant, the Commissioners had nothing to ask him.

What was slated to be a “final” review of Arcata’s Gateway Area Code took place at the April 23, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. On May 14, 2024, is the Public hearing on the General Plan 2045, the Gateway Area Plan, and the Gateway Code. Also on May 14 is a Planning Commission review of the three documents and the Commission's recommendation to the City Council. *** The full-steam-ahead pedal-to-the-medal accelerated pace will result in a sub-standard Gateway Code.

The "greenways" concept as expressed in the Gateway Code is not well-conceived. It is not written clearly, and contains numerous major errors. This was evident from the 1st draft of the Code. There have been no changes in this through the 2nd and 3rd drafts. For how long has David Loya been aware of these deficiencies and errors -- and done nothing?

What does the Gateway Code say about Tenant and Employee bicycle parking? The section of the Gateway Code on long-term (over two hours) bicycle parking is yet another part of this document that has the appearance of being copied from somewhere else and never really thought about. ------- With photos of just what the Gateway Code requires, and what a developer could give us for tenant bike parking.

A guide to separate articles about specific issues in the Gateway Code.

Requirements for a successful woonerf / linear park designation in the L Street Corridor. An initial draft of what must be added to the Gateway Code is included in this article. Reading time for the Code requirements, about 5 minutes; for the entire article about 10 minutes.

With the original plans of the Gateway Area Plan so deficient, much of the overview of good planning got lost. The Gateway Code has numerous errors and omissions. Among what was neglected is:  Where are the bus stops? Where is the transit center? Where is the planning?

What was slated to be a "final" review of Arcata's Gateway Area Code took place at the April 23, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. At the previous meeting, Commissioners Dan Tangney and Matt Simmons noted that they would be absent from the April 23rd meeting. The "final" review was scheduled anyway. In this way, the most senior member of the Planning Commission and the current largest individual contributor to the Gateway Area Plan process were shut out of the conversation on the Gateway Code.

The April 23, 2024, meeting of the Arcata Planning Commission had a "final" review of the Gateway Area Code -- the document that defines the "look and feel" of all construction, parks, pathways, and so on that are part of the Gateway Area Plan. In the 3 minutes that are allowed for public comment -- on a document that is going to change the look of Arcata forever -- Fred Weis spoke on how the Gateway Area Code document needs considerable work before it can be considered complete.

The "Greenways" section is a highly confusing portion of the the draft Gateway Code. The Code should include this as guidelines for what will happen ("Greenways are required in the approximate locations shown in Figure 2-56."). But what is shown in the Code is clearly 100% overkill -- and some of it is absolutely impossible. The Gateway Code needs to be revised.

In the Gateway code, tenant bicycle parking does not have to be indoors. It doesn't even have to be behind a fence. In discussing this with the Planning Commissioners at their April 23, 2024, meeting, the director repeatedly referred to this as inside parking -- within the building. There is nothing in the Gateway Code that says that the secure bicycle storage space has to be inside the building -- or even inside at all.

There is much in the draft Gateway Code that the Planning Commission never discussed. And there are other topics that indeed were discussed, but the changes that were requested were never included in the Gateway Code. What happened?

Comments and suggestions on the draft Gateway Code. This is the form-based code that defines the look and feel of every building, street, park. and more of everything that will be built in the Gateway area. You can use this document along with the "Guides for the Council, Commission, and Community — to the Gateway Code comments and suggestions" to learn more about developers can and cannot do.

According the procedures of the draft Gateway Code, a four-story hotel project with 85 rooms could be approved by a single person -- the Zoning Administrator. As such, the project would never be seen by the Planning Commission. A hotel of this size could, by code, have a parking lot with 3/4 acre of asphalt.

I propose: that the criteria be much lower for Planning Commission review. Such as: PC review required for anything over 4,000 sq.ft. building area. Or: PC review required for everything (except for the simplest of projects, to be defined). How would this work? The Julian Berg Valley East project took 31 minutes to be approved. If a project is well-designed and adheres to the Form-Based Code, then approval by the Planning Commission would be smooth sailing.

For two years we have been waiting for 3D images of what a build-out might look like for the design of the Gateway Area Plan. Finally, here in February 2024, we have some 3D images of what multiple buildings in the Gateway area might look like.

The Form-Based Code for the Gateway area is now called the Gateway Code. It specifies the building height and massing for each of the four districts in the Gateway area:  Barrel, Corridor, Hub, and Neighborhood. I am not implying that 5-story or 7-story buildings will be built -- only that, by code, they can be built.

This is the 3rd draft of the "Gateway Code" -- the form-based code for the Gateway Area Plan, as delivered from the City's consultant Ben Noble. Dated January 31, 2023. This article contains the 3rd draft, the 2nd draft from September 2023, and the 1st draft from June 2023.

Reading time: 6-8 minutes or longer -- Last night's Gateway Open House meeting was a minor success. Despite being held with just 2-1/2 weeks' notice and on a date that ignored a major religious holiday -- and on a weekday late-afternoon, meaning that it was largely inaccessible to community members with regular jobs and people with a child or children -- there was a good turnout. Over the 4 PM to 6 PM time of the two-hour drop-in meeting, an estimated 60 people attended.

Reading time:  15-30 minutes. -- The second draft of the Gateway Code (form-based code) came out on September 22, 2023. This article compares the details of this draft as compared with the June 5 1st draft. There is much that is missing. This Gateway code is in need of much work. In my view, it is inadequate, and will lead to sub-standard results. 

Read time: 7 minutes. Skim: 2 minutes. -- We can look at how Santa Cruz has dealt with some of the same issues we face here in Arcata. Santa Cruz already had an existing 20% inclusionary requirement. New proposal: Projects with a 25% inclusionary requirement get a 30% density bonus. Projects with a 30% inclusionary requirement get a 50% density bonus. Other issues: Public hearings for new larger construction.

Reading/viewing time: 6 minutes -- Transcription and all images from the video of Shading Analysis. This is a step in the right direction, but completely inadequate. It fails to fully illustrate what the results of solar shading would be with multiple 6-story buildings in the Gateway area.

Reading time: 4 minutes -- The "Gateway Area Form-Based Code Enhanced Content & Outreach" contract amendment with Planwest for $118,000 was approved at the December 21, 2022 Council meeting. The "Plan Area Massing Diagram" would be especially useful at this time, as we are discussing massing and building heights. Eight months later, and it's never been delivered.

This image was presented as a one-page handout at the June 13, 2023, Planning Commission meeting. It is a still image from the video presentation “Building and Massing” of the St. Vinnie's site on K Street.

“And our design standards and Community Benefits programs are unlikely to be implemented due to waivers and concessions.” --- Arcata's Director of Community Development David Loya has provided this video presentation of the various affordable housing programs. 15-1/2 minutes, July 28, 2023. VIDEO and full TRANSCRIPTION.

John Barstow served Arcata on the Planning Commission and the earlier Design Review Committee for 30 years. He retired in October, 2022. He favored a four-story building height and was not optimistic about the Community Benefits program. He also recognized that "The development of the Form-Based Code is really the hard part of this process."

The buildings are five to seven stories tall and have a boxy shape. The ground floor is a parking garage, sometimes combined with shops. Four or five stories of apartments or condos sit on top of this concrete “podium,” so they’re often called podium buildings. They cover a large area compared to older apartment buildings, often taking up a considerable portion of a block face. These buildings are prevalent because they maximize developers’ profits by balancing leasable floor area (more is better) with construction cost (less is better). Simply put, podium buildings represent a proven formula for creating marketable housing at a reasonable cost.

A critique of the Urban Field Studio report from the July 11, 2023, Planning Commission packet. There is further critique following the Urban Field Studio presentation at that PC meeting, available also on Arcata1.com.

Urban Field Studio evaluated the feasibility of the current draft Form-Based Code. They were assigned four specific sites, and asked to show whether the aims and goals of the draft Gateway Area Plan could, in their view, be achieved at those sites, particularly on being able to achieve the density of housing that the draft Plan calls for.

In the Gateway Area, the minimum number of parking spaces required is Zero. That is, if a developer wants to build a 48-unit apartment building, it's possible that there will be no parking spaces for those tenants. But at the same time, there'd be a MAXIMUM of 12 spaces -- even if the apartments had 2 or 3 bedrooms. My guess? Developers will not build by these constrictive rules.

This is the introduction to the lengthy article on the Urban Field Studio "Code Site Test. PLEASE READ THE FULL ARTICLE ALSO. It will take about 30-45 minutes to read. The full article has both critique and support by an expert of the Gateway Plan, and a good Q&A from Arcata's Planning Commissioners.

IMPORTANT presentation to the Planning Commission, July 11, 2023. Can high-density tall buildings be constructed in the Gateway Area? This report presents findings on four specific sites. The answer: In theory, yes. On a practical, economically-feasible, realistic basis -- the answer is NO.

What do we want our buildings to look like? Do we want a boxy building with 5-story walls that go straight up and completely shade the adjoining houses? It is all decided by the Form-Based Code. **** A very brief article with IMAGES that show our choices.

During the past more than one-and-a-half years of discussion on the draft Gateway Plan, we've seen a variety of important aspects of the plan come and go. Critical issues seemed to have arrived as firm promises and later vanished like smoke following a Planning Commission conversation of just a minute or two. Or vanished with no conversation whatsoever. *** An area that's near and dear to the hearts of Arcatans are building heights and the set-back and step-back requirements for new buildings.

The long-awaited initial draft of the Form-Based Code finally arrived. As promised, it does contain requirements for Inclusionary Zoning in the Gateway Area. *** Unfortunately the Inclusionary Zoning requirements are ridiculously low. To even call this "inclusionary zoning" is a stretch. This would be laughable except that this is a such serious matter -- and so important for the people of Arcata and for the future of Arcata.

Redwood City's Downtown Precise Plan includes Form-Based code and Planning Commission review. It all took 4 years to develop. The Form-Based Code can serve as a model for Arcata.

"By his reckoning, only 8.5% of projects meet their initial estimates on cost and time, and a piddling 0.5% achieve what they set out to do on cost, time and benefits." -- "Over-optimistic time and cost estimates stem from both psychological and political biases: a reliance on intuition rather than data, and . . . “strategic misrepresentation”. This is when budgets are deliberately lowballed in order to get things going, on the premise that nothing would ever get built if politicians went around being accurate."

A letter to Arcata's City Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners: This draft Form-Based Code has about 40% of the information and code that is needed for a good Form-Based Code. It fails to provide for the intents and interests and purposes of the Gateway Plan. It does not fulfil our needs.

This is the initial draft of the Form-Based Code for the Gateway Area Plan, as delivered from the City's consultant Ben Noble. Dated June 5, 2023. This entire Form-Based Code draft is 58 pages.

Note: This article was written June 10, 2022 -- almost one year ago. The topics that are brought up then are still current. The same issues that existed in May 2022 still exist in May 2023 -- one year later.

At their March 1 and April 5, 2023, meetings, the Arcata City Council formally directed the Planning Commission to do as much as it can -- as fast as it can -- to create complete and workable drafts of Arcata's new General Plan update, the new Gateway Area Plan, and the brand-new first-time-ever Form-Based Code for the Gateway area. The Council has requested complete working drafts of these three documents by the end of June, 2023 -- now (at the time of this writing) under 3 months away. ---- As the former Community Development Department long-time employee often said: "ANXIETY ON YOUR PART DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN EMERGENCY ON MY PART."

The Gateway code includes a MAXIMUM number of parking spaces at 1 per every 4 units -- which works out to one per every 4 to 8 tenants. A restaurant with a staff of six and hosting 35 or 40 diners would have a MAXIMUM of ONE space. How will this work out for Arcata?

This workshop was attended on Zoom by 26 participants, plus five members of the City Staff and the Form-Based Code consultant Ben Noble. -------- The public offered their viewpoints on the topics of Streetscape Design, Mobility and Parking, and Privately-Owned Open Space for a total of only 20 minutes. ------ This is not the way to have the community involved in helping to make decisions that will change the form and life in Arcata. 

Course Materials. Form-Based Code Study Session with the Arcata Planning Commission and Ben Noble. February 11, 2023.

Part 2. Arcata Planning Commission with Ben Noble - February 11, 2023 --Form-Based Code Study Session -- 1 hour 43 minute video.

Part 1. Arcata Planning Commission with Ben Noble - February 11, 2023 --Form-Based Code Study Session -- 2 hours 3 minute video.

Video of the Form-Based Code presentation by Ben Noble, August 16, 2022. 1 hour 31 minutes. This was the 2nd presentation. With some questionable survey input from about 50 participants.

An excellent presentation of Building Height and Massing in the Gateway area. 47 minutes. With 3D modeling. A "must see" video.

Why the Chico Meriam Park development in Chico is a terrible example of Form-Based Code

Many form-based codes meander away from the fundamental principles that make them attractive in the first place. From the website of Smart Growth America.

Here is a one-hour presentation on what a Form-Based Code is, some background of its development, some examples nationally, some Northern California examples, and the nature of the Ministerial Review permitting process. 

3D images and Aerial Views combined with 3D images. Get a visual representation of development in the Gateway area. Includes an imaginary proposal by local architect Julian Berg for the car-wash site.

To the Planning Commissioners and the City Council members: Let's move forward. While it's all good to be looking at the different pieces of the draft Gateway plan as you've been doing, there are larger unanswered questions present. It is my view that if you can get matters settled, then there'll be more efficient motion toward accomplishing what we all want:  A good plan for the Gateway area.

Why this website exists? Because this is what Ministerial Review looks like.  The data center building on 11th Street goes against everything that's important to us. No jobs, no vitality. This is the blight in Arcata

We are completely off from the Planwest schedule for the Gateway plan. Let's re-evaluate where we are, and adjust accordingly. With specific requests for what the City Council can do.

Redwood City's Downtown Precise Plan was adopted in 2011, after three or four years of development.  It is helpful to us because it incorporates a well-designed Form-Based Code -- and has a blend of Discretionary Review and Ministerial Review.

Arcata's Village project was stalled in public comment for almost 2 years. A year after it was eventually approved, the developers withdrew. What went wrong?

Which does Arcata want? Ministerial review, to smooth the way for developers, or Planning Commission and public input, which allows for greater oversight? We can have both.

Redwood City's Downtown Precise Plan includes Form-Based code and Planning Commission review. It all took 4 years to develop. The plan can serve as a model for Arcata.

The Gateway Area Plan, the General Plan, the Environmental Impact Report, Local Coastal Plan... and articles about these documents. There are many documents and videos...

Parks, Open Space, and Solar Shading  

Form-Based CodePresentations, Workshops, Documents Ministerial ReviewThe discussions on how it would be set up, and how it would work