Arcata1.com on your desktop for a bigger view. Learn more about our city.

No menu items!


HomeImportant TopicsForm-Based Code and Ministerial ReviewGateway Code Greenways are wrong. David Loya is not doing his job.

Gateway Code Greenways are wrong. David Loya is not doing his job.

Tap / click here for more than two dozen articles about the Gateway Code.


The article What are the Greenways in the Gateway Code? Are they real? outlines the issues with the “Greenways” concept that’s been in the Gateway Code since the 1st draft in June 2023. The issues about the Greenways was brought up by Commissioner Joel Yodowitz at the Commission’s April 23, 2024, meeting.

How long has Community Development Director David Loya been aware of the many problems in this Greenways section?

For at least nine months.

Since these errors were pointed out on July 11, 2023, the 2nd draft of the Gateway Code came out and the 3rd (current) draft came out.

 

There has been no acknowledgement of the deficiencies of the “greenways” concept.

 

There have been no changes whatsoever to the text or to the map.

Here is what David Loya wrote to me on April 25, 2024 — a day and a half after the April 23rd Planning Commission meeting. Highlight added.

“The Greenways section was developed to allow the Council flexibility to fix the location of the greenway at a later date and still be consistent with the policy and the code. (Note the Greenway section has a note that the concept map will be incorporated into the Gateway Plan.) The Since L Street is a city street, if the Council identified L Street as a “greenway” it would be a woonerf.

You identified the woonerf in the mobility section on 6th. The woonerf is shown (in the incorrect location, now that I am looking at it) on the greenways map. The greenway arrow on  7th street is supposed to be shown on 6th Street.

 

When did Fred Weis point out this glaring error to David Loya and to the Planning Commission?

July 11, 2023 — nine months earlier.

“In the Form-Based Code on page 45, or page 62 in your packets, there is a greenway proposal, “Conceptual Greenway Locations.” I don’t understand this. I’d like to have it explained. It shows greenways with no vehicles whatsoever, running through private parcels of the Greenway [the Greenway Building, where FedEx is, at 8th & N Streets] parcel, through the private property of the Tomas parcel, and around Seventh Street between L and K, which would cut off all vehicle access to the existing Devlin Cottages and other locations too. I don’t know whether it’s an idea or conception, but it needs to be talked about and likely discarded.”

This was at public comment on July 11, 2023. 

Since that time, the 2nd draft of the Gateway Code came out and the 3rd (current) draft has come out. There was no acknowledgement of the deficiencies of the “greenways” concept. There has been not one change to the text. There has been no change to the map.

There are 13 greenways shown. How many will be developed?

At the April 23, meeting, Community Development Director David Loya told the Planning Commission: 

“Recognizing that we don’t know all the bits and pieces right now, we haven’t gone through a very detailed plan to know exactly where those trails are going to be, how many of them are actually going to be needed. You know, we’ve got two greenways, this one and this one that are about 300 feet apart. Do we need both of those? It may be that as the development comes forward, you know, we don’t and there’s something else that that is equally applicable.”

What does the Gateway Code say about the greenways? It says that they are required — all of them.

Conceptual Configuration. Figure 2‐56 shows the conceptual configuration of new
greenways in the Gateway districts.”

Greenways Required. Greenways are required in the approximate locations shown in Figure 2‐56.

“The [Barrel district] Master Plan must note deviations from the conceptual greenway configuration in Figure 2‐56 and explain the need for these deviations.”

It seems the case that, as we see throughout the Gateway Code document, that is policy “Greenways are required in the approximate locations shown in Figure 2‐56.” is just another example of a poorly-written policy. It should not say that they are required in the approximate locations. It could say something along the lines of what David Loya told the Planning Commission at the April 23rd meeting. 

And Planning Commissioner Joel Yodowitz said…

“And that is the Greenways. I mean, when I read that, I’m just not sure what to make of that.”

I just don’t know how something can be that vague and be a provision in the [Gateway] Zoning Code.


 

Tap / click here for more than two dozen articles about the Gateway Code.