This newsletter was sent out on Monday, May 27, 2024.
The two scheduled public hearings with the Arcata City Council take place on Wednesdays — May 29 and June 5, 2024. If needed, the public hearing meetings will be continued. The City Council will consider, take public comment on, discuss, and perhaps vote to adopt the Gateway Area Plan, the Gateway Zoning Code, the Arcata General Plan 2045, and the Final Environmental Report.
Please forward this to everyone you know who might be interested.
Gateway Plan and General Plan Updates
This week:
Finally we are here.
The City Council will be discussing the General Plan Updates, the Gateway Area Plan, and the Gateway Zoning Code. The Council will make the final voting decisions, possibly as soon as their July 17th meeting.
The City Council will be discussing the General Plan Updates, the Gateway Area Plan, and the Gateway Zoning Code. The Council will make the final voting decisions, possibly as soon as their July 17th meeting.
►►► These are the most important meetings of the Gateway Area Plan project. ◄◄◄
This newsletter is lengthy. I am relying on you to use your good sense to skim through this material and select what is important to you.
Many of the issues of the General Plan and Gateway Area Plan are simple, easy to understand, and easy to speak to our Councilmembers about. Other issues are complex and require more explanation.
Please feel open to phone or write to me if you have any questions — or look on Arcata1.com for more info.
Your input is valuable — and meaningful.
You can tell the City Councilmembers what you want to see for the future of Arcata. To call or write, see phone numbers and e-mail addresses here.
You can attend the meetings in person, or can watch and participate through Zoom, or can call in on the phone. The meetings are broadcast on Access Humboldt Channel 10 (or maybe 9) and are also live on the City’s website. Instructions on how to voice your comments are on the agenda links, above.
Can you be there (or call/Zoom in)on these Wednesdays – May 29th and June 5th?
These meetings are “Public Hearing” meetings. These are formalized versions of a standard meeting. It would be great to have lots of people at the meeting there, in person.
These meetings are “Public Hearing” meetings. These are formalized versions of a standard meeting. It would be great to have lots of people at the meeting there, in person.
At each meeting there will be one opportunity to speak on the “Gateway Area Plan, Gateway Code, and the Program Environmental Impact Report” issues, and a second opportunity to speak on the “General Plan Comprehensive Update with the Exception of the Gateway Area Plan” issues.
The notice of the hearing contains a legality that limits any future legal challenge to matters that were brought forward just at that hearing — either in writing or verbally. This means, as it says, that if in the future a person wanted to present a legal challenge to some portion of the General Plan (including the Gateway Area Plan), they are limited to only those topics that were brought up in the meeting or in written correspondence.
So come, speak, and write!
What is important to you? Here are some issues with the current General Plan and Gateway Area Plan:
- The Arcata Fire District has requested no permits or occupancy of buildings that are over three stories tall. If there’s a fire, saving the building structure is not what’s important. Saving human lives is what is important. (See below for more on the AFD’ s letter.)
- As it is set now, one person single-handedly approves up to four-story buildings, without input from anyone else. (That is the Zoning Administrator — David Loya.) If it’s three stories, there’s not even a hearing. More on this below also.
- Bayview, Sunset, Northtown, and Upper I and J Street neighborhoods have an “implementation measure” to be rezoned for tall, dense structures of up to four or five stories.
“Local-serving commercial uses such as corner grocery stores and coffee shops” will also be permitted. This means that existing single-family homes can be converted to be a coffee shop, hair salon, bookstore, convenience store, and so forth. For more on this, see Four-Story Buildings do not belong in the Bayview, Sunset, and Upper I & J Street Neighborhoods - No transit hub, or accommodation for bus stops or pull-outs along K Street, 11th Street, 8th, 9th etc.
Setting a building back ten feet so a bus can pull over might be a good idea, but it’s not in the Gateway Code. - Currently there can be 5, 6, and 7-stories — right alongside the linear park and proposed woonerf. This potentially puts sections of the park and woonerf completely in shade. Better would be to reduce the height and scale of buildings that are directly adjacent to the new L Street corridor linear park, and/or have graduated “step-backs” so more sky and light come in.
- The Gateway Code allows the backs of buildings, parking lots, dumpster sheds, etc. to be alongside the linear park. The Gateway Code provides protections for “privately owned publicly accessible” but no protections for the L Street corridor linear park.
- No requirement that tenant or employee bike parking be indoors. Tenant bike parking doesn’t even have to be behind a locked gate. This is just flat-out wrong.
- Commercial-use bike parking. A restaurant that could seat 100 diners at a time is required to have just four bike parking spots for patrons and one spot for all the employees. This is sending the wrong message about encouraging bicycle use.
- Very vague electric vehicle charging requirements. No e-bike charging facilities required.
- Daylighting of creeks is “encouraged.” It is not required.
- No public bathrooms in the Gateway area. Nothing at the “privately owned publicly accessible” open spaces either.
- If developers don’t build the “privately owned publicly accessible” open spaces, what happens? No parks?
- If Gateway developers don’t include parks and instead pay the “in-lieu” fees, that money should go to purchase and create parks in the Gateway area. That has been the City’s policy, as best it can be done, but it’s not in writing and it’s not a requirement.
- Policy LU-1f: Development of a diversity of housing types. “The land use plan map shall provide enough land in the various residential use categories to allow for development of a variety of types of new housing units and residential environments. The purpose shall be to achieve an appropriate balance between single‐family housing on individual lots and multi‐unit housing types.”
The City of Arcata is not zoning “enough land” for single-family residences — so why say that we are? - Grass lawns: No word on this. How about discourage or eliminate lawns.
- Native plants: “Promote landscape designs emphasizing native plants, that may be complemented by non-invasive, non-native species, when they integrate harmoniously with the scale and architecture of buildings and improve the overall aesthetic appearance of the City and its neighborhoods.”
Why not require native plants? Native plants are essential. - The Environmental Impact Report recognizes that traffic noise may have already exceeded allowable standards in certain sections of town — including along Alliance Road and K Street. What is proposed as a “mitigation measure” is to have the the developers — at their expense — do an accurate sound-level survey (which the EIR engineers did not do). And then — and I am not making this up — require the building’s developer to install a central air conditioning system — so that tenants can keep their windows closed, in order to keep the noise out.
A more appropriate mitigation measure would be to have the traffic on Alliance and K Street slow down! Lower speeds equate to less traffic noise. The Environmental Impact Report is deficient in dozens of ways… but who cares? It’s just a report.
On Arcata1.com you can go to Newest Articles or to the City Council / Planning Commission portal page to see the latest or more crucial articles.
Thank you for your interest, your involvement, and your support.
— Fred Weis
Phone: 707-822-4400
Keep reading for more!
Some background and details
Two weeks ago, on May 14th, Arcata’s Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council adopt the General Plan updates, the Gateway Plan, the Gateway Code, and the Final Environmental Impact Report.
We will put aside the question of whether the Commissioners had read or reviewed the Final EIR document — 253 densely written pages — which was released just four days earlier, and yet voted to recommend it. I don’t think they read it.
The Planning Commission took public comment for 20 minutes and then spent a total of 15 minutes to discuss and vote “Yes” on the recommendations.
The Arcata Fire District’s letter
In my view, Arcata’s Community Development Director, David Loya, continues to minimize and trivialize the clear and strongly-worded April 9, 2024, letter from the Arcata Fire District board of directors. The AFD’s letter states “we believe it would be imprudent to approve building permits and begin occupancy in the envisioned residential buildings” — the 4, 5, 6, and 7-story buildings envisioned in the Gateway Area Plan, that is.
For more on the Arcata Fire District’s letter, see this article and read the original letter.
As Community Development Director David Loya put it:
“I understand the objectives of the City and its housing and economic development goals and objectives are not the exact same as the Fire District’s goals and objectives. And through the relationship that we built, we need to work through those issues to find solutions that accommodate both agencies. So, I think that work is ongoing. I understand what I’m saying is not exactly what the Fire District has said in this letter. But I think there are elements in there — that we both have expressed the desire to coordinate, communicate, and collaborate on these solutions. I think the Board President pointed to some of those collaborations in their letter. And we fully support those and we’ll continue to work with the Fire District.”
The Community Development Director alludes to an improved building code that will help the Arcata Fire District fight fires and maintain adequate emergency services. But that is only a part of the issue. Smoke inhalation is what kills people. It takes lots of firefighters immediately at the scene of a fire in order to safely evacuate a building.
Improving the building code is good. But to improve the building code to the level of standards of an even taller building (the standards of a 10 or 12-story building) would likely make the cost of that building be unfeasible. That is to say, the apartment buildings would not get built at all.
The Arcata Fire District has clearly stated that they cannot provide the levels of emergency services that — by national firefighter standards (it’s not just the AFD’s opinion) — are absolutely necessary for any building above three stories. This is an on-going situation that even after the AFD gets funding will likely take three to five years to resolve.
Large issues that still remain
1. Inclusionary Zoning
Inclusionary Zoning refers to requiring very-low, low, and/or moderate-income housing in the same building as market-rate apartment units — as opposed to having entire buildings with just lower-income apartments. The City Council determined they wanted Inclusionary Zoning to be City-wide and not just in the Gateway area at their January 17, 2024, meeting. And at that meeting the Council set the figures for the specific percentages and figures for Inclusionary Zoning.
Inclusionary Zoning has been removed from the Gateway Area Plan, but it has not yet been included in the City’s Land Use Code (which is where Director Loya wants it to go).
It’s been four months now. When are the Inclusionary Zoning measures going to be included in Arcata’s codes? The City Council directed this, and it has not yet been done. Inclusionary Zoning is a major issue, and putting this in is a seemingly minor matter. But as of this time there has been no progress.
2. Ministerial Review: The Zoning Administrator (David Loya) would be the single person approving buildings up to four stories.
For almost a year, the draft Gateway Code had the approval of new building projects be set as Zoning Administrator approval for buildings up to 3 stories (40 feet height, actually — including the roofline) and a Planning Commission hearing set for buildings at 4 stories (over 40 feet) and higher.
Even though Planning Commission Chair Scott Davies, at the Commission’s April 23, 2024, meeting, said that this would not be changed — that it was not open to discussion — this level of building heights was indeed changed.
It was changed without any discussion, and the change is not shown in the “tracked changes” document.
To be fair, the way that had 40-foot height projects going to the Planning Commission was not worded very well. It was yet another example of the lack of attention to detail that we saw in the Gateway Code document.
But to change this at this late date — and without any discussion or track-change notice — is very bad.
In his speaking, Community Development Director David Loya regularly refers to “ministerial review” as though it were a virtual automatic approval process that is done by a single person. This is not true.
Former Planning Commissioners Julie Vaissade-Elcock (Chair) and Judith Mayer (and myself also) used to contradict him on this. But it was not until the City’s Form-Based Code consultant, Ben Noble, pointed out the differences between “zoning administrator” review and ministerial review that includes Planning Commission review that David Loya backed off on this false assertion.
In recent weeks, though, he is back to using “ministerial review” as though it were automatic — and that he’d be the person doing it.
What I believe is best for Arcata
With the notion of objective standards of the form-based code, a project must (by State law) in theory be approved if it meets the objective standards. But in the real world nothing is black and white. There is often room for interpretation. I would far rather have the seven sets of eyes, brains, and the collective experience and sensibilities of the entire Planning Commission look at every project — every single project. As we have seen, if it’s a good project, it sails right through.
The development of a Form-Based Code is new for Arcata. The Planning Commission recognizes that they will have to “tweak” and adjust the Gateway Code periodically — after they see what policies of the Code and the Community Benefits Program are working and which are not.
If the Planning Commission does not see the projects at a hearing, how are they going to know “give and take” was part of the approval process?
As the Planning Commission has experienced again and again, suggestions made by the Commissioners are often seen by the developer as desired improvements. By modifying the design according to input from the Commissioners, the project is improved — and everyone is happy.
By State law, these projects will be approved. And by having input from seven Commissioners — plus input from the Community Development Director and from the public — a project will become even better.
With approval based on objective standards, this is not an adversarial situation. To repeat: The projects will be approved. With Planning Commission participation, the projects will also be improved.
3. The L Street Corridor linear park and woonerf
I am very curious to hear what the 3-person City Council has to say about the lack of any real planning for the L Street corridor linear park and woonerf. The Council has clearly and strongly requested a vibrant and exciting woonerf for the 4-block section of the linear park.
On Arcata1.com, see: A good building design for the L Street corridor woonerf
It has become very clear that the Community Development Director has what can be regarded as a very odd idea of what planning for the L Street linear park and woonerf actually involves. Planning for the buildings, planning for the community, and planning for people.
To this point he has refused to do anything other than what he wants to do. He says that a linear park and a woonerf are allowed to be built, and that’s all he needs to do. He could not be more wrong.
The planning for the future L Street corridor linear park and Woonerf is still not in the Gateway Code.
Community Development Director, David Loya, is insisting that since the Gateway Area Plan allows a linear park and a woonerf to be built, that’s all he has to do. He also insists that those are public projects and the Gateway Code is for private projects — so there doesn’t need to be any planning provisions in the Gateway Code for what will be these valuable additions to life in Arcata.
What Directory Loya has done is not planning. It is very possible (we don’t know yet) that the three-person Arcata City Council that will discuss and ultimately approve the Gateway Area Plan fully recognizes this.
To see the basic planning steps that are necessary for a successful woonerf and linear park in the L Street corridor view this article.
The vision of the future woonerf along the four-block stretch of what is now L Street, from 7th to 11th Streets, involves a pedestrian-mall type walkway, with small shops and restaurants and places to meet and and walk and sit along the way.
You can see more of what a woonerf is in some of the articles on woonerfs and L Street. The images on the Internet show mostly paved designs, where people took an existing street and made a walkway out of it. Here in Arcata we’re going to be more creative — and we’re going to be more pedestrian and bike-oriented, with a more natural design. Perhaps the best image is from Arcata’s own Rails with Trails study, from 2010.
Other notes on the General Plan update
The General Plan still contains the “implementation measure” to rezone the Bayview, Northtown, Arcata Heights (Upper I & J Streets), and Sunset neighborhoods for four-story apartments and “local-serving commercial uses” throughout the residential and historic neighborhoods.
With the State density bonus law, these can be six story buildings — and the bonus can be triggered by subsidized student housing.
“Local” or “Neighborhood -serving commercial uses” includes convenience stores, hair salons, coffee shops, small retail stores, sandwich shops and restaurants, and so forth.
Of particular note to the Realtor and home-building community is Land Use policy LU-1f. It is on page 2-9 of the “May 29, 2024” draft General Plan 2045, which is PDF page 36.
Here it is:
“Land Use policy LU-1f
Development of a diversity of housing types. The land use plan map shall provide enough land in the various residential use categories to allow for development of a variety of types of new housing units and residential environments. The purpose shall be to achieve an appropriate balance between single‐family housing on individual lots and multi‐unit housing types.“
I am not making a political statement about this. I actually think that this policy should be removed. I think that it will be grounds for a future lawsuit.
The “General Plan 2045” calls for a population growth of 40% from the 2020 figure of 18,857 to approximately 27,000 people — a population gain of about 8,000 people. Cal Poly Humboldt projects a population gain of students, faculty, and staff of about 5,500 to 6,000 people, of which the City of Arcata is shown as being responsible for 40% of that, or about 2,400 people.
Please be aware: I am not against the creation of new housing in Arcata. I want the Environmental Impact Report, the General Plan, and the Gateway Area Plan to represent the views of the people of Arcata. Certain sections and policies in them do not represent the view of the people, in my opinion.
And I want the documents to be honest — and in my view they are not honest.
I believe that the creation of valid, understandable documents and images does not delay the creation of housing in Arcata.
Certain members of our city government have taken the attitude that being clear and accurate is not important. I believe that it is. I believe being transparent, straightforward, and realistic makes for a better plan and a better Arcata.
To subscribe to Arcata1.com’s newsletter (or to remove your name from this list) please go to arcata1.com/newsletter or write or call Fred Weis at 707 – 822 – 4400.
Your privacy is respected.