Snoo6435 t1_j9v4dda wrote
Reply to comment by Job_Stealer in 95% of Bay Area Cities Lost Zoning Authority: In 105 jurisdictions of the Bay Area, anyone can build any residential projected at any height or density so long as 20% of the units are for low income. by dolphins3
Are you saying that the city didn't change rules to allow 8 story apartment buildings up to one mile from transit hubs into historic neighborhoods? And that no onsite parking is required? And that the neighborhood planning groups aren't included in the process? I seriously like to know. BTW, my home is in Mission Hills. My degree is in landscape architecture and planning from Cal Poly.
What is a referendum California?
In California, a ballot proposition is a referendum or an initiative measure that is submitted to the electorate for a direct decision or direct vote (or plebiscite).
Job_Stealer t1_j9vffd7 wrote
Hello fellow Mustang alumni,
Unless you have a minor in CRP, I have never met a LARC that has any idea about the planning process outside of anecdotes, and that's what I wished CAED did more of. Integrating our allied professions.
A referendum is "the power of the electors to approve or reject statues or parts of statutes..." Cal. Const. Article II 9(a). The power of a referendum only applies only to NEWLY enacted legislation and is subject to constitutional limitations. In local government respects, they are used to reject an ordinance or resolution that has been RECENTLY passed (30 days before they take into effect). Also, they can't contradict state law.
Have you seen your city's general / specific plan? Have you read your land use matrix? Probably not. I don't expect the average individual to do. That's partially why public planners exist. But unless I see specific language allowing for that specific type of development you are talking about to occur, your statement is considered a pretty uncredible NIMBY argument. In fact, Mission Hills is a very wealthy neighborhood of sfh next to the downtown specific plan area, from what i recall. This means that the neighborhood will eventually become high density over time. It was designated as a Tier 1 in respect to the housing solutions portion of the city's complete communites approach. THIS ITSELF WAS A PRODUCT OF AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT PUBLIC OUTREACH EFFORTS.
Those local ordinances you mention are an extent to comply with SB10, which is a state mandated statute. There has been recent debate within the planning field here whether or not the state is overreaching in its power. I'm on the side that it is. HOWEVER, we have had an official housing crisis for the past decade. If cities try to designate "historical neighborhoods" for the sake of blocking high density development (especially wealthy places that want to keep the poors out), then they get what's coming to them with current state law. However, well planned places will integrate a plethora of intensity of land uses well, even if they're "historical neighborhoods".
You're right to an extent of the overreaching power of the state and the lack of public participation in planning. It's a problem as commissions are overrepresented by a rich minority and public hearings are only being visited by landowners or old, advantaged individuals.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments