While citizens in Danville and Lafayette have wised up to the top down central planning tactics of unelected regional government mandates from ABAG and MTC, citizens of El Sobrante are just waking up to the County’s “General Plan Update”. In sum, the plan update will transform El Sobrante into just another soul-less, densely populated gulag of high-rise sprawl in which to warehouse low-income families and the elderly.
The plan calls for rezoning the major corridors of San Pablo Dam Rd. and Appian Way where high-rise sprawl will dominate the community. Meanwhile, local citizens are fighting a single family development just a few blocks away from the rezoned area with the help of the Contra Costa Times, which has published stories on their ‘struggle’ to keep the land open behind their homes.
The Times actually included the name of their group and lobbied for funds to help them fight the single family home developers! See story at my website here; and here.
The Contra Costa Times rightly criticized these regional government elites for using public funds to purchase a costly building in SF to house their entitled and totally useless bureaucracy.
Now the Times’ should editorialize against their aggressive stance to transform quiet suburban neighborhoods into tomorrow’s wastelands where non-property owning residents can vote to tax those citizens still owning property for even more ineffective government services.
Bill Gram-Reefer is Editor & Publisher of Halfway To Concord, founded in 2004. Halfway To Concord is the leading online source for community-driven political news, events, and opinion for Contra Costa County and the San Francisco East Bay.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Given the rate that businesses are fleeing California from the increased rates of taxation and the resulting erosion of job opportunities, how do these regional planning authorities justify their population growth projections that they claim require the high density rezonings? The recession also has recently been shown to have influenced the birthrate downward. So, lacking economic and population growth, is there even the claimed ‘need?’
The benefits of mixed use — 1st floor consumer commercial & dwellings above — are very minor.
For those living in the building & nearby, how much of their spending will be nearby? A: 5-10%?
How much driving will that prevent? A: 0.5-3 miles per trip?
How much higher prices are there? A: up to 20% more, due to reduced competition & a smaller customer base compared to car-oriented destinations.
Land prices are bid higher, which is normal & happens in all CBDs & other areas of increased demand.
State Senator Darrell Steinberg crows about the passage of SB375 which will ‘change the way we think about sustainable development’ – as I have said in LTE to the CCT this is ‘one scary dude’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iH-HVdyGmA
You can thank CA Senate President ProTem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) for introducing the climate change laws that mandate every community build high density housing…building high density housing to ‘mitigate’ high levels of CO2 is junk science at it’s best…unfortunately, most of the last few generations who graduated from guvmint screwels will believe anything the guvmint shoves down their throats….
This is exactly the type of develpment that the Concord Planning Commission should try to avoid imposing on our community. With the exception of high density transit villages located near BART stations, Central planning from ABAG, MTC, and the State , is right out of the Soviet five year plan play book.
Many individuals such as myself moved to the suburbs to avoid the congestion, crime, and urban spraw lwhich characterize this life style.. Now we are faced with governmental agencies trying tio impose their will on ourselves while telling munipipalities this is what we want.
No wonder citizens of Danville, Orinda,San Pablo and elsewhere are up in arms about faceless, unelected govermental agencies trying to impose mega housing developments they don’t want in their communities.
We may lose this battle against “Big Brother”, but it is worth the fight.
We may have to hold our nose for such “exceptions” for greenfield projects like the Concord Naval Weapons Station project that is government land to begin with, but as long as we make exceptions for mandates at “high density transit villages e.g. at Concord BART Station and neighborhood, we invite the camel’s nose into the tent thus weakening forever the local authority for development and planning. These seemingly innocent exceptions lead to more mandates, eminent domain takings, crony developer deals, bloated budgets, mandated PLAs and set asides for subsidized low-income housing, that only makes the project more expensive and harder for working families to live there because they and the nearby community end up footing the bill for the social engineering and subsequent fall out.