From valerie at vanngroup.com Wed Aug 4 08:20:31 2004 From: valerie at vanngroup.com (Valerie Vann) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 08:20:31 -0700 Subject: [OldNorth] Old East Infill meeting Message-ID: <4110FEBE.7CCD2265@vanngroup.com> Re: Old East Aug. 12 meeting with Infill Subcommittee What's going on? Does the committee intend to meet separately with all three neighborhoods? Wasn't the committee supposed to answer all of our concerns about infill policy in our neighborhoods? Or did the level of ONDNA concern and desire to participate get lost at the Council meeting, given that public comment was cut short and the two projects under consideration at the Council meeting were not actually IN Old North? Personally, I was hoping (and expecting) a serious effort on the part of the Council to step back, slow down, and do some in depth work on a holistic approach to "infill" and "densification" that addresses the specific concerns of our three traditional neighborhoods, including garbage, parking, noise, street tree & landscape maintenance, open space; pedestrian, bike and auto traffic; public transit; and affordable housing issues; the approaches being taken by other California small and medium cities, especially those with similar traditional core areas (e.g. Sonoma, Santa Rosa, Grass Valley, & other towns with student and/or senior populations like Chico). I'm very concerned that we're going to get a piecemeal, ad hoc approach to the infill issue, an ill-thoughtout reaction to the latest "planning" fad(s), or a divide and conquer strategy, or all of the above. Valerie Vann valerie at vanngroup.com From winterety at sbcglobal.net Wed Aug 4 10:04:38 2004 From: winterety at sbcglobal.net (sheryl lynn gerety) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 10:04:38 -0700 Subject: [OldNorth] Re: Old East Infill meeting In-Reply-To: <4110FEBE.7CCD2265@vanngroup.com> References: <4110FEBE.7CCD2265@vanngroup.com> Message-ID: <5E792D4A-E638-11D8-884F-00039370746A@sbcglobal.net> Valerie and Old North Neighbors: Here, as best as is possible in a quick summary, is what has been happening. . . I suppose the first thing is to say far too much far too quickly for volunteer neighborhood organizations to appear as if they are entirely 'on top of it.' But, we are trying. First, the response to in-fill and the discussion at the last City Council meeting is being choreographed by Esther Polito. She has proposed to meet first with Old East, as their issues take the form of specific, urgent, pending projects on J and K Streets. That will be the 12th, and will, I believe, include the Council subcommittee on in-fill, Sousa and Asmundsen. It is open to observers, and we will be there. I have been trying to organize a date and a small working committee to meet just with Esther about the same time (in fact I proposed the 12th, but she argued for giving OE priority). I also asked that the first ON meeting not include Sousa and Asmundsen, because we have the luxury of taking a more general and perhaps creative approach. If this works, that is if I can get people to volunteer, the goal will be to bring several coherent possibilities to the next monthly meeting of the Board and residents, and, if we are ready, Asumundsen and Sousa. Polito envisions the next step as a broader meeting of all neighborhoods covered by the R2-CD district, to work on ideas emerging from these smaller settings, common to all of us. U/Rice Lane probably will be represented by a consultant, as they are not as organized as the other neighborhoods under the R2-CD district. You are correct that all of our current "problem" issues, all of which rather suddenly have become urgent, are interconnected, but we don't yet have the ideas or person-power to work on them all at once, especially as a committee-of-the-whole. So, I am trying to line up subcommittees of board members and others to tackle them outside of monthly meetings, and then coordinate as best as possible in those meetings. There are also a few cases in which individuals have carried the burden, and could use some back-up, which I am trying to enlist: Steve on 5th Street, Z, Angela and I on parking, Z on garbage and alleys, etc. We also have going or planned: an attempt to complete John's suggestion of a pamphlet to aid a membership drive this September, continuing a developing relationship with the Davis Food Co-op on their project for the corner of 6th and G, coordination with the Old East group, a proposed "one-pager" defining what the Design Guidelines mean for us, an important proposal to schedule neighborhood 'walk-abouts' for new Council and Planning Commission members (a similar walkabout in OE was essential in the last Council meeting outcomes), and an attempt to assemble historical and trend data on housing and neighborhood demography which planners say will be needed for the R2-CD discussion and when and if we face in-fill proposals, etc. Also, Barbara Boehler (OE pres.) has proposed that she and I coordinate to write an Op-Ed piece for the Enterprise on the Design Guidelines, our neighborhoods and in-fill. So, please, volunteer and please respond when your new president asks you to volunteer. Some more specific responses: > Re: Old East Aug. 12 meeting with Infill Subcommittee > > What's going on? Does the committee intend to meet separately with all > three neighborhoods? Wasn't the committee supposed to answer > all of our concerns about infill policy in our neighborhoods? Yes, but (as above) we are moving toward a broad discussion by graded steps > > Or did the level of ONDNA concern and desire to participate get lost > at the Council meeting, given that public comment was cut short and > the two projects under consideration at the Council meeting were not > actually IN Old North? Not at all, in fact various historical and other contingencies plus our organization put ON in a strong position of leadership on these issues, if we can get our selves coordinated. > > Personally, I was hoping (and expecting) a serious effort on the part > of the Council to step back, slow down, and do some in depth work > on a holistic approach to "infill" and "densification" that addresses > the specific concerns of our three traditional neighborhoods, > including > garbage, parking, noise, street tree & landscape maintenance, open > space; pedestrian, bike and auto traffic; public transit; and > affordable > housing issues; the approaches being taken by other California small > and medium cities, especially those with similar traditional core > areas (e.g. Sonoma, Santa Rosa, Grass Valley, & other towns with > student and/or senior populations like Chico). Partly because we are for the moment partly 'on the defensive,' responding as issues arise and as we all can find the time, and partly for other reasons, we simply are not able to do it all at once, although we have committees on just about all of those topics. Some members of this Council are pushing hard to justify Covell, which unfortunately has ramifications for all of our issues, from pressure on staff time to the linkage between in-fill and boundary expansion. > I'm very concerned that we're going to get a piecemeal, ad hoc > approach to the infill issue, an ill-thoughtout reaction to the latest > "planning" fad(s), or a divide and conquer strategy, or all of the > above. "Divide and conquer"? I don't think so in the current scheduling, ordering of meetings; I have a lot of confidence in Polito's judgment of how to go about this. Latest planning fad? Yes, "in-fill" is mesmerizing for some key decision-makers, but we are working hard to take a cautious, "Hey, let's slow down and think about this" approach. Piecemeal? Pragmatically, yes we are operating somewhat piecemeal, as amateurs and volunteers. But, the more people and good ideas we can get coordinated, the less it will be so. Thank-you for your note and the opportunity to get this 'on paper' and circulated to folks. Please share your ideas and time, Bruce (ONDNA pres.) > > Valerie Vann > valerie at vanngroup.com Bruce Winterhalder -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 6256 bytes Desc: not available URL: From valerie at vanngroup.com Wed Aug 4 10:41:33 2004 From: valerie at vanngroup.com (Valerie Vann) Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 10:41:33 -0700 Subject: [OldNorth] Re: Old East Infill meeting References: <4110FEBE.7CCD2265@vanngroup.com> <5E792D4A-E638-11D8-884F-00039370746A@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <41111FCD.2BA547A5@vanngroup.com> Bruce, I appreciate your summary of the situation and clarification of the process that's developing. As you know, I'm aware of the rather daunting demands all our neighborhood issues are making on all of us, especially those of you with jobs & families. I also am trying to "have a life" outside of ONDNA (& local/state/national) political) concerns. >volunteer OK, here's what/where I am: At the last ONDNA meeting I volunteered to make an alternate/extra to the 2 person "walkabout committee", but I'm not sure who the other person besides Dan Szumski is. (Maybe the walkabouts should be delayed a bit and imcorporated with our contacts with Polito, Greenwald & Souza). I am willing to join the meeting(s) with Polito as you suggested to me on Monday. Let me know what/when and who else will be involved. I will try to attend the Aug. 12 OE meeting. I've got a tentative (at his convenience) agreement with Dan Quickert ("Urban Forest" committee of one.) for the two of us to do a neighborhood walk to look at street tree, alley vegetation status and issues. Finally, we need to be aware of "Open Access" (Public Meeting) requirements in all aspects of this process where ONDNA and/or it's officers is involved. Valerie Vann valerie at vanngroup.com From dequickert at omsoft.com Wed Aug 4 23:29:40 2004 From: dequickert at omsoft.com (Dan Quickert) Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 23:29:40 -0700 Subject: [OldNorth] Re: Old East Infill meeting Message-ID: <01C47A7A.EA42ED70.dequickert@omsoft.com> On Wednesday, August 04, 2004 10:42 AM, Valerie Vann wrote: > ...Finally, we need to be aware of "Open Access" (Public Meeting) > requirements in all aspects of this process where ONDNA and/or > it's officers is involved. Actually, we have no legal obligation in that regard as we are not a government entity... BUT we do strive for openness and inclusiveness. Dan Q.