Understanding One Valley, One Vision

By David Gauny

Important facts about the future planning of Santa Clarita

The 2010 City Council will begin review of One Valley, One Vision (OVOV), a proposal that will forever redraw zoning and planning guidelines in virtually every part of our city.

It is not an exaggeration to say that Santa Clarita is at the precipice of becoming either a well-planned city with premium venues or the next city to be overrun with L.A.'s urban sprawl. Execution of One Valley, One Vision will determine our fate.

Here are a few examples of the potential damage we will incur without alert leadership:

• Tripling (or more) of site densities in multiple areas. This means that if you have 100K sqft of retail down the street from your home, the landowner could raze it and build 300K sqft or more + very possibly without public hearing.

• Reduction of traffic standards. The plan calls for lowering the pass/fail threshold for traffic flow by one full grade. This further reduces obligations of developers to mitigate their projects.

• No Peak-Hour traffic analysis. Instead of viewing peak commute times to measure traffic flow, traffic counts would be averaged over 24-hour period. This profoundly blurs the facts about actual traffic problems.

That said, process up to this point has been disastrous. At community workshops that were supposed to invite public input, staff produced only blank pages on every key zoning question I asked. How does the public weigh in without information? Such process is the reason why our city continues to suffer 11th hour pushback from citizens. Wasted time, money, and lawsuits are the result. Good process makes a better plan and our refusal to embrace this concept is costing our taxpayers dearly.

And this strikes at the heart of the heart of why I'm running for council. Whether it's lack of interest or conflict of interest, our incumbent leadership has a dismal record of understanding complex proposals. It is telling that OVOV was deliberately delayed until after the election, as this method of avoiding meaningful debate and exposure of intentions has been employed by this group more than once. Outside money increasingly funds incumbent campaigns and without new leadership we will suffer the inevitable effects.

What I support. As a businessman, I understand that growth is both necessary and beneficial to the health of our city. But to avoid L.A.'s density nightmare, we need better checks and balances from our City Council and a real plan to keep public safety and services funded.

My goal is to bring representation and a plan that better protects our community moving forward:

• Tough questions and better process to eliminate "fuzzy math" analysis of proposed zoning and traffic modeling. I will also apply this approach to projects and demand that builders engage local residents to minimize the concerns of affected homeowners and their investments. No more backroom deals cut at the expense of our citizens.

• I will reject revisions that attempt to restrict public voice on major projects. If we remove the accountability of our elected officials, city staff will be delivering approvals regardless of who is elected to council. City Council must remain accountable to its constituents if we are to protect our planning future.

• I am committed to the programs we need to attract large anchor businesses to our community and I am already supporting and working with our Economic Development Corporation to accomplish this. Local high-paying jobs bring well-planned corporate centers and raise tax revenues without strip mall-style density.

• A plan for a true cultural Arts and Convention Center. Our demographic supports this and it is fundamental to making our city an attractive destination for employers and future tourism dollars. Premium venues and entertainment bring tax dollars without density and forever protect the value of our homes and our businesses.

Our city council has not demonstrated vision that includes high-paying jobs in our valley. With a dismal .90:1 jobs/housing ratio, even low-wage jobs are lacking. Roads are clogged with people leaving our valley for work and people outside our valley coming here to work. They then take their check and spend it elsewhere. This is not a plan for growth and the incumbents have been asleep at the switch.

OVOV is only a bad thing if we fail to bring the high-paying jobs our citizens need to live and work locally. The incumbents have already demonstrated their vision and political will here. We need critical thought and thorough review of the proposal to protect our home values and our quality of life. I am committed to the ideas and energy that will get us there.