The group, Friends of Mill Valley, sent the candidates a questionnaire to which FoMV wanted simple Yes or No
answers. Because the questions deserved and required a more thoughtful and complete answer than that, and because
FoMV stated it would post only "Y", "N" or "W" on its home page, with any fuller response posted somewhere else on
its site, I decided not to provide them my answers.
Instead, I have posted my answers, along with the FoMV questionnaire and my letter to FoMV explaining my decision,
here. I am also sending them to the Mill Valley Herald, the Marin Independent Journal, and the Pacific Sun, and the
League of Women Voters.
Please click on the link below to see my letter and the questionnaire (with its instructions). The complete text of my
responses (with the questions) is also below the links.
answers. Because the questions deserved and required a more thoughtful and complete answer than that, and because
FoMV stated it would post only "Y", "N" or "W" on its home page, with any fuller response posted somewhere else on
its site, I decided not to provide them my answers.
Instead, I have posted my answers, along with the FoMV questionnaire and my letter to FoMV explaining my decision,
here. I am also sending them to the Mill Valley Herald, the Marin Independent Journal, and the Pacific Sun, and the
League of Women Voters.
Please click on the link below to see my letter and the questionnaire (with its instructions). The complete text of my
responses (with the questions) is also below the links.
Maureen Parton’s Answers to Friends of Mill Valley Questionnaire
Traffic
- As Council Member, will you insist that Mill Valley traffic systems be designed such that traffic on Miller,
Camino Alto and East Blithedale is faster between popular destinations than it is on cut-through neighborhood
streets?
Yes, I will work to ensure that transit (buses, shuttles and cars) on Miller, Camino Alto and E. Blithedale, our city
arterials, will move more efficiently and thus faster. I will work to put well-conceived, neighborhood-supported traffic
calming measures in place in the neighborhoods. Our neighborhoods deserve to be protected from cut through traffic,
thereby increasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists.
- Do you believe the idea of a roundabout at the corner of Camino Alto and Miller is worth the expenditure
of City funds to further study?
Yes. Roundabouts have been very successful in Truckee, California. There can be drawbacks. With a roundabout
located adjacent to Tamalpais High School and The Redwoods, my chief concern is for the safety of pedestrians and
cyclists. I do believe this idea warrants further study.
Affordable Housing
- Would you urge the City to comply with ABAG targets?
Yes. It is the law thus the City must comply. (The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
sets the housing numbers; the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) apportions the region’s “fair share” to
each of the cities and the counties.) I will work to change the targets so that they are appropriate to our City. We must
not overstep environmental and service capacity limits.
- Do you believe that encouraging higher density is the best way for Mill Valley to provide needed affordable
housing units?
Increased density is not the only solution. Depending on the specific site, additional housing units on a single parcel
next to transit can be a good part of an overall plan. Affordable housing is an essential community resource. The
creation of affordable housing deserves a comprehensive approach that looks at many methods, only one of which is
building. A comprehensive approach considers a range of ideas, including creative re-use of current structures, units
along streets served by transit, sponsorship/incentives for deed restricted second-units, second unit amnesty programs,
commercial inclusionary units for workforce housing and single family homes for families.
Thus far, second units have served to meet a large portion of our current housing allocation. However, second units on
hillsides and remote areas (away from existing transit and services) add to parking and traffic impacts to the
neighborhoods and our City. They are not the complete solution.
- As Council Member, would you make it a priority to organize a county-level voucher pool to make housing
in Mill Valley available to persons who qualify due to low income?
Yes. This is a good idea. This is somewhat similar to the federal section 8 housing program, which in Marin County
has an impossibly long waiting list of qualified candidates. It is not clear how such a program would be financed by the
county and the cities. A countywide financing measure, as we have done for open space (bond) and transit (sales tax),
would have to be considered.
Growth, Planning, and MAPP
- Do you think that the actions of Mill Valley’s planning department are grounded in the values of the citizens
of Mill Valley?
Yes. The Planning Department’s job is to provide the planning process; the values are determined by the people and
their representatives. This planning process is underway and is not done yet. The values of the residents of Mill Valley
are made manifest in the plan that comes forward and is approved.
- Should the lot near the corner of Camino Alto & East Blithedale be rezoned to allow housing to be built
there? (If yes, how many houses?)
This lot is already zoned to allow housing thus rezoning is not necessary. Access and safety here are the key issues.
Health and safety considerations point toward fewer units at this congested location. The decision on the exact number
should be based on these same safety considerations, factual analysis and reasoning.
- Do you approve MAPP’s recommendations to: increase allowable building heights (to 40 feet), reduce or
eliminate commercial building street setbacks, increase density (up to 20 units per acre plus first-floor retail), and
reduce parking standards (by 33% to 50%) on large sections of Miller Avenue?
This is really four questions and involves issues deserving more thoughtful answers than a simplistic (and potentially
misleading) Yes or No answer.
Let’s look at the facts. Currently, our existing building standards on the Gateway and Main Street portions of Miller
Avenue permit building 3 stories and 35 feet. Due to the 3 foot residential flood plain requirements, the draft proposal
for Miller’s mixed use design is exploring the possibility of an additional 5 feet to specifically protect these flood prone
areas and to allow for taller, more generous ceiling heights on small footprint, ground floor commercial that will make
our shopping experience more enjoyable.
The plan along Miller envisions a variety of building heights and designs. The Chambers Building at 420 Miller at two
stories (28 feet) and the House/Ronald project at 505 Miller at three stories (38 feet) are two examples of the type of
designs our community has overwhelmingly supported.
The current development code governing Miller (the part east of Locust to the Safeway) permits commercial
development. Stand alone commercial development is very traffic inducing. The plan for Miller allows a small-scaled,
mixed use area with housing over retail. This will not be a second downtown, just a friendlier street. The plan
encourages walking, neighborhood gathering places and charming storefronts with viewable merchandise.
Right now, Miller Avenue is little more than a freeway on-ramp hostile to pedestrians and bicyclists and made for quick
stop, “drive by” shopping. Ask yourself, when have you ever strolled along Lower Miller Avenue for fun and
amusement? We can do better.
As a city, we should be looking ahead to our future and doing things now that prepare us for it. The days of fossil-fueled
cars are numbered. Our housing choices should reflect that eventuality. Scattering housing and second units on our
hillsides dooms us to a car-dependent lifestyle and adds ever more cars to the equation. Year to year, we can feel this
deterioration to our quality of life. Our dependency on the automobile is a big part of the reason. Small housing over
retail on Miller lets people choose to live within walking distance of stores, shopping, services and ready transit – so they
can live “car free” or at least with fewer of them. Miller Avenue, fostering green and sustainable design and a walkable,
transit-served neighborhood, can help us truly walk our talk ~ environmentally speaking ~ and get us future ready.
- Would you support separating the timeline, planning, environmental impact evaluation and public approval
process for Measure A street improvements from the MAPP?
No. It is better if it is done together as one vision. We spend too much time in our own traffic now. This is because our
land use and transportation planning has never been done as an integrated whole. It is time to try an integrated
approach. A bold vision providing more frequent transit and shuttles will give us the option to get out of our cars.
Then, we will see other ways of living and housing ourselves that are not car dependent. Some of us will choose to live
this way. Miller Avenue can be that place.
Traffic
- As Council Member, will you insist that Mill Valley traffic systems be designed such that traffic on Miller,
Camino Alto and East Blithedale is faster between popular destinations than it is on cut-through neighborhood
streets?
Yes, I will work to ensure that transit (buses, shuttles and cars) on Miller, Camino Alto and E. Blithedale, our city
arterials, will move more efficiently and thus faster. I will work to put well-conceived, neighborhood-supported traffic
calming measures in place in the neighborhoods. Our neighborhoods deserve to be protected from cut through traffic,
thereby increasing safety for pedestrians and cyclists.
- Do you believe the idea of a roundabout at the corner of Camino Alto and Miller is worth the expenditure
of City funds to further study?
Yes. Roundabouts have been very successful in Truckee, California. There can be drawbacks. With a roundabout
located adjacent to Tamalpais High School and The Redwoods, my chief concern is for the safety of pedestrians and
cyclists. I do believe this idea warrants further study.
Affordable Housing
- Would you urge the City to comply with ABAG targets?
Yes. It is the law thus the City must comply. (The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
sets the housing numbers; the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) apportions the region’s “fair share” to
each of the cities and the counties.) I will work to change the targets so that they are appropriate to our City. We must
not overstep environmental and service capacity limits.
- Do you believe that encouraging higher density is the best way for Mill Valley to provide needed affordable
housing units?
Increased density is not the only solution. Depending on the specific site, additional housing units on a single parcel
next to transit can be a good part of an overall plan. Affordable housing is an essential community resource. The
creation of affordable housing deserves a comprehensive approach that looks at many methods, only one of which is
building. A comprehensive approach considers a range of ideas, including creative re-use of current structures, units
along streets served by transit, sponsorship/incentives for deed restricted second-units, second unit amnesty programs,
commercial inclusionary units for workforce housing and single family homes for families.
Thus far, second units have served to meet a large portion of our current housing allocation. However, second units on
hillsides and remote areas (away from existing transit and services) add to parking and traffic impacts to the
neighborhoods and our City. They are not the complete solution.
- As Council Member, would you make it a priority to organize a county-level voucher pool to make housing
in Mill Valley available to persons who qualify due to low income?
Yes. This is a good idea. This is somewhat similar to the federal section 8 housing program, which in Marin County
has an impossibly long waiting list of qualified candidates. It is not clear how such a program would be financed by the
county and the cities. A countywide financing measure, as we have done for open space (bond) and transit (sales tax),
would have to be considered.
Growth, Planning, and MAPP
- Do you think that the actions of Mill Valley’s planning department are grounded in the values of the citizens
of Mill Valley?
Yes. The Planning Department’s job is to provide the planning process; the values are determined by the people and
their representatives. This planning process is underway and is not done yet. The values of the residents of Mill Valley
are made manifest in the plan that comes forward and is approved.
- Should the lot near the corner of Camino Alto & East Blithedale be rezoned to allow housing to be built
there? (If yes, how many houses?)
This lot is already zoned to allow housing thus rezoning is not necessary. Access and safety here are the key issues.
Health and safety considerations point toward fewer units at this congested location. The decision on the exact number
should be based on these same safety considerations, factual analysis and reasoning.
- Do you approve MAPP’s recommendations to: increase allowable building heights (to 40 feet), reduce or
eliminate commercial building street setbacks, increase density (up to 20 units per acre plus first-floor retail), and
reduce parking standards (by 33% to 50%) on large sections of Miller Avenue?
This is really four questions and involves issues deserving more thoughtful answers than a simplistic (and potentially
misleading) Yes or No answer.
Let’s look at the facts. Currently, our existing building standards on the Gateway and Main Street portions of Miller
Avenue permit building 3 stories and 35 feet. Due to the 3 foot residential flood plain requirements, the draft proposal
for Miller’s mixed use design is exploring the possibility of an additional 5 feet to specifically protect these flood prone
areas and to allow for taller, more generous ceiling heights on small footprint, ground floor commercial that will make
our shopping experience more enjoyable.
The plan along Miller envisions a variety of building heights and designs. The Chambers Building at 420 Miller at two
stories (28 feet) and the House/Ronald project at 505 Miller at three stories (38 feet) are two examples of the type of
designs our community has overwhelmingly supported.
The current development code governing Miller (the part east of Locust to the Safeway) permits commercial
development. Stand alone commercial development is very traffic inducing. The plan for Miller allows a small-scaled,
mixed use area with housing over retail. This will not be a second downtown, just a friendlier street. The plan
encourages walking, neighborhood gathering places and charming storefronts with viewable merchandise.
Right now, Miller Avenue is little more than a freeway on-ramp hostile to pedestrians and bicyclists and made for quick
stop, “drive by” shopping. Ask yourself, when have you ever strolled along Lower Miller Avenue for fun and
amusement? We can do better.
As a city, we should be looking ahead to our future and doing things now that prepare us for it. The days of fossil-fueled
cars are numbered. Our housing choices should reflect that eventuality. Scattering housing and second units on our
hillsides dooms us to a car-dependent lifestyle and adds ever more cars to the equation. Year to year, we can feel this
deterioration to our quality of life. Our dependency on the automobile is a big part of the reason. Small housing over
retail on Miller lets people choose to live within walking distance of stores, shopping, services and ready transit – so they
can live “car free” or at least with fewer of them. Miller Avenue, fostering green and sustainable design and a walkable,
transit-served neighborhood, can help us truly walk our talk ~ environmentally speaking ~ and get us future ready.
- Would you support separating the timeline, planning, environmental impact evaluation and public approval
process for Measure A street improvements from the MAPP?
No. It is better if it is done together as one vision. We spend too much time in our own traffic now. This is because our
land use and transportation planning has never been done as an integrated whole. It is time to try an integrated
approach. A bold vision providing more frequent transit and shuttles will give us the option to get out of our cars.
Then, we will see other ways of living and housing ourselves that are not car dependent. Some of us will choose to live
this way. Miller Avenue can be that place.