Sorry, a friend suggested I create a blog and name it 'Bacon Bits'. I couldn't resist. :)

October 19, 2008 - Question about State Route 84

I wrote the following in a response to a question about State Route 84:

I oppose the spending of $200 million on the proposed East-West Connector project.

About 12 years ago, I was a Transportation Engineer who worked on the original five scenarios for the Route 84 project. At the time, I looked at the traffic flows and the geography of the area and I couldn’t figure out why this road was needed. There was a large traffic generator to the west, leading to the Dumbarton Bridge, but there was nothing to the east of the project to generate the amount of traffic that one would expect with a project of this magnitude.

There was a historic reason for the roadway. There was a plan to create a freeway near Mission Boulevard named the “Mission” or “Foothill” freeway. But this freeway never got approved and was eventually dropped by Caltrans in 2004. (The name of the roadway is now technically the ‘East-West Connector’ as Caltrans no longer considers it a state roadway project.)

Part of the reason given for building such an expensive roadway was that future growth in the area would be such that this level of roadway would be needed. While some growth has occurred in the area, it hasn’t resulted in traffic that requires major improvements. It doesn’t appear that future growth in the area will result in the new roadway being warranted.

There have been financial dealings that appear to have pushed Fremont into approving this roadway even if it was not interested in the roadway itself. Below is from an article in the Argus in April of 2006 describing how the Council reversed a position they’d held for 20 years and voted to proceed with the project:

That vote came about two weeks after a Nov. 9 letter from Caltrans expressing support for use of up to $42 million in state funds to complete key phases of the Mission Boulevard-Interstate 880 interchange project, Pierson said. The funds are tied to Assembly Bill 1462, legislation sponsored by state Assemblyman Alberto Torrico, D-Newark, that became law in October 2005.

The bill's funds, which would come from Caltrans selling excess land related to the Route 84 project, was a key factor in getting Fremont's support for Option 2, city officials said.

In other words, funds from the sale of some of the land associated with the Route 84 project could be used to fund the Mission/880 interchange. These are two separate projects that should be considered separately based on their own merits.

The bottom line is that this project will cost about $200 million. Regardless of the level of City funds involved, this project is not needed. To spend this much money on a project like this in these economic times is simply irresponsible.

October 13, 2008 - PTA Publishes Candidate Responses to Questions

The PTA published the answers that candidates provided to their questions about schools. These can be found at:

     http://fremontcouncilpta.org/election08.php

October 8, 2008 - Question about Development at Patterson Ranch

A number of people have asked me my thoughts about the proposed Patterson Ranch development: Below is what I said at a LWV forum in response to a question about this:

If elected, I would vote against the proposed Patterson Ranch development. This issue made me realize that I have significant disagreements with the way our current City Council is running our city.

The area in question is currently zoned for about 250 homes. The current proposal has 840 homes (some in three story apartments), another strip mall, an elementary school, a church and a large sports park. This would require a General Plan amendment which the council has indicated that they will approve. I can’t imagine why the developer is being given this gift to over-develop an area that is right next to Coyote Hills Regional Park.

A professional poll was done that determined that, by far, the majority of Fremont residents did not want to see this large of a development next to Coyote Hills. At City Council meetings, many residents expressed their concerns about this project. As with the Sabercat project, the public outrage doesn’t seem to concern the current council.

Some will argue that the current housing element requires us to re-zone to allow for more housing. It’s simply not true. The only area that we are deficient in our housing requirements is in the below market level homes. And we only need about 350 of these.

We don’t need these homes. They will change the nature of that area for the worse. The public doesn’t want it. It will make our City’s financial problems worse. And yet, as mentioned, we have every indication that our City Council is going to approve this project.

October 6, 2008 - Question about a Performing Arts Center

I was asked my thoughts on a Performing Arts Center. Below was the reply that I gave:

In general, Fremont lacks a number of items that could help establish a sense of identity and a sense of community. While the value of identity and community is difficult to quantify, I feel it's very important for the health of our city. They provide quality of life for Fremont's residents, which is exactly what we need to encourage more businesses to move here.

A Performing Arts Center would certainly provide identity and a sense of community. I would love to see such a facility in Fremont. If we could somehow use the existing Centervile Theater, this could provide a cost-effective way of making this happen.

Any candidate can, and probably will, say they are for spending money on the arts. I am no different. The question is what policies do they have that will actually generate revenue for the city. My main platform element is one of balanced development. I believe that the City has focused too much on residential development which doesn't pay for itself in the long run. We need to focus on bringing more businesses into Fremont before we can think about providing amenities such as a Performing Arts Center or a youth athletic facility.

September 6, 2008 - A's Discuss Their Transportation Plans in the Fremont Bulletin

The Fremont Bulletin had an article in their September 5th edition about the A's transportation plans. The meeting was an overview of a presentation given by Paul Menacker of Wolff Urban Development LLC to the Fremont Rotary Club.

The first thing that strikes me is that it's obvious their transit plans are incomplete. The article notes "... the A's have already contacted BART ..." and "The team is also negotiating with AC Transit, Capitol Corridor, and the Altamont Commuter Express." These comments clearly indicate they are still in the planning stage and that they do not have any concrete transit plans at this point.

They expect that 10,862 auto trips will be generated for each game. This is the equivalent of nearly five lanes of freeway traffic running at capacity for one hour. Interstate 880 is already congested in the afternoon. This also doesn't consider the traffic from the 3,150 homes that will generate about 3,000 auto trips of their own during the p.m. peak hour. And if there isn't an adequate transit plan, these numbers would increase.

The traffic improvements mentioned, adding an extra turn lane here and there, could be described as 'tinkering at the edges'. The surface streets in the area of the ballpark simply can't handle an additional 10,682 auto trips, even with these minor improvements.

The article says there will be 42 weekday evening games. Given 250 work days in a year, this is about one night in six that one's commute home would be subjected to ballpark traffic. The 13 weekday afternoon games could also impact one's afternoon commute.

The article notes that 50 merchants have written letters supporting the project. They obviously believe that a ballpark somehow generates 'economic benefit' to the surrounding area. The existing Oakland Colisuem and Oracle Arena have failed to do that in Oakland. Why would this work in Fremont when it didn't work in Oakland? What business would want to locate close to an area with a significant traffic problem on over 80 days of the year?

Is it best for Fremont to sacrifice an area that could be the home of good-paying jobs and convert into one that has 3,150 homes? I would argue that the former would be far better for Fremont's economy. I would rather that Fremont be put 'on the map' by getting a large Silicon Valley company to make their home here.

July 29, 2008 - Hayward City Council Meeting on Transit-Oriented Development

I was asked by a Hayward City Councilperson to speak at one of their meetings on transit-oriented development near the South Hayward BART Station. Here is what I had to say:

"Good evening council members and thank you for the opportunity to speak on the subject of the South Hayward BART and Mission Boulevard study. My name is Vinnie Bacon and I’m on the Executive Committee of the Southern Alameda County group of the Sierra Club.

"First of all I want to say that the design represented in this study is the type of development that the Sierra Club applauds. I want to thank you for your consideration of this type of development. Today’s events are requiring us to look at ways to reduce our usage of fossil fuels for environmental and economic reasons. This type of development does just that while also providing a great place for people to live and shop. This project represents good forward thinking on your part.

"One thing I want to caution you about is the tendency in suburban environments such as Hayward to try and tone down some of the more urban aspects of this type of development to make it more in line with the existing suburban landscape. For example, the densities proposed here are much higher than the rest of Hayward. However, in order for transit-oriented development to function properly, higher densities are required.

"Not surprisingly, studies have shown a very strong correlation between higher densities and lower vehicle miles traveled (VMT). In order to get people out of their cars, we need to provide enough activity that people can get to within walking distance. Higher densities helps make that happen.

"Another effect of higher densities is that it provides more economic stimulus for the retail areas to succeed. The type of businesses in this area should have ample pedestrian orientation. If too low of densities are used, there simply won’t be enough people around to make this retail viable.

"Finally, the increased number of people actually serves to create a safer community. More people walking around the neighborhood results in less crime."

July 14, 2008 - Question about School Lottery

In campaigning, I was asked my opinion about school lotteries. The idea behind this is that schools should give priorities to those who have been living in an area the longest amount of time. I think this is a fair idea. I like the fact that people know what they're getting into. While realtors might hate this idea, I think new home owners should be specifically told where they would stand in the lottery. People might buy a home across the street from a school thinking that they would be able to have their child attend that school, only to find they're now on the end of a long waiting list to get in that school. If there is going to be such a system, then we need to make sure the rules of this are clearly spelled out to everyone involved.

The big question for me is how did we get to this state where our schools are so overcrowded that someone buying a home across the street from a school may not be able to get their children into that school. The answer is obviously that development decisions were made that did not consider where the children from these developments would go to school.

Of course, we would never allow a development that didn't have water and sewer hookups available. I feel that we should think in a similar manner regarding schools. If a proposed development does not have a clear, funded answer as to where these kids should go to school, then we should not permit that development to go forward. The project proponents would need to go back to the drawing board and figure out how to adequately provide the schools that the project requires.

July 12, 2008 - First Day of Active Campaigning

Today we began active campaigning by tabling at Trader Joe's. It was great to get out there and talk with large numbers of random voters. The general concerns that I heard from people, and their responses to my platform, convinced me that I am on the right track to winning a seat on the City Council. I look forward to getting out there again and again until November 4. As one of my campaign volunteers noted today "This is the fun part of the campaign."

July 7, 2008 - Comment on Safe Routes to School in Ardenwood

I was asked by an Ardenwood school parents to review emails that had been circulated by the City to address problems with routes used by students to get to school. Some of these routes are on high-speed roads which create unsafe conditions. Below is my reply:

"The techniques that were recommended by the City's traffic engineers (bulb-outs and raised crosswalks) are standard measures to reduce motorists speeds in areas where children may be present. This is a common problem that makes up much of the transportation engineering field today. Many older city standards considered the motorists first and insisted that streets be wide, straight and with adequate sight distance. The result is that motorists feel safe on these roads and naturally drive faster on them.

"By using bulb-outs, raised crosswalks, medians or a number of other methods, you're making the motorists slow down as the road is no longer as straight, wide and/or as flat as it was. Raised crosswalks are good ideas as they are basically putting a speed bump right where kids cross. Let's hope that the funding can be found for these improvements.

"The Safe Route To School program helps interested parties determine the best routes for children. I have helped prepare these studies in the past. When cities are designed primarily to accomodate high-speed traffic, then need for these types of studies is obvious.

"Modern urban design recognizes that certain areas should be designed with the pedestrian in mind. Newer developments can be designed using these principles as opposed to having to retrofit them later (i.e. add speed bumps) when it's realized that there are pedestrian safety issues. Pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods and retail areas are more enjoyable places to spend time and help promote a sense of community."

June 12, 2008 - Meeting with Police in Ardenwood

This was a meeting that was put on by the Fremont Police Department. There had been a rash of burglaries in the Ardenwood area. The police and Councilmember Steve Cho noted that the City's finances lead to the City having one of the lowest officer per resident ratio amongst many neighboring cities. This lack of officers has led to the City to institute a policy of not responding to burglar alarms unless the alarm is verified (i.e. confirmed by someone reporting suspicious behavior). The officers argued that this policy does not lead to more burglaries as 99% of these reports are false alarms.

It is sad that the City can not provide a service that it has in the past. The police are simply stretched too thin. One of our top priorities needs to be implementing policies that don't put additional demands on our city services and doing what we can to bring businesses into Fremont. Business and job growth is the surest way to solve our City's financial concerns.

May 17, 2008 - Campaign Kickoff Event

Our Campaign Kickoff event was held on May 17 at the Community Center if Fremont's Central Park. We all enjoyed fine music and good food on a wonderful day in the park. The link below contains video of the talk I gave as well as the transcript.

Link to Events Page with videos and a transcript of Vinnie's talk.

April 27, 2008 - Comment on Trip to China

I was asked by someone on the Mission San Jose Yahoo! group what I thought about the trip to China that some Fremont officials went on. Here is my comment:

"This trip to China is another example of Fremont ’s failed economic development policies. Fremont government seems to think if you build it they will come. This is a development strategy that has been called “smokestack chasing” - build office parks and then travel around begging businesses to relocate here. But this policy doesn’t work. Why? Because today’s high tech companies have lots of options for location and they want to be in a place that helps them attract the best workers. That is why, as Richard Florida explained in his recent book, "The Rise of the Creative Class", companies prefer to locate in areas with lots of amenities like charming, walkable neighborhoods, beautiful open space, and diverse cultural activities. Fremont needs to focus on developing from within – supporting those gems that we have like unique neighborhood commercial districts and independent businesses – instead of approving soulless strip mall after soulless office park, hoping to attract the best and the brightest.

"It's just not working.

"Furthermore, with today’s tight city budgets, we need council members that will think twice before approving expenditures like this. As a Councilperson, I would be a strong fiscal conservative. I would only approve or participate in trips like this if there was a clear potential benefit to the City. I would consider all potential economic development expenditures in the context of an overall economic development strategy. Every dollar spent on a trip like this is a dollar that could be spent on something much more effective."

March 30, 2008 - First Blog

In starting to blog the campaign activity, I decided to go back and capture some historical events that have happened up to this point in time.