Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire: Louise Engel

Louise Engel

On Livability

The Tattler presents the 2016 election candidates questionnaire.  Candidates for elected office will answer questions broken down into topical sections that effect Emeryville residents. Responses will be released section by section rotating through all the responding candidates representing the City Council and School Board hopefuls.  

The order of presentation was chosen randomly. Regular Tattler stories will be interspersed in the 2016 election questionnaire.  Readers wishing to peruse all the answers by an individual may use the search bar function by entering ”Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire” with the name of the candidate and all of that candidate’s sections will be presented. Alternatively just typing in the name of the candidate will also work. 

There are six candidates running for three seats and all answered our questionnaire save candidate for City Council Brynnda Collins.  

Today, candidate for City Council Louise Engel answers questions on livability (please check the previously posted section 1 answers for this candidate's bio):

Section 4  Livability

Readers Note:  Louise Engel did not answer any questions on the livability section.  She did produce the following text as a response to all three questions:

The City staff present to the Council regular progress reports that look at City data that tracks business conditions in the broad sense, for example, through business openings and closures in Emeryville. Our economy, though, does not exist in a vacuum. Our businesses serve local and regional markets. Regional and national economic trends and conditions influence Emeryville’s businesses and economy. City staff join with our neighboring cities to share information to understand East Bay conditions.

A report that looks at regional indicators is one means to understand the economic health of our community. Recently the East Bay Economic Development Alliance released an economic study that includes Emeryville: “East Bay Outlook, 2016-2017.” The report concludes that East Bay cities will continue to experience positive circumstances in 2016. Workers within the high tech and similar categories choose to live here, attracted to Emeryville’s central location and more affordable housing (compared to other parts of the Bay area). This creates short term pressures on small business conditions, housing and quality of life. In the long term, this type of worker category has the potential to provide positive economic outcomes for Emeryville. That labor asset can be leveraged to attract businesses to our city and to foster further growth at firms already located here.

The following are excerpts from the report on pages 5 - 8:

Small Business:

“The East Bay is particularly friendly to small businesses and has a higher concentration of small firms compared with San Francisco and San Jose. Small businesses account for 45.5% of employment in the area, compared with 43.0% in San Francisco and 35.1% in San Jose. These small businesses have been a huge asset to the region during the recovery and current expansion. The distribution of employment in the East Bay indicates that the region is well equipped to support small businesses. It has successfully grown large businesses as well, although it is home to fewer large businesses compared with its neighbors.”

Labor Market:

“The East Bay labor market moved forward at a strong pace in 2015 [2.8%], matching statewide job growth rates and surpassing average national job growth rates. The region also boasted lower unemployment rates in 2015 [4.3%], compared to the state and nation.”

Business Sales:

“As local incomes rise, the East Bay economy also benefits from incrementally higher spending. Taxable sales growth in the East Bay outpaced the South Bay and San Francisco, as well as California. Taxable sales growth in the East Bay also came in faster than nationwide retail sales.”

East Bay Residents as Commuters:

“Outbound commuting among East Bay residents remains most common in high-skilled industries — which means that these workers are likely bringing home relatively higher wages. Many of these workers migrated to the East Bay in search of more affordable housing and improved quality of life while maintaining jobs in San Francisco or San Jose. They now represent a local asset that can be leveraged to attract businesses to the East Bay and to foster further growth at existing firms…. forecasts that payroll employment will continue to grow at roughly 2.0% during 2016.”

Housing pressures short term:

“….the East Bay benefits from these commuters over the short run through increased demand for housing and more spending in the local economy…..Over the longer term, these outbound commuters represent a significant local asset that can be leveraged for a variety of economic development efforts”

[for example] …. that can be leveraged to attract businesses to the East Bay and to foster further growth at existing firms.”

Tattler:  Other cities have implemented bans on ‘formula’ retail; that being national chains, franchises, fast food etc.  Emeryville already has a plethora of these kinds of businesses.  Do you see constituting a ban as something Emeryville should do moving forward?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer the question.

Tattler:  New construction is commonly too expensive for local retail to afford because of the high rents developers must charge to recoup their construction costs.  This is often cited as the reason Emeryville can’t seem to deliver the kind of locally serving retail Emeryville residents want.  The Tattler has proposed new development write off retail rents associated with their residential projects by forcing developers to put in writing their assurances to bring locally serving/non-formula retail.  Would you force this assurance guarantee from developers for new residential development?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer the question.

Tattler:  Emeryville has gotten worse over time in several key areas, specifically with regards to the things residents tell us they want to see in their town.  We have been told by a generation of City Council members by their voting records that we must accept that Emeryville must get worse over time. The Tattler has made a declaration that we should not permit new development to make our town worse insofar as can be measured.  So for instance in affordability, park acreage per resident, locally serving retail, ratio of home ownership to rentals; these hallmarks of livability (and more) are measurable and the effect new development has on our existing metrics can be measured.  We could have a blanket insistence that all new development not make the town get measurably worse in key areas or even an insistence that new development make our town get measurably better.  Would you support this?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer the question.

Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire: Louise Engel

Parks/Open Space &

Sherwin Williams Project:

Louise Engel

The Tattler presents the 2016 election candidates questionnaire.  Candidates for elected office will answer questions broken down into topical sections that effect Emeryville residents. Responses will be released section by section rotating through all the responding candidates representing the City Council and School Board hopefuls.  

The order of presentation was chosen randomly. Regular Tattler stories will be interspersed in the 2016 election questionnaire.  Readers wishing to peruse all the answers by an individual may use the search bar function by entering ”Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire” with the name of the candidate and all of that candidate’s sections will be presented. Alternatively just typing in the name of the candidate will also work. 

There are six candidates running for three seats and all answered our questionnaire save candidate for City Council Brynnda Collins.  

Today, candidate for City Council Louise Engel answers questions on parks/open space and the Sherwin Williams development proposal (please check the previously posted section 1 answers for this candidate's bio):

Section 2   Parks/Open Space

Our General Plan says Emeryville is dramatically underserved in parks.   The 26 acres we have now (includes “linear” parks, essentially glorified sidewalks) must be increased by   21-26 acres within twelve years if our General Plan is to be honored.   However something must change in Emeryville if this is to be achieved because with each passing year, we drift farther away from our goal.   Our park fees obtained from developers have not kept pace with our needs.

Tatter:  City planners use the metric of residents per acre of park land to measure how well a city’s residents are being served.   Oakland is well served with park/open space at approximately 67 residents per acre.   Emeryville currently has about 500 residents per acre.   After peaking in the late 1970’s, Emeryville’s ratio of residents per acre of park/open space has gone down every year since then, despite a few small parks having been built.   This disturbing downward trend has actually accelerated over the last 10 years. Increasing developers park fees is unlikely to help much moving forward owing to the limited amount of developable land left.   Acknowledging all this, what can be done to build the amount of park land we say we want?  

Louise Engel:  Parks and open space enhance every community by contributing to our overall well-being as we live within this hectic, urban world. Through intense urban redevelopment over the past 20 years, the City evolved from a heavy industry focus, with strip commercial alongside an older housing stock. Emeryville occupies only 1.2 square miles. About 20 percent of the land is roads, highways and other rights of way.  Interstate freeways 80, 880 and 580 bound and/or split the City neighborhoods. Our arterial streets experience heavy commute traffic. Major railroad lines run through the town to transport people, Amtrak, and cargo to points north and south. 

Emeryville’s small geographic size, its central location and the existing transportation systems – people and cargo movers - contribute to the challenge of adhering to optimum standards for park and open space. Our City Parks and Recreation Committee members actively pursue alternative recreation options. For example, at its March meeting this year, the committee discussed parklets: Temescal Creek Park and placing adult fitness equipment in Stanford Avenue Park.

Tattler:  Our General Plan is very clear on parks/open space; we need more than we have, twice as much.   But the disconnect between what the people say they want and what they’re getting is extreme in Emeryville.   There seems to be no political will to follow the General Plan once politicians get in office.   Politicians routinely say they’re going to turn this around but they have not yet done so.   And yet the voters keep voting for these politicians.   Several council members have been re-elected over and over again. Does this tell you the people don’t really want parks, regardless of what they say?   Are you willing to consider amending our General Plan to delete parks if you can’t or won’t deliver on your promise to build more so at least our guiding document will accurately reflect reality and not be a pie-in-the-sky fantasy meant to elect dishonest politicians?   Considering all this, at what point should the General Plan be considered a failure?

Louise Engel:  The public does play a key role in Emeryville’s ability to achieve a goal such as parks/open space. Registered voters elect our City Council which has three positions up for election this November 8th. Citizens participate on committees that study an issue along with the professional assistance of City staff. The decision making process involves interaction among competing interests. Stakeholders and influencers weigh in with their special interests that pertain to development and land changes that impact potential park/ open space. 

In addition State laws and regulations impose another layer of scrutiny on City actions. For example, in March 2016, the City Council approved an annual progress report on the General Plan. The report highlighted progress on updating the housing plan elements as well as the other plan elements which would include parks and open space. The City then submitted that report to the State, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the California Department of Housing and Community Development, as required by law. 

Section 3   Sherwin Williams Project

The Sherwin Williams development project is a mostly residential proposal earmarked for the last large piece of fallow land left in Emeryville.   This single project could easily increase Emeryville’s population by more than 10%.   At 540 all rental residential units planned as well as some office space and a small amount of retail, this project promises to be very consequential for our town for better or worse.

Readers Note:  Louise Engel did not answer any questions on the Sherwin Williams section.  She did produce the following text as a response to all five questions:

Louise Engel:  An infill development proposal, reuse of land, challenges all of the ways in which our elected officials work through balancing the City’s regulatory framework with the interests of neighbors alongside those of the developer. The developer seeks to create a planned unit development that is economically viable.  There are no easy answers.

The proposal to develop the Sherwin Williams project site has undergone City review for more than 4 years. The Planning Commission and City Council held study sessions in fall of 2013. Earlier this year 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. During the environmental review process the applicant worked with neighborhood groups and submitted a revised application for the project to the Planning Commission in July for its review. 

At the recent September meeting, the Emeryville City Council again considered extensive input from staff; public comment from businesses, neighborhood groups and individuals. Many of the issue areas, described in the five questions posed above, were among those raised in that public forum. Many concerned people have actively participated to shape, and to reshape the proposal, to achieve an outcome responsive to maintaining a quality of life here in Emeryville.

Working together as a collaborative committee, PARC, the nearby neighborhood stakeholder group, is achieving changes to the project that are directly meaningful to their daily lives. This citizen initiated committee provides an example of civic engagement that gives them a united voice coupled with leverage to effect their neighborhood for years to come. 

Tattler:  The Sherwin Williams developers propose to add 2.08 acres of public park on the site.   Using the standard formula of 2 people per unit (more if the project attracts families as the developers say it will), the project will come in at about 520 residents per acre and help bring down Emeryville’s already deplorable residents/park acre average. Should negative skewing of our park/residents ratio like this be a disqualifying condition for this project?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer

Tattler:  The Sherwin Williams site is relatively cheap since it is fallow.   Because our General Plan requires us to build many more acres of parks within 12 years and because it’s cheaper for the City to buy fallow land than land with buildings already on it for this purpose, and because the City of Emeryville has the capacity to pass a park bond to raise revenue for this, is making the Sherwin Williams site a large park a rational choice?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer

Tattler:  With more than 500 parking spaces, this project can be fairly called another Emeryville ‘drive-in drive-out’ residential development.   Do you see adding this many cars to our streets as being offset by any benefits to existing residents by the project’s amenities?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer

Tattler:  Is Emeryville right now not up to snuff, a less-than-desirable place to live that can only be improved by the Sherwin Williams project going in as proposed?   Do we ‘need’ the Sherwin Williams development?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer

Tattler:  The project is hemmed in on the west by the rail road tracks and on the north by land slated for future development by Novartis, to the east is the Horton Street Bike Boulevard that our General Plan forbids adding more traffic to. How will the retail there be viable with these constraints let alone the office space and the residential units?

Louise Engel:  Did not answer

Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire: Louise Engel

Housing Affordability: 

Louise Engel

The Tattler presents the 2016 election candidates questionnaire.  Candidates for elected office will answer questions broken down into topical sections that effect Emeryville residents. Responses will be released section by section rotating through all the responding candidates representing the City Council and School Board hopefuls.  

The order of presentation was chosen randomly. Regular Tattler stories will be interspersed in the 2016 election questionnaire.  Readers wishing to peruse all the answers by an individual may use the search bar function by entering ”Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire” with the name of the candidate and all of that candidate’s sections will be presented. Alternatively just typing in the name of the candidate will also work. 

There are six candidates running for three seats and all answered our questionnaire save candidate for City Council Brynnda Collins.  

Today, candidate for City Council Louise Engel, who answers questions on affordable housing:

Louise Engel

Bio:
Experience: I have been an owner of a small business, as a Consultant and Project Manager, with an Emeryville City license for 20 years. In other jobs, I achieved cooperative resolution on Bay Area developments with land use and environmental planning issues: mixed-use with housing, industrial, airport, and seaport developments. I am a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (A.I.C.P.) and the Association of Environmental Professionals (A.E.P.). My skill sets give me hands-on knowledge for balancing stakeholder interests in civic affairs.

Section 1 Housing Affordability

With each passing year, Emeryville becomes less affordable, regardless of the epic residential building spree over the last 20 years here.  Emeryville has never built housing at a pace even close to what we have done recently.  And yet, affordable housing remains Emeryville’s most intractable problem most people agree.

Tattler: Emeryville’s affordability rate right now is approximately 11% city-wide according to City Hall using their metrics.  We had more than 30 years of the Emeryville Redevelopment Agency (RDA) who’s primary function was providing affordable housing and 11% is the sum total we could muster with all the largess that agency could bring to bear.  How do you see us raising the 11% average appreciably in the post Redevelopment Agency era? 

Louise Engel:  The ability to afford housing in this region burdened with a high cost of living effects all of us who live in Emeryville. High living costs effect, for example: rental rates; the ability of “first time” home buyers to buy; and escalating association fees in residential complexes for those who already own. Pooling resources through county wide measures is one way for Emeryville to work together with other East Bay cities. For example, during the upcoming November 8, 2016 General Elections, voters in Alameda County will vote on whether or not to approve an affordable housing bond ballot measure. If the measure passes, funds for the homeowner programs and rental innovation program funds will be allocated countywide. Emeryville would have a share in that pool of funds.
On May 4 this year, Mayor Dianne Martinez attended the 20^th Annual Affordable Housing Leadership Awards ceremony of the Non-Profit Housing (NPH) Association of Northern California. Mayor Martinez received a Leadership Award on behalf of the City of Emeryville. NPH granted the award to Emeryville because of the City Council’s policy of setting aside 20% of our “boomerang” funds (the portion of the former Redevelopment Agency tax increment that flows to the City) for affordable housing.

Tattler:  Emeryville, formerly an industrial wasteland with lots of abandoned warehouses and factories in the 1980’s has been almost completely rebuilt now with lots of housing and shopping centers.  Seeing so little fallow land left and the housing stock that we have is mostly less than 25 years old, where will we build the affordable housing that we need?

Louise Engel:  The City owns a site at the corner of 43^rd and San Pablo Avenue. A city recreation center occupied the temporary structure before the activity moved to the newly opened Emeryville Center of Community Life (ECCL). Emeryville is currently reviewing the site for an affordable senior housing project.

Tattler:  Urban density is generally recognized as a net positive thing.  However, increasing density also comes with its own problems, overcrowding of parks and traffic being among them.  Emeryville right now has more than 200% of recommended market rate housing according to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).  How do you suggest we increase affordability without increasing our existing 200% of market rate housing more?  Is ABAG wrong?

Louise Engel:  Single, detached housing is often out of the reach of first time home buyers who then look to alternative ownership. For example, residents discuss how they might make the financial change from a rental to condominium ownership. Emeryville’s “down payment assistance program” is available for the purchase of market rate units by people with a moderate income (or below) who are first time home buyers. That’s how my niece became a condominium owner through a similar program in Portland, Oregon.

Tattler:  'Supply and demand' is central to classical economics as everyone knows.  Here in Emeryville, developers and some others are using this argument to forward a position that the problem in Emeryville is that we haven't been building enough housing and that's why its so expensive here.  Yet at 200% ABAG recommendations for market rate housing (and going higher), the more we build, the higher the housing costs go.  Neighboring cities have built less than 100% of ABAG recommendations.  Does Emeryville have to be a sacrifice zone for the greater region to satiate the supply and demand axiom posited by some?

Louise Engel:  The Sherwin Williams development project is a mixed use proposal that galvanized citizens within the surrounding neighborhoods: the citizen initiated committee, PARC. This collaborative group is working within the City’s proposal review process. The project proposes residential, office and retail/restaurant uses. The developer seeks a change in the number of residential units. City rules allow 260+ units. The project proposes 520+ units.
The City review process allows the neighborhood people to join together with a united voice. Citizens can achieve leverage to influence the developer. The developer did respond to many to the neighborhood concerns. If approved and developed, the hours and hours of hard work together would shape this evolving neighborhood.