Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Richmond, California, Riviera Residential Development Initiative, Measure N (June 2016)
| Measure N: Richmond Riviera Residential Development Initiative |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| June 7, 2016 |
| Status: |
 Defeated
|
| Topic: |
| Local zoning, land use and development |
| Related articles |
| Local zoning, land use and development on the ballot June 7, 2016 ballot measures in California Contra Costa County, California ballot measures |
| See also |
| Richmond, California |
A citizen initiative to allow the Riviera Residential Development was on the ballot for Richmond voters in Contra Costa County, California, on June 7, 2016. It was defeated.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of enacting an initiative designed to amend zoning laws and require the city council to amend zoning laws to allow the construction of the Riviera Residential Development, a 59-unit residential development project proposed for 4.92 acres at Marina Way South and Hall Avenue. |
| A no vote was a vote against the initiative and the proposed Riviera Residential Development project. |
Election results
| Richmond, Measure N | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| No | 13,532 | 66.24% | ||
| Yes | 6,898 | 33.76% | ||
- Election results from Contra Costa County Elections Office
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[1]
| “ |
Shall the ordinance to amend the Richmond General Plan 2030 to allow a 59 unit single family detached project on a site south of the intersection of Marina Way South and Hall and approve a development agreement and related actions be adopted? [2] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the Richmond City Attorney :
| “ |
Voter approval of Measure N (the “Initiative”) would authorize a private development known as the Richmond Riviera Residential Development (the “Project”) consisting of 59 single-family detached houses on an approximately 4.92 acre site south of the intersection of Marina Way South and Hall Avenue, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay (the “Property”). The Initiative would amend the City’s General Plan to allow “detached and attached single family units” on the Property. Arguably, this amendment would also allow such uses in other areas of the City that have a similar land use designation. The Initiative would provide that the land use designations applicable to the Property establish a maximum density, but not a minimum density. This language may cause an internal inconsistency in the General Plan, where the definition of Major Activity Center and certain General Plan policies contemplate a high-density, mixed-use project for the Property. The Initiative would approve a Planned Area zoning designation for the Property, along with development standards that would override existing zoning and development standards on the site. The Initiative states that the City’s Municipal Code, and all other City ordinances, policies and programs must be amended to implement the Initiative and ensure consistency between the Initiative, the General Plan and the Municipal Code. A legal question exists as to whether an initiative that directs a city council to perform a legislative act, such as amending an ordinance, is valid. The Initiative includes a Development Agreement (“Agreement”) that would be entered into between the City and Property owner. The Agreement would provide the Property owner with the right to use and develop the Property as specified in the Agreement and the Initiative. The Agreement provides, among other things, that the City cannot impose any requirement on the Property owner to initiate or complete development of the Property within any particular period of time. The Agreement would be in effect until December 31, 2020, unless the Project is completed earlier or the Agreement is otherwise modified, terminated or extended pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, including voter approval on behalf of City. The Initiative would not require environmental review by the City under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Initiative could be amended by the voters. [2] |
” |
| —Richmond City Attorney [1] | ||
Support
Supporters
The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of the measure:[1]
- Dennis Dalton, Co-Chair, Protect Richmond’s Shoreline Supporting Measure N, Sponsored by Virtual Development Corporation
- Ron Karren, Member, Protect Richmond’s Shoreline Supporting Measure N, Sponsored by Virtual Development Corporation
- Karen Murphy, Retired, Marina Bay Resident
Arguments in favor
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[1]
| “ |
A “YES” vote on Measure N will stop the view-blocking, high-rise apartment and condominium buildings currently zoned for our waterfront and replace them with 59 single-family homes for middle-class families. These homes will be some of the most environmentally friendly in the Bay Area, with designs that include solar panels, smart home technology, efficient irrigation systems, and drought-tolerant landscaping. The project also provides a walkable community with convenient, public access to the Bay Trail, parks, and the new ferry terminal. Additionally, one acre of land will be donated to provide more than 30 affordable houses dedicated to our public school teachers. It begins to address one of our biggest obstacles in retaining good teachers by making sure they can afford to live in the city where they work. The new homes that come with a “YES” vote will create up to one hundred jobs, more than $3,500,000 in onetime revenues for the city, and more than $500,000 each year in estimated property taxes. Richmond is facing serious financial struggles, and our city can use these new funds to help make our community safer by investing in our police and fire fighters and making our schools stronger for generations to come. A “YES” vote on Measure N sets a standard for our shoreline that respects our environment and Richmond’s residents, providing them the services and benefits they expect and deserve.[2] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official argument against the measure:[1]
- Tom Butt, Richmond Mayor
- Gayle McLaughlin, Richmond Councilmember and former Mayor
Arguments against
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[1]
| “ |
Mayor Tom Butt and former Mayor Gayle McLaughlin Urge a No Vote on the Richmond Riviera project. We don’t always agree but we both agree that the Richmond Riviera scheme is a bad deal for Richmond. The developer is trying to avoid the public process, which by law includes environmental review, public scrutiny and a public planning process. The developer is dodging public scrutiny by avoiding: • Design Review; • Planning Commission; • The public process to change the General Plan; and the • City Council. The so-called “development agreement” is nothing but a one-sided ‘developer gets it all’ scheme that lets the developer make a fortune and gives the community nothing. And while subverting the public process is enough to vote against Measure N, it is simply the wrong project for our waterfront. The developer wants to build 59 waterfront homes for the rich instead of building housing for everyone. The Richmond Riviera is elitist, building 59 large houses that only the wealthy can afford. Richmond needs more market rate and affordable housing, building homes only for the rich isn’t fair and makes our housing problem even worse. And finally, the Richmond Riviera project doesn’t fit with Richmond’s long-term vision for our waterfront. It will destroy plans for the new ferry service to San Francisco, and will prevent Marina Bay from attracting amenities such as shops, restaurants, and grocery stores. Measure N serves the interest of one Florida developer – Richard Poe – and doesn’t serve the public good. The public process should not be pushed aside simply to meet the desires of a greedy developer. Join the Richmond business community, Richmond Progressive Alliance, Contra Costa Central Labor Council, Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council and vote No on N. It’s bad for Richmond.[2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a successful initiative petition campaign.
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Richmond Local zoning, land use and development. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
