Following “a year of housing plan workshops” to identify locations for 6,978 state-mandated residential units, the Chino City Council has set a special election for June 7. Voters will be asked to approve higher density at locations “chosen for their proximity to transportation, services and potential jobs.”
I am certain these recommendations are thoughtful, and comply with Measure M. Yet, what will happen if voters say “no?”
Sacramento dictates local infrastructure but gives no assistance or consideration for the quality-of-life of our residents, current and future.
Before voting, will we have reliable data on how these “units” will further impact local gridlock, or ensure the health and safety of 15,000-plus new residents needing more classrooms, shorter response times, and resolution to the outages and flooding we endure with constantly strained utilities?
We have yet to see new construction by out-of-town developers translate to permanent, meaningful employment for local manufacturing, medical, retail, and restaurants—we either commute out of county, work remotely, or lack daycare.
Unanswered “help wanted” signs are everywhere. Do you ever wonder why a local pizza delivery now takes 2.5 hours?
Imagine driving, shopping, or living near these “overlay” locations at Central Avenue north of the freeway, Park Place behind the hospital, or Edison and Euclid near College Park and The Preserve.
Then ask if these “underused” locations can tolerate more density, while residents in older neighborhoods, as well as the newer developments, already feel underserved.
My vote is for sustainable growth in the Chino Valley. So far, Sacramento’s one-size-fits all demands on this diverse state are not optimal: redevelopment agencies, ADU regulations, district elections, and more.
When ranked state-by-state, national relocation studies confirm California is in last place—50. It is 2022; let us demand Sacramento help us build back better before we build back more.