Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

Month: July 2020

  • City Council Should Heed Planning Commission’s University Mall Recommendation

    Screen Shot 2020-07-09 at 2.54.07 PMBy Greg Rowe

    Some Davis residents have publicly questioned the planning commission’s May 27 unanimous rejection of the University Commons redevelopment proposal.  After carefully evaluating this project for 18 months, I suggest that decision reflects the community’s expectation that the commission will uphold good land use practices and support neighborhood integrity.   

    Instead of simply modernizing University Mall, the owner (Brixmor) wants to convert it to a large student housing complex with retail, offices and other features to purportedly serve community needs.  Brixmor’s March 2018 application included 174 housing units comprising 552 bedrooms within 208,606 square feet (sf). But 8 months later when the city issued an EIR “Notice of Preparation” (NOP), the apartments had increased by 90 units and almost doubled in area to 412,000 sf with 894 beds. There was no explanation for this increase.  

    The NOP said the 264 apartments would consist of 66 one-bedroom units, 104 two-bedrooms, 28 three-bedrooms, and 66 four-bedroom units (25%), focused on student bed rentals. But as I explained at the May hearing, a 2019 survey of Davis apartment complexes revealed that 76% of surveyed units have only 1 or 2 bedrooms. Units with 4 or more bedrooms comprise just 6% of surveyed apartments, compared to the 25% sought for University Commons. These factors clearly reveal Brixmor’s intent to exclusively cater to student renters because families are better served by conventional apartments.

    (more…)

  • Local Clergy Comment on Affordable Housing

    The owners of the University Mall, the Brixmor Property Group, have applied to the City for permission to demolish the existing shopping center and replace it with a mixed-use project of 264 apartments and 136,000 sq ft ground-floor retail.

    We also note that Commissioner Darryl Rutherford has stated that the Commissioners themselves had multiple objections. "I'm a little disappointed in what we're seeing here." He called the proposed affordable housing plan ($600,000 in lieu fees) "an atrocity" and a "slap in the face."

    Historically, Davis once had one of the strongest inclusionary housing requirements in the state. That policy intended to create affordable units in every major rental project built in Davis, enabling low-income families to live in Davis, and create the possibility of a robustly diverse community. Many minority households whose members work in Davis are part of the low-income population and these affordable units were often their only entry to living and working in Davis.

    However, of the 264 apartments being given permission to be built on the University Mall site in Davis, not one of those 264 units will be set aside as an affordable unit.

    (more…)

  • DJUSD, “Representation is crucial”

    Discussions following the school board’s decision to fill Dr. Pickett’s seat exposed many deep feelings. As I listen, I grow increasingly frustrated that people of color are again repressed from a decision-making position.

    Assuming good will, the issues are more deep-seated than what I hear. The trustees who made the decision believe they chose the best candidate. They chose from their perspective, values and experiences. The hidden flaw in all decisions is unconscious bias. We only see what our minds allow us to, unless we choose to uncover our shadows.

    The next decision-making piece is the importance of representation. Reflect on these scenarios:

    You’re a man, looking at a board of all women. Do you feel your voice will be represented?

    You’re a woman, looking at an all-male board. Do you feel your voice will be heard?

    You’re white, looking at a board where every member is a POC. Do you feel your voice will be represented?

    You’re a POC, looking at an all-white board. Do you feel your voice will be heard?

    The last point is choosing the best candidate. As a leadership coach, I encourage clients to consider the best candidate, looking beyond qualifications. What an organization needs when hiring is based on measured results, and accountability to the mission and goals. Start with determining the minimum competency requirements, followed by what characteristics and skills are needed to fulfill the organization’s mission. The most qualified candidate is the one who meets the required qualifications and best matches the characteristics and skills needed to fill those gaps.

    Using this lens to fill Dr. Pickett’s seat, what are the board’s gap areas? The final candidates met the qualifications. According to the district, its mission is fulfilled, in part, through a system characterized by a “diverse and inclusive culture.” How can the culture be diverse and inclusive if its board doesn’t represent the students and families? When choosing the most qualified, I believe these well-intentioned trustees missed an opportunity to follow DJUSD’s values and mission.

    This only perpetuates a skewed power system. If the board doesn’t diversify, there’s less chance that the administration and staff will. Representation is crucial for young people of color, navigating a world that demonstrates there’s no place for them.

    What does leadership do now? It looks in the mirror, admits its blind spots and unconscious bias, and stands up for what’s right.

    Tracy Tomasky

  • David Taormino and Bretton Woods Are Attempting a “Bait-and-Switch” with the Davis-Based Buyers Program

    by Alan Pryor

    Summary

    David Taormino, the developer of the Bretton Woods senior housing development just west of Sutter Hospital, is trying to pull another fast one on the City of Davis' senior population. Taormino just proposed, and City Staff supports, that the Davis-Based Buyers Program be rescinded from the signed Development Agreement for the Project that already exists between him and the City. This local senior-preferential buying program reserved 90% of the 560 new homes in the project for seniors that have a pre-existing connection to the City of Davis. It promised that the project would be for local or Davis-connected seniors and not just a high-end enclave for rich retirees fleeing from the Bay Area.

    This requirement to preferentially sell to existing Davis seniors was widely promoted and promised to voters in actual ballot language when the project was approved in the November, 2018 general election (then known as the West Davis Active Adult Community). Well, after Taormino and all his lawyers and the Davis City Council all loudly and adamantly proclaimed the project was definitely and undeniably legal in all respects, now David Taormino claims he has new "concerns" about the legality of the program and he wants to rescind it and its promises to Davis seniors. There has been no new legal opinion or justification provided by Mr. Taormino to substantiate this newfound concern.

    Of course the real reason that Taormino has this newfound concern for the law is that he realizes that by selling his new homes to wealthier Bay Area expatriates instead of the local senior voters he so ardently-courted (but who have far less home equity in their existing homes), Mr. Taormino can probably get an extra 10 – 15% or more for each home he sells to out-of-towners. And he can market the homes to a whole lot more people than he would if otherwise restricted to Davis. 

    But Taormino heavily sold this project directly to Davis senior voters by promising them that this project would be just for them and not cater to Bay Area transplants. He even collected hundreds and hundreds of names and email addresses of senior voters by claiming he was putting them on a buyers "waiting list" for the new homes and then proceeded to bombard them with campaign literature in the guise of project "updates" throughout the election campaign.

    This whole bait and switch process is fundamentally dishonest and reprehensible. And for City Staff to recommend that Taormino be allowed to remove this obligation from the Development Agreement while getting really noting of substance in return, it shows City Staff is once again willing to play ball accommodating developers without regard to what is best for the City and, in this case, its senior residents.

    (more…)

  • Letter from Davis faith leaders opposing the changes in regulations on seeking asylum in the U.S.

    To Whom It May Concern:

    As faith leaders in Davis, CA, we strongly oppose the changes in regulations on seeking asylum in the United States being proposed by the Department of Homeland Security and the Executive Office for Immigration Review of the Department of Justice.   These proposals would effectively end our asylum system, block protection for people and families fleeing from persecution, and reverse decades of U.S. and International Law.  The changes would restrict the number of those admitted to the US, apparently on the unfair basis of wealth and status.  Thus, those with the means to fly into the US would not be affected if their flight was non-stop or only had one stop in another country.  However, those who have passed by land through two countries would automatically be barred.

    The new proposed rule is long and complicated; however, a few of its new restrictions are particularly disturbing.  It would eliminate gender-based claims for asylum.  Women and LGBTQ asylum seekers would be disproportionately affected by this change. Not only would women be unable to seek asylum based on their experiences of extreme domestic violence, but even women fleeing sex slavery at the hands of terrorist groups could be denied.

    (more…)