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

<

>

In support of Measure V

By Ron Glick

At the beginning of the 21st century, after a period of strong growth, concerned citizens of Davis passed two major reforms to preserve farmland. The first was the Measure J ordinance that requires a popular vote to rezone agricultural land to other uses. This is the reason Measure V, which I support, is on the June ballot. The second reform was a parcel tax dedicated to the preservation of open space around Davis. 

Together, these two reforms have been incredibly successful in preserving farmland in the area directly surrounding the city of Davis. In the last 25 years, and with little acrimony or fanfare, thousands of acres of land have been purchased by the city or otherwise preserved under conservation easements. The City of Davis Open Space Commission deserves the thanks of everyone in Davis who cares about land preservation.

Most people don’t realize it, because much of the land that has been preserved is in farm production and not open to the public, but almost 6000 acres, more than nine square miles of land near Davis, has been preserved to date. In fact, and I was shocked when I learned this, the amount of land preserved exceeds the footprint of the city itself. See: https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/community-development-and-sustainability/open-space-program

When these two reforms were enacted, the hope was that half the land surrounding Davis could be preserved. We have more than accomplished that goal. 

It is for this reason that I will be voting yes on Measure V in June. Davis has done a wonderful job of preserving farmland but farmland preservation can’t be the only priority of this community. We have other needs and housing is a big one. 

Under Measure V, Davis will get 16 acres with the developed infrastructure to build Affordable homes. It will also get six million dollars as seed money towards the construction of those homes. There are lots of people who would benefit if that housing gets built. Additionally the construction of market rate housing will provide much needed supply to the local and regional housing markets.

Davis should be proud of itself. We set out to preserve farmland and even taxed ourselves to do so. We have been wildly successful in that endeavor. But now it’s time we built more housing. Please join me in voting yes on Measure V.

Posted by

davisite2

on

in

, , , ,
Davisite logo

Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

Comments

3 responses to “In support of Measure V”

  1. Donna Davies

    I support V for the reasons you’ve addressed. Thank you.

    Reply
  2. Susan Rainier

    The portion of “farmland” that Village Farms is proposing has had other uses besides farmland and that is what the No On Measure V are most concerned about for placing housing.

    Building in a floodplain is a big issue, especially since we know there have been atmospheric rivers consistently due to climate change. Also, due to this, the State of California has stated that they will not bail out a City who knowingly builds in a floodplain. The developers need to issue warnings and disclaimers for this issue.

    Building on massive fill taken from a floodplain is not best practices for not having settlement issues for the houses and protecting all the houses and areas from flooding as mentioned above. The developers need to be transparent on these building practices for potential buyers. Other subdivisions in Davis around this zone also need to be aware.

    Building adjacent to an unlined, abandoned landfill is a big issue, especially since we know that other communities who have done this have been subjected to major lawsuits because their children were born with defects caused by the PFAS and other chemicals that leach out from the landfill. The city was supplied multiple case studies about this, yet ignored them. The developers need to issue warnings and disclaimers for this issue.

    Building this number of houses will generated the same number of vehicles. The city is not taking into consideration the concerns of citizens saying that we do not have the road systems needed for this volume of vehicles introduced into our existing street system. 15,000 new trips per day is unsustainable for Davis roads.

    How dare Village Farms say they are for habitat when they are destroying the trees and known watershed zone that exist now, doing a good job of saving us from flooding. It is beyond ironic. In some circles Watersheds are now considered Sacred to heighten the concerns about building on them. The developer is saying they are saving the vernals pools now – after they plowed over them – only to find that they came back. Yet this shows the true attitudes of the developer – All, or nothing.

    The City has a Legal Duty of Care to Protect Citizens. For now, Buyers Beware!
    Vote No on Measure V

    Susan Rainier, AIA, LEED BC+D, Living Future Accredited
    https://living-future.org/lcc/

    Reply
  3. Eileen Samitz

    Sorry Ron, but this is about this abysmal project Village Farms which has too many issues with toxics including carcinogenic PFAS “forever chemicals leaking from the adjacent unlined Old Davis Landfill/Burn Dump and Sewage Treatment Plant a huge 100-acre floodplain with flooding potential, massive traffic including adding more than 15,000 more car trips PER DAY at already impacted Covell Blvd. and Pole Line Road Habitat destruction including tearing out hundreds of trees along Channel A destroying habitat and endangering the vernal pools due to re-routing Channel A which would disrupt the hydrology that the vernal pools rely on for survival and most of all the UNaffordable housing.

    Plus, the developer is NOT building the affordable housing except possibly 100 affordable apartments in the LAST phase 10+ years down the road, and this only IF the City does not first build 100 affordable apartments.

    But then the City included the word “may” (HUGE LOOPHOLE) rather than “shall” ask the developer to build 100 affordable units or may not. So the City can very likely wind up with ZERO affordable units. Also the developer will have built 90% of the expensive market rate units by the last phase so he can walk away from building the 100 affordable units with a massive profit.

    David Thompson, lifetime affordable housing developer and advocate wrote an article on this Village Farm affordable housing plan which is really an affordable housing scam.

    It’s A “May” Day for Village Farms

    Meanwhile, there is a better alternative which is building below Channel A which distances the housing from the toxics and the bulk of the flood plain, preserve the vernal pools with a conservation easement and build 900-1,000 housing units. This avoids the toxics exposure and flooding potential and reduced impacts like traffic. Masks sense and is similar to the “Environmentally Superior” alternative in the Covell Village EIR.

    Vote NO Village Farms for a better alternative!

    Reply

Leave a comment