Wedge gets nod, Best Buy design approved by council
Tonight the Woodland City Council voted five to zero to approve the design proposed for the Best Buy store at the Gateway shopping center. The unanimous vote supported the staff recommendation to make an exception to the city's design standards. The Planning Commission denied the initial request made by the Petrovich Development Company on May 15 in a four to three vote.
Posts
130 comments:
I believe this is probably the best decision for the project. We have already started down this path of "super strip mall" and throwing a wrench in it because it is inconsistent with the "fake-itecture" we call the city design guidelines is just bad for everyone. I will keep my consumer dollars in Woodland, and if I have the ability to spend them at the "mom-and-pop" rather than the big box, then I will. But most importantly I would like to see my sales tax revenue do some good for my own community.
Martie, I applaud you for having the decency to come onto this forum and explain/defend your position. However, I hope you have at least learned something from this situation. There is a very concerned contingent that you now have to answer to (as an elected official) please operate in their best interest.
I hope all members of the council operate in the best interest of all the residents of Woodland not just a small group.
I have to say that as a Woodland resident the original decision by the planning commission had me shaking my head in dismay - consideing we're in the middle of a serious economic slowdown and consumer confidence is at a lull, I couldn't believe the planning commission would nix a project of this magnitude over something as seemingly small-minded as signage. I'm sure the planning commission had what they believed to be good reasons - but to an outsider it just looked like pinheads following the letter of the law, at the expense of the town and residents they are supposed to serve. Kudos to the City Council for overriding the planning commission and moving Woodland in the right direction.
Based upon this ridiculous comment "consideing we're in the middle of a serious economic slowdown and consumer confidence is at a lull, I couldn't believe the planning commission would nix a project of this magnitude over something as seemingly small-minded as signage.
Yes lets abandon all of our rules, guidelines or whatever we follow in response to the almighty dollar.
That has to be the dumbest reason ever for allowing a project to move forward.
I wonder what your response will be when you will see the ripple effect this project will have on this community for the local business owners.
I guess you will blame the economy for their demise as well.
It is just evolution. This shopping center will not have much effect on downtown. It may even have a positive effect. For instance, instead of leaving town for electronics and Costco shopping, I can now shop here. I will save gas money, which I will spend in town as well. I will then stay in town and eat as well, probably Paco's, then I will be downtown for the things I need there. Who on Main street will Best Buy hurt? I have never purchased anything electronic from a main stret merchant. I have purchased books, vacuum bags, food, tires, gas, military supplies, novelties, sandwiches, art, antiques and insurance. I do not think Gateway will hurt any of those things.
BTW, this is my first comment on this post.
ANON. said. "Who on Main street will Best Buy hurt? I have never purchased anything electronic from a main stret merchant".
Sears, Stablers...dude, have you been on main street?
I buy from these two places, as do mnay other Woodlanders.
Alan Jackson had a song about 8 years ago called the "little man" it talks about whats happening right here in Woodland! Very fitting for this topic.
I commend Martie and other three commissioners for standing firm on their principals on following the city design guidelines. The Council did right by over ruling the decision on the bases of the economics. I believe that the system worked well.
Little Man lyrics
I remember walk'in round the court square sidewalk
Lookin' in windows at things I couldn't want
There's johnson's hardware and morgans jewelry
And the ol' Lee king's apothecary
They ware the little man
The little man
I go back now and the stores are all empty
Except for an old coke sign from 1950
Boarded up like they never existed
Or renovated and called historic districts
There goes the little man
There goes the little man
Now the court square's just a set of streets
That the people go round but they seldom think
Bout the little man that built this town
Before the big money shut em down
And killed the little man
Oh the little man
He pumped your gas and he cleaned your glass
And one cold rainy night he fixed your flat
The new stores came where you do it yourself
You buy a lotto ticket and food off the shelf
Forget about the little man
Forget about that little man
He hung on there for a few more years
But he couldn't sell slurpees
And he wouldn't sell beer
Now the bank rents the station
To a down the road
And sell velvet Elvis and
Second-hand clothes
There goes little man
There goes another little man
Now the are lined up in a concrete strip
You can buy the world with just one trip
And save a penny cause it's jumbo size
They don't even realize
They'er killin' the little man
Oh the little man
It wasn't long when I was a child
An old black man came with his plow
He broke the ground where we grew our garden
Back before we'd all forgot about the little man
The little man
Long live the little man
God bless the little man
GOD BLESS DOWTOWN WOODLAND
I commend Martie and other three commissioners for standing firm on their principals on following the city design guidelines. The Council did right by over ruling the decision on the bases of the economics. I believe that the system worked well.
I commend Martie and other three commissioners for standing firm on their principals on following the city design guidelines. The Council did right by over ruling the decision on the bases of the economics. I believe that the system worked well.
Thank you first timer. I am one of those downtown businesses you refer to. I could not agree with you more. The Gateway project will only strengthen the Downtown. In fact it will bring shoppers from outside Woodland as well. While they are here at Costco, they could check out our Downtown. Now we need to bring in shops that cause people to park their cars and actually WALK on Main Street.
Now, only if we could get the freeway traffic out of our Dountown that would be nice.
Anon 10:25, I did not get the, "Yes lets abandon all of our rules, guidelines or whatever we follow in response to the almighty dollar." from the responder.
I think the sign issue should have been handled prior to the Council meeting. I am sure glad we have a system of checks and balances in our local government.
Hey song lyrics person, we are taking steps right now to avoid the demise of Woodland.
I am one of those Little Men. Our business is thriving in downtown Woodland. I suspect we are not the only success story here.
Downtown is thiving where ?
I see nothing but empty store fronts when I am downtown. I just noticed the large antique store is going out. The baby store by floors to go is for lease. The clothing store that just opened is now closing. The book store is now gone.
Wow you right downtown is thriving. My mistake.
Downtowners are not the only privately owned businesses in Town. I am sure tons of other stores will benefit from Gateway such as, Quiznos, The car wash, hotels, Jack in the box, Cheveron, ampm, Shell, on down the line. If Sears were smart they would expand and get some selection. A huge Sears is only 20 minutes away.
What can Downtown businesses do to capitalize on this increased Woodland traffic, even if it concentrates a little east of Woodland? How about co-advertising with some of these big dogs out there. How about mirror hanger advertising at the car wash, organize some handouts to place out there. Co-op your advertising dollars and get some of those shoppers to eat and visit the unique stores you can't find at Gateway.
Thanks for all the positive comments in this string and the other, earlier one. Four Planning commissioners testified at the council meeting last night, three who opposed the design exemption and one who supported it. I agree that the system worked, and as I said last night, I think it is a sign of healthy city government that the Planning Commission and City Council can disagree civilly with each other. The final decision has to rest, of course, with the council as the elected body. They have the direct accountability to the residents of Woodland. All is well.
PS - check the city web site. I received notice via email that the agendas for the Planning Commission and staff reports either are or soon will be on the city site. This is the notice:
Please be advised that the Planning Commission meeting agendas (back to July 2007) are available on the City of Woodland website. Please note that we are currently including links to the Staff reports and will begin including all exhibits and attachments to these reports as well. The agendas can be located using the following web path:
Home > Government > City Departments > Community Development > Agendas &
Hope this helps.
Martie Dote
12:41, Just to clarify;
I said our business is thriving. I also suggested that ours is not the only one.
Just another wedge issue.
(snark!)
Anon 11:42: If you are buying your electronics from OUR sears, you are in serious trouble. Maybe you should enter the 21st century. Best Buy has the best prices, best selection and Sears can't hold a candle to them.
Anon 11:53:
while I agree with some of what you say, I take particular issue with your assertion that the gateway center will somehow bring people into the "downtown". I have one question for you: When was the last time you were in Vacaville at the outlet stores? Did you go to the "old town" Vacaville? Did you even KNOW that there WAS an old town VACAVILLE??! I didn't either, I got lost there one day and stumbled upon it. I applaud your optimism, but think it is quite a stretch to think people coming to "Gateway" will come down to our row of antique/thrift stores.
Anon 1:25:
again I applaud your optimism. However, I believe the success of downtown lies in turning it's back on the gateway plaza. Develop UNIQUE experiences that cannot possibly happen in an "automobile centric" development. For example, the farmers market that is now happening in Freeman park as opposed to the mall parking lot (which was a VERY auto-centric location)this is an AMAZING example of something gateway could never deliver. Continue to develop these types of experiences up and down main street. Another good idea would be to start a monthly art walk. (which I am sure is very dear to Dino's heart) We are beginning to get some gallery spaces downtown, by opening up restaurants and art galleries to a more pedestrian clientelle it would bring "woodlanders" downtown. In the interest of limiting the "Freeway traffic" from using main street as a means to get to cache creek we could route traffic to Gibson and Kentucky blvd via more 'pedestrian friendly' traffic strategies. These are all things that city leaders should be looking at, by being active and by bringing it to their attention we can affect change, we just need to "take responsibility".
Chris, you are an amazing mediator and I love your message of Downtown trying to be totally separate from Gateway.
I believe the only way places like Vacaville and Roseville can afford their historic Downtowns is because of the revenue streams generated by 21st century businesses allowed to operate in those cities.
I've read a lot of opinions about people not supporting the downtown merchants - but you pretty much put it into perspective with your analysis of Sears. We have a lot of new people who have made Woodland their home and want to live and shop in current times. We all want our tax dollars to stay in Woodland.
The Farmers Market is a good thing for Downtown - what other attractions with a historical/agricultural flavor could be offered on a regular basis?
For a long time I've been resentful of people who say that I shouldn't have shopped on line for less expensive books or hot-footed it over I-5 for other necessities of life. I'd sarcastically answer that I don't shop at thrift stores, thank you nor do I shop weekly for my antiques and I hate to be overcharged for anything.
Downtown Woodland, in the 21st century should, as you say, be unique - it would be wonderful to have more art galleries and maybe even having an old-fashioned soda fountain (not the Marble Slab type). More great restaurants like Tazzino's, Pacos, and Osaka would be terrific, as well. Leave the fast-foods to Gateway. We have such a great opportunity now to blend the modern with the historical in Woodland and make everyone happy.
As usual Supervisor Rexroad has found another topic to obsess over Jeff Monroe.
Jeff you voted as all the other councilmmbers did on this yet the guy zeroes in on you rather than the issues.
I too an beginning to think they guy is mental.
Once they showed how the whole block was ass Best Buy, the blue wedge was just a small portion of the design.
And Dino's comparison to the new junevile hall wa shocking. It is the sameexact wedge just not blue.
No one ever complained about the design there. Ever.
I think the real isses may not be the wedge, but the idea of another major retailer coming to town.
Folks if we are going to have populations grow, we have to service them somehow and it pretty much comes down to sales tax dollars.
It's a delicate balance to keep the downtown unique and interesting but it alone will not provide park and pools and police and fire for the ever expanding population.
Rexroad, try applying your brain the the issue and stop be so jealous of Monroe. People like him because he is honest, nice and fair. They trust his motives where as yours are always politically motivated because you are a political consultant by trade.
Jeff, thank you for your vote on this one. Times are getting tougher and our city needs the money - we have mouths to feed.
Anon: 6:27am:
Thank you for the compliment. I am a lifelong Woodland resident and really care about our downtown. I feel there should be every opportunity for people to open whatever business they would like. However, it should represent a diverse mix that attracts the entire population, and with varying times of "activity" that is how you truly have an active downtown. Right now what we need are "open air" and "nightlife" attractions that appeal to everyone. Additionally, low cost, or no cost events will help in these tough economic times. I think the upcoming benefit concert (tomorrow night) at WOH is a great example of a night life attraction.
Anon: 6:55am:
I don't think attacking Matt Rexroad is the best avenue to make your point. I don't personally know Matt, and have only lightly followed his record, but if there is one thing I applaud him for is that he wears his views right out on his sleeve and he stands up for what he believes in. This community NEEDS more people like him (and Jeff Monroe). Big box retail will provide definite benefits to the community with tax base, and jobs. However, we need to be aware of the trade off: It will definitely hurt some of the downtown businesses, and we need to be sensitive to their unique needs and help them in any way we can as a community.
The idea of helping Downtown is because more Woodland shoppers will now stay in Woodland. These shoppers already know where downtown is and probably go there when they need to.
Like me, many will be happy to stay in town and save on gas and time. We now need a few more restaurants to top everything off. I like some of the ideas above about making downtown unique. The real problem is there is not much to attract me downtown and when I do come down there; there is nothing open to get some more of my money.
For example, after a play at night the place is a ghost town. If there were a little night life nearby, like say a coffee shop or a nice restaurant or something, I would drop even more money.
I work 8 - 5 and can only make it down there at lunch or on weekends or evenings and most everything is closed.
Dote is a disaster and she will keep this town from reaching its potential with her anti progress, anti growth agenda. It is personal with her. Why would she vote against staff's recommendation? Why did she vote against the project when she was on the council last time? Is there any doubt Costco, a new Target, Best Buy and other retailers we drive 30 miles round trip to find are good for Woodland. Her attempt last Tuesday to try and separate her role as a planning commissioner from that of council member is absurd. It was a cover up when the Woodland Journal and the Bee finally reported her bad behavior against the public's best interest. The Democrat knew about it but did not want to affect one of their choices for the up coming election. If she continues this behavior we will have to mount a recall. Our fire and police safety depend on a healthy budget. Woodland has one of the lowest per capita expenditures for police and fire because our budget is in crisis. She apparently does not care and if she does she has no solution in place but is hell bent on defeating anything that involves progress and particularly the Gateway project. Her cronies on the planing commission need to be addressed as well. They are there to buffer the council and represent their interest. If they were not appointed by the current council members, they need to be replaced with people who represent the community and the problems that face Woodland today. Dave Sander's ego is clearly dictating his agenda, not our interest. He has to go and now. Woodland is the only city without term limits for its planing commission. I applaud the three planning commissioners who were looking out for us but lost the vote to move this project forward.
Chris Holt, 11:53 here,
I mentioned bringing shops that would support "walking" traffic to Main Street. That means I feel we DON"T have those options now!
You wrote:
"When was the last time you were in Vacaville at the outlet stores? Did you go to the "old town" Vacaville? Did you even KNOW that there WAS an old town VACAVILLE??! I didn't either, I got lost there one day and stumbled upon it. I applaud your optimism, but think it is quite a stretch to think people coming to "Gateway" will come down to our row of antique/thrift stores."
By your own admission, you went shopping outside of Woodland. And then you found a downtown (by accident or not). All I am trying to say is that more shoppers in Woodland is a help to our local economy.
Bob S.
Chris Holt,
Oops, I forgot to add this before I submitted the last comment.
My downtown business is NOT an antique or thrift store.
Bob S.
BEST BUY, MY FOOT
Best Buy has some bad policies....
Normally, I would not share this with others; however, since this could happen to you or your friends, I decided to share it. If you purchase something from, Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, JC Penny, Sears etc. and you return the item with the receipt they will give you your money back if you paid cash, or credit your account if paid by plastic.
Well, I purchased a GPS for my car, a Tom Tom XL.S from 'Best Buy'. They have a policy that it must be returned within 14 days for a refund!
So after 4 days I returned it in the original box with all the items in the box, with paper work and cords all wrapped in the plastic. Just as I received it, including the receipt.
I explained to the lady at the return desk I did not like the way it could not find store names. The lady at the refund desk said, there is a 15% restock fee, for items returned. I said no one told me that. I said how much would that be. She said it goes by the price of the item. It will be $45.00 Dollars for you. I said, all your going to do is walk over and place it back on the shelf then charge me $45.00 of my money for restocking? She said that's the store policy. I said if more people were aware of it they would not buy anything here! If I bought a $2000.00 computer or TV and returned it I would be charged $300.00 dollars restock fee? She said yes, 15%.
I said OK; just give me my money minus the restock fee.
She said, since the item is over $200.00 dollars, she can't give me my money back!!!
Corporate has to and they will mail you a check in 7 to ten days.!! I said 'WHAT ?!'
It's my money!! I paid in cash! I want to buy a different brand.Now I have to wait 7 to 10 days. She said well, our policy is on the back of your receipt.
I said, do you read the front or back of your receipt? She said well, the front! I said so do I; I want to talk to the Manager!
So the manager comes over, I explained everything to him, and he said, well, sir they should of told you about the policy when you got the item. I said No one, have ever told me about the check refund or restock fee, whenever I bought items from computers to TVs from Best Buy. The only thing they ever discussed was the worthless extended warranty program. He said Well, I can give you corporate phone number.
I called corporate. The guy said, well, I'm not supposed to do this but I can give you a 45.00 dollar gift card and you can use it at Best Buy. I told him if I bought something and returned it, you would charge me a restock fee on the item and then send me a check f or the remaining 3 dollars. You can keep your gift card, I'm never shopping in Best Buy ever again, and if I would have been smart, I would have charged the whole thing on my credit card! Then I would have canceled the transaction.
I would have gotten all my money back including your stupid fees! He didn't say a word!
I informed him that I was going to e-mail my friends and give them a heads up on this stores policy, as they don't tell you about all the little caveats.
So please pass this on. It may save your friends from having a bad experience of shopping at Best Buy
10:45 A.M.
Welcome to the "Big Box" experience. I swore off Home Depot and Wal mart, myself.
People who shop at big box want a large selection with a low price. I prefer to shop for quality products with an emphasis on GREAT customer service.
Bottom line, people will continue to shop at big box, and yes that means Best Buy. If we never get big box in the area, then the stream of tax dollars will go to where the big box is.
I have never been in a Best Buy, so thank you for the heads-up. I am sure YOU are not the only one to get caught up in this scheme.
Hi Anon 9:53- well, just as the discussion level was elevated....
Re: the entire Gateway Center project- I've posted a rather lengthy history of that project on the entry "A wedge by any other name" and would direct you to that for information - I'm not going to repeat the whole thing again. Short version - one more time - I voted FOR the project initially and then against, but only after the DEVELOPER CHANGED the project. I also encourage you to read Chris Holt's posting after that.
Over on the WJUSD recall entry, one of the reasons proposed is that the board members didn't think for themselves and only rubber-stamped staff recommendations - so which is it to be? Independent thinking or rubber stamp? Staff also sometimes have their own agendas or are being influenced by outside forces; it's the duty of commissioners and council members alike to look past the staff report- otherwise why have an elected body at all, why not just a big computer program to approve staff reports. Appointed and elected officials owe their constituents their best attention, attendance,their ability to resolve issues, and their own best judgment.
I haven't been on the council the past four years, and thus had no input into the budget(s) prior or current. The budget problems will be something I hopefully can help with the next four years. Solving those problems will be a challenge, especially since we're in a recession, but I'm hopeful we can keep a balance between community character, levels of service the city provides, and controlled growth. By the way, I have never been anti- growth, ever, just anti-bullying. I have good relationships with developers who have brought us good projects, worked with us, and paid attention to our needs and standards. My goal is to keep the city growing at a controlled rate, providing the services people expect from a city, building a healthy job base and yes, even healthy retail opportunities. There's nothing personal about it; however, I don't think that's the case with some high profile developers. The city determines the growth it accepts, not the other way around. Read in this string about the sprawl in Elk Grove.
I've worked with Dave Sanders for several years, and he is both an excellent chairman and planner. Pat Murray and Steve Barzo are also dedicated commissioners, and also voted to oppose the exception. Despite what you think, the Planning Commission is not just a buffer for the Council, but has its own range of duties and its own charge. One necessary talent for being a good planner is to look out past the end of your TV remote and think what the city will look like, and how it will function, 5, 10, even 50 years from now.
If you don't understand how I can function as a Planning Commissioner until June 30 and a council member after July 1, then sorry.
Term limits for Commissioners have been discussed in the past, but the problem is finding people to actually serve on this and other commissions. Without a core of dedicated volunteers, many seats would be empty. Being a Planning Commissioner is not an easy job, it takes time, commitment and some resolve. Standards for the community are not to be taken lightly, and land use decisions are one of the few areas reserved solely to the cities. That authority, also, should not be bargained away for someone's bottom line.
Finally, while I have to smile at the notion that I will wield the kind of power you think, the reality is we're a representative republic, I will be one of five voting members on the council, and while I hope to influence other members on issues- which is, I think, why I was elected- it takes three votes before anything happens. Part of every action the council takes involves council statements and attempts to influence other members. If we make decisions you don't like, I suggest you look to all three or more members who voted to your dissatisfaction.
It has never been my experience that the Daily Democrat buried a story to protect me personally; in fact, they didn't endorse me in 2004. They are an independent entity with their own editorial policies. You might want to question why the Bee story singled me out when there were three other commissioners who voted the same way, and as one said, I didn’t even have that much to say that night.
Now, free advice. Close your eyes, imagine yourself on a beach in Hawaii, take ten deep breaths and slowly exhale, and think the word “serene”. Works for me.
regards,
Martie Dote
anon. 10:45
You should have pointed out that the anecdote youposted was taken directly from snopes.com... I go there often when someone forwards me an e mail that is questionable. Usually if it's questionable it's completely false.
Though, in this case, it is true- the policy is directly stated in the store, I believe, and on the back of the receipt. So, it's one of those things you need to be aware of when you choose to shop in a store like Best Buy. I, personally, have never had a problem. Just a FYI out thre for everyone.
I rather like the idea of Best Buy and other stores being nearer than they have been. Granted, I do tend to choose smaller, "mom & pop" stores for some of my purchases, but I like the fact that I don't have to kill a dinosaur to do my shopping.
Bob S.:
I re-read your post, maybe I misunderstood your point. I was merely pointing out that I think it is a stretch for us to assume that people coming to our costco are going to come downtown and shop. As a matter of fact I believe quite the opposite. The parking issues downtown really put a damper on anyone coming down there, and when they do they park as close as they can, get their stuff and get out. Nobody meanders downtown. We need "activity, and activation of public space" to keep people downtown and enjoying themselves. so in that sense I agree with the second part of that post. Additionally, I do shop outside of Woodland, because there aren't alternatives IN town. At least not yet. If you read my frist post, on this comment board it spells out my position rather clearly.
Martie,
Thanks for clearing things up, I commend you for staying with this subject. We may disagree on the value of the current "design guidelines" but I have to give you credit for holding up a document you were charged with enforcing. From a purely architectural angle, after reviewing that elevation, I don't feel the blue wedge is out of proporition or scale with the building. While it isn't directly in the language of 1880's I do feel it compliments the building well. Giving it a good juxtoposition of "traditional-esque and contemporary/clean."
"Close your eyes, imagine yourself on a beach in Hawaii, take ten deep breaths and slowly exhale, and think the word “serene”. Works for me." Great advice Martie!
I agree with Martie that the system worked the way it was supposed to work concerning Best Buy.
Our budget problems are being created because of a severe downturn in the economy. We are better off then most communities in the area because we anticipated it. We haven't really had to use much of our reserve...yet. We will get through it.
Matt Rexroad attacked me? I am pretty use to that by now. I haven't seen it yet but will probably let it slide when I do. All five councilmembers pretty much said the same thing concerning Best Buy. Matt has a right to his opinion and he knows I APPRECIATE him for it.
Matt, think and say it with me "serene." Wow, that does work:)
JM
Hey Chris,
Again, my post at 11;53 agreed with you that we need more shops for "walkers" on main street to visit.
Parking is a major issue. This blog (Woodland Journal) has had discussions for fixing some of the downtown issues. Parking, freeway traffic, and traffic speed ALL need attention. The new downtowners group is working with the City on promoting our downtown.
Our Downtown has very little to entice a visitor at the current. My hope as a downtown business is that the Gateway project will begin a stream of new shoppers to our community. With that increase of money spenders, I would hope that a few of them would be curious enough to explore our fine community.
When we have visitors to our home here in Woodland, we love to drive them around and show off what Woodland has to offer. We show off the old homes, their landscaping, old buildings, and yes some of the original architectures.
I am just suggesting that people who come here to the Gateway are potential customers for the entire community.
Bob S.
Hi Bob S.
What about doing a kiosk or some type of signage promoting the downtown at the Gateway Center. Something that would direct people or entice people to toward the downtown. Open to suggestions.
JM
Bob S and Chris; I have your answer:
Just cobblestone Main St from College to 3rd. No one will want to drive on it. It would be just like old Sac, then Brenda can run her horses around the block for some rides.
The Realist
Jeff- good suggestion. We have the kiosk at the plaza, but one at Gateway with a downtown directory for folks who want something beyond the big box experience makes sense to me. Let's talk more on this. How can we get payment for it, though. The development agreement is already in place - it would take maybe Paul volunteering. Would he do that?
Martie Dote
Chris - wanted to respond to your 11:18 AM 6/10- be assured I learn all the time, and my intentions are always to work on behalf of the city's best interest. Jeff can confirm. Martie
Realist:
Honestly, the cobblestone is not a bad idea at all! That is very much a pedestrian friendly strategy, I believe we should explore all of these and come up with the best possible plan to increase the unique experience woodlanders will have when they are downtown.
Bob S:
I apologize for the 'antique store/thrift' comment, I believe they have a place in the community, however I also think Woodland's downtown may have one too many. I believe we should all work toward promoting the richness and appeal of activities we have downtown.
Martie, Jeff:
I feel a kiosk could be a good idea, Additionally, we should look into ways to bring popular "annual events" back into the downtown, I am particularly reminded of the august "cruise" of years past...or the Chili cook-off which I believe was held downtown at least once.
Dote: Its been said if you let someone talk (or write long enough) they will expose their true self and Martie Dote in her post above does just that. She says her decision was not personal. However, she clearly states she is "anti bullying" and "high profile developers"! Clearly this is personal! Clearly she is putting her personal feelings for Petrovich (who might be a bully and high profile) against our best interest. Consequently, we are left to assume if she perceives a developer not to be bully and not high profile that she would look more favorably on their projects. Sounds very, very personal to me! Sounds like our desire to have quality retail in this town which generates much needed revenue for police and fire and creating jobs is all predicated upon what Dote thinks about the person. In other words, my family and I don't have a council person who represents our best interest but whether a developer kisses her you know what enough. Woodland does not have any "high profile" developers so I guess that means any developer that can get things done in this town is a bad thing to her. If the developer gets beat up in the process and makes an argument, then he is a bully. It's the perfect excuse in her mind to be against any new development that comes to town which equals anti growth, anti progress and protectionism. She is into small decisions that don't matter (see the endorsement of a kiosk at Gateway in her latest post). She is not for anything that will make a real difference to us. She is into meddling with the project by asking for costly mundane changes, not letting people who can make a difference into our town who can make it a better place to live. Does anybody have a problem with Costco? Does anybody have a problem with a better, larger state of the art Target, Best Buy, In N Out Burger, more revenue, more jobs, more police, more fire protection, cheaper gas (Costco), buying locally, not driving 45 miles round trip to buy what we want???? Well all that would not have happened had Dote not lost in 2004. We would have had these services and more open two years sooner. If it takes a person who you don't like Dote, stuff it. We are watching you. Those of us in Spring Lakes came her to have a life, a normal life with normal services so check your ego, your anti bully attitude and hate for high profile people at the door when you enter the council chambers. Clearly this was personal. Clearly you are trying to re-write what happened. Unfortunately, you are now under the microscope of the fire department labor union as well as the city's own labor representatives who showed up to make sure the council approved Best Buy which was the lynch pin for the balance of the project before you took your seat. I can't afford to go cool my jets in the sun like you plagaerized in your closing because I am paying too much for retail products, gas and my mortgage.
Items I can get downtown but cannot get at Gateway:
Tatoos, Balied out of Jail, Insurance, Antiques, Mexican Food, Cheap luggage and novelties, Kirby Vacuum bags, The Stag, Used clothes, high end furniture, more antiques, horse stuff, more mexican food, banking, smog check, parking tickets, WOH, natural food and vitamin, customer service, hair cut while watching porn, tires, court house papers, business license, killer homemade sandwiches, art, pizza, cowboy boots, fake grenades and gas masks.
Downtown has nothing to worry about. I will continue to get these things downtown.
Hey 10:36,
You forgot a few:
...used books, medicine, autos, Graffic designers, newspaper, massage...
Anon 10:03, 10:36, and 11:16:
Alright, Alright, let's not work ourselves into a hot foamy mess!
firstly: 10:03, I would like to point out a few things, the planning commission is made up of more than just Martie Dote. (she is sticking her neck out by being on the blog, you should give her credit/respect for that) Secondly, the City Council, is all elected. These are things YOU can change by taking action. If you don't like decisions, show up for the meetings and speak your peace. If you can do a better job planning for the city, put in an application. It is ok to hold someone accountable and I think we should all do our part, but at some point it becomes "personal" as I believe your attack on Martie is. (sorry, I just love pointing out Irony.)
Anon 10:36 and 11:16
Everything you have pointed out is true, but more importantly you are naming all "SMALL" businesses, these are the lifeblood of our economy and our community. I personally take offense as a Woodlander at your statements because you are implying that we should be "anytown USA" by frequenting/promoting the 'high-tax-generating-big-box' retailers. I am all about keeping my money in Woodland, but I would also like to patronize our unique businesses and small businesses WHENEVER possible. Please do the same.
This is 10:36 again. Thanks for the additions. I also forgot these:
Bowling ball repair and hole drilling, flowers, home loans, headstones, muffler repair, movies, sticky seats at the movies, weight lifting, Long John SIlvers, orthotics, cheap hotels, blue print and drafting, waxing, psychics, psychos, bizarro world, payroll service, chinese food, Flory's jewlrey oh wait never mind that one, corner drug where you can find everything other drug stores never carry, gold sales, BBQ ribs, mmm cookies, congressmen, pilates, driving school, locksmith, Citizens who care inc., windshield replacement (although they will travel to gateway to replace your window).
Chris, I was not being sacastic. I was just trying to show, with a little humor, that downtown will not be effected much by Gateway. It should increase shopping downtown, because more people will be sticking around and buying all of these other things you can get in Sac, but not gateway.
And this is 11:16. I got a kick out of the list (albeit, some of the list was a bit sarcastic).
Whoever you are, 10:36, you are most definately one who frequents our downtown. You seem to know it intimately. I think most people who live her in Woodland could compile such a list. Great Job.
10:36 here;
It almost started sounding like a song. I had to throw a bit of humor in there to keep it interesting. Glad you liked it.
My point is, I do not hink any of these businesses I listed will be hurt at all with Gateway in town. It can only help.
I think the stores that will suffer the worst maybe from Gateway;
Nugget, Bel Air, Wal Mart, Raleys, Sears, The Mall.
In response to Dote's posting to the first Woodland Journal article on the subject of Petrovich's requirement to give the downtown $1 million, let's set the record straight.
Dote is really lying to us here on what really is the obligation by Gateway for the downtown. I checked with Rick Kirkwood, our former City Manager who was involved in every issue regarding Gateway. Here are the facts contrary to Dote cover up.
There never was a $1 million payment due to the downtown. There was a requirement to "invest" $1 million in the downtown in the form of a development project to get rid of blight. That concept never changed nor did Petrovich shirk his responsibility. Kirkwood wanted there to be a nexus between Gateway and helping the downtown when it was thought that Hobblit Haynes was moving out there. Kirkwood did not want Gateway to create blight at Third and Main by removing HH. He wanted it back filled. Petrovich bought the contaminated Hobblit Haynes property and was going to develop it. Instead HH stayed there and Petrovich and has been cleaning it up it's ground water contamination ever since with no federal or state assistance - some bully. When Costco committed to Gateway exactly where HH was going to be located, Rick Haynes and Dave Hobblit let Petrovich off the hook from selling land to them because they wanted Woodland to have a Costco and all the benefits we now enjoy. That is why Rexroad did not do anything about teh so called contribution to the downtown because nothing needed to be done. This "investment" was to be made within 5 years of completion of the Gateway center.
When Hobblit Haynes didn't move, the requirement didn't get lifted from the project. Petrovich then spent $2 million purchasing the closed down blighted Shell station at the entrance to our downtown, saving and relocating a dilapidated Victorian house and demolishing a ranch house that was about to fall down which was a public nuisance. This alternative project was created by Petrovich to meet his obligation with no subsidy as was given to the Weisman Building. It's turned out to be a $7 million investment, not $1 million.
Had Petrovich failed to meet his obligations, his penalty would have been $1 million payable to the general fund. The "investment" in the downtown in the form of the Rite Aid (now under construction) was accomplished five years ahead of the deadline. Jeff Monroe was mistaken at the debate calling this a loop hole. Ask Jeff if you want to verify. Dote knows it and is trying to use his mistake as fact and is still calling it a loop hole. No loop hole existed nor was it used. Ask anyone at the city familiar with the issue like I have and you will find out the correct answers. Better yet, go read the Development Agreement as I did. Its a recorded document against the property. Of course Dote is too lazy to do that and just wants to make excuses and twist the facts for her horrible judgment.
Now here is the kicker I discovered in the process of researching all of this; when the downtown Rite Aid went to the Planning Commission about five months ago to merge 3 parcels into 2, it was supposed to be a 5 minute prefunctory item on the agenda. What did Dote do? She waged war on the project and convinced the Planning Commission (as the former council person involved in such matters) to reject it! Why, because she does not like Petrovich. There is no other explanation. Staff had already approved it's design which had completely complied with the downtown specific plan and it did not require planing commission approval by law.
After the vote was taken and the next agenda item was to begin, it was explained to her that she just let Petrovich off the hook for his obligation to "invest" $1 million in the downtown by disapproving a simple parcel map to merge 3 parcels to 2, instead of screwing him. What did our brilliant leader do, she re-opened the item after it was voted on and retracted her vote and approved the parcel map. Why, because it was more costly to Petrovich then the bone head mistake she had just made. Yes, folks, that is Martie Dote at her best. Small minded with a personal agenda.
Lastly, as for the train that was supposed to go in at Gateway, I looked into that as well. The idea was introduced by Petrovich as a way to make the center unique. Dote was on the council when it was suggested by the developer but everyone on the council was against it except Jeff Monroe! Yes, Dote did not support the train she is now saying was the reason she voted against the project! Lies, lies and more lies to cover up a personal agenda that does not represent our best interest. Is it too late to un-elect her because I don't see an end to this BS with her.
Dote is a fraud. Dote lies to cover her wrong doings and she can't be trusted. We all need to stay on top of her actions if we ever want to see any investment or progress in our great town.
Thank you 8:02 PM - for the most part that pretty much sums up my recollections of the $1 M Petrovich was to obligate to the CoW.
The train issue which Dote says she pulled her support for the Gateway project (amongst other questionable reasons) seems so ludicrous in light of two years of lost revenues that I was having a hard time thinking that could be true.
Anon 8:02 and 9:14:
I only have one question for you guys/girls. Is there a reason you are still posting anonymously? Is it the fear of retaliation? I am only asking because I have never once posted anonymously, I have always given my full and true name. I feel it allows me to carry a level of credibility and allows people to trace my "record" on issues. I find your assertions vaguely plausable, but I can't accept them if I don't know who you are or what your potential "angles" could be. I am only bringing this up because through the last week or two I have been active on this blog I have noticed only about three to four people are posting their actual names. I commend those who do, it immediately gives me a sense of respect for them. As a member of Woodland (I still consider it a town where you 'know everyone') I would hope you would want recognition for your opinions and correction when you are wrong. We should all be looking out for what is best for the city (and by extension, best for us) and posting anonymously just seems to be counter to such a thought.
I am just putting my .02 in here. I really enjoy the amount of "discourse" that happens on this blog and would like to help promote it and push it forward, stop being anonymous....please
So I'm assuming that anon 6/13 10:03 and 6/13 8:02 is the same person, and I'm guessing it's the same as 6/12 9:53, since you have the same vapid style - if not my apologies to one or more of you.
What exactly did I plagiarize (please note spelling)?
Since I can assume you don't like me personally, let me frame my response by saying you remind me of an uncle I had, who believed that if he spoke louder than anyone else he would always be right.
Let me also assure you I have a much broader experience with all sorts of developers than you do, and can differentiate when one is trying to ram through a project and when one is working with you and your staff to produce something of quality. I've worked with both and know the difference.
You have totally mis-represented the Rite Aid project. That project should have had a 7-0 clearance, but Paul's presentation to the Planning Commission turned four against him, and he managed that in just a few minutes. Him, not me. I'm not the one who said "every time you are in front of us, Mr. Petrovich, you give us ultimatums" - that was Commissioner Gonzales. It wasn't there for design review- it was there to combine five parcels and re-divide into two - a legal function of the Planning Commission. Staff recommended "conditional approval", which meant the Commission could review suggested conditions and add or delete others. The whole question, concern really, of the Commission centered on the left turn lane across Main Street so close to East. I was worried people not paying attention would rear-end people waiting to turn left into Rite Aid, thinking they were in the left turn pocket for East St. Paul said without the left turn lane, no project, Rite Aid went away, and he was free of the requirement to invest in the downtown. That was the first I had heard that the investment had been moved from the Third St project to the Rite Aid at 6th St., but then I'd been away from the council four years, and the Planning Commission doesn't deal with development agreements. The City Attorney wasn't there, and staff weren't versed in the development agreement, so we had no other information than Paul's. After the loosing vote, and I was as shocked as Paul, he said he was willing to compromise on the turn lane. You may be aware that in parliamentary procedure, in order to re-open a defeated item, one of the no-votes has to do it. I was hoping for a compromise offer, so I did, and the Commission subsequently voted for the project, 7-0, on the condition that the City Traffic Engineer could close the left turn pocket if it became a hazard. It was all about the turn lane and the compromise reached, not the development agreement. We didn't talk about it because we couldn't. It wasn't agendized, it wasn't in the staff recommendations or conditions, it was a comment in passing by Paul that I tried to get clarified with no success. Four commissioners changed our votes. Sometime after that meeting I had a meeting with Mr. Millsap, Paul's attorney, and in the course of that meeting, recommended he ask his client have surrogates present his projects. This was a serious recommendation, since sometimes Paul can come across like a bull in a china cabinet and put people off. I don't know if it's enthusiasm on his part or if he thinks that's the way to get things done, but it hurts him with our commission and maybe others, and it's not necessary. I want his projects to stand or not based on their merits, not because he has made commissioners or others feel pushed. Hum, does that sound like I'm trying to personally kill very Petrovich project?
Jeff was the one to use the "loop hole" language at the downtowners forum in the Opera House. That was the first time I had heard it, although by then I knew the site for the investment had been moved. The only times I have used it, I attribute it to source. Jeff may just have been simplifying his response to the question. I always knew it was an investment and not a direct payment, such as Home Depot had made which funded the Downtown Coordinator for a couple of years, and Yolo Polo Plaza made to fund transit for a year. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
I didn't pull support for Gateway because of the train - that was just an example of how the project changed- it was (repeat again) because Paul changed the project from auto mall/small retail to pay for infrastructure to large retail center/no auto mall. That was the reason Hoblit didn't move. They went to great lengths, showing me emails from Chrysler, that they had to move- in six months!- or loose their franchise. So what happened, how come they didn't move when the project was approved? Because the auto mall was gone, ie., no place to move to. Yet they still have their franchise? Hum. I also finally got to read the development agreement, and things I thought were in it, such as a cineplex at Third after Hoblit moved were compromised by Paul's ability to also build one at 102 and I5- direct competition. Just how many people do you think it takes to support two complexes like that and what becomes of the vacant one downtown?
The council vote to not approve the project in 12/03 was 3-2, so why don't you ask the other two council members why they voted against it. They were hardly my cronies. One of the things that held up the project, I think, was that the County sued when it was approved without being an auto mall because the auto mall use was the one in the negotiated tax share agreement needed for the 1991annexation, although the subject of the suit was inadequate CEQA and conversion of ag. land. The land also set vacant for at least two years after project approval, but maybe you should ask Paul why. Maybe he had trouble getting his financing together, or Target to agree to move, or Costco was delayed, hum?
The firefighters and General Services reps weren't at the council meeting on Tuesday to monitor me- they were there because in the course of the budget cuts each department was asked to make this year, the council also said they would do what they could to mitigate the budget issues. I get along great with the firefighters, and they, along with the middle management group, endorsed my candidacy because they know I'll fight to keep their jobs intact as much as I can and that maintaining public safety levels of service was a big deal for me in my first term.
I hope you enjoy SpringLake- Neal and I worked two years, hundreds of hours, to iron out issues with developers, housing advocates, planners, public works, finance, to get a project that worked. As it builds out I think it will get better.
So, as I said, I can tell you don't like me, even though you don't know me. We can, however, agree that this is a great small city that's going through some changes. After re-reading your diatribes and the way you twist what I've written, even how you begin your polemics (Dote is a disaster, etc), I've pretty much concluded I wouldn't like you, either. You are loaded with far too much venom to be an agreeable conversationalist, and it interfers with your ability to analyze intelligently. Recommend a cold shower and stay on your meds.
Best Regards
Martie Dote
8:02, 9:14, Martie,
Martie said: "I always knew it was an investment and not a direct payment, such as Home Depot had made which funded the Downtown Coordinator for a couple of years, and Yolo Polo Plaza made to fund transit for a year."
Jeff said it was a loophole.
Many downtowners were under the impression the $1 million was FOR the downtown.
Most importantly, 8:02 said: "I checked with Rick Kirkwood, our former City Manager who was involved in every issue regarding Gateway."
There's the problem... the city did not communicate very well with the public.
As for the Shell building, 8:02, you should investigate more into that and tell us why the building was vacant for so long. The city messed with Carranza and the transition from Texaco to Shell.
Martie - thanks for shedding some light on the $1 million. One question, who made Carranza an offer they couldn't refuse?
Petrovich is probably thinking, "This is the best City Council money can buy." I am so dissappointed with Monroe and Pimentel!
Funny how things get all twisted out of shape as the years go by.
I (like much of the downtown) thought it was an investment in downtown infrastructure because that was what was we heard. I took that to mean street lights, sidewalk repair, etc. We were wrong about the agreement and the city attorney informed us we were wrong. Maybe loop hole wasn't the best way to put it.
I think the three of us that voted against Gateway I had different reasons for doing it. I voted against Gateway I because it was a Lowes and a grocery store. I could not see the value to this community to add a fifth home improvement store. I was sure it would mean that one of the other home improvement stores would become an empty box.
I went to Petrovich (it could only be one of the three that voted against it) and said I would bring back the project if he would promise a Costco. I knew Petrovich had a business relationship with Costco. Everyone I spoke to wanted a Costco in Woodland. The City did a survey and again Costco came out number one.
At first Petrovich told me no, Costco will not come to Woodland (to small). We stuck it out and the rest is history.
Now say it and think it with me "Serene"
Have a great Saturday!
JM
Excerpt from Dote's response:
"I had a meeting with Mr. Millsap, Paul's attorney, and in the course of that meeting, recommended he ask his client have surrogates present his projects. This was a serious recommendation, since sometimes Paul can come across like a bull in a china cabinet and put people off. I don't know if it's enthusiasm on his part or if he thinks that's the way to get things done, but it hurts him with our commission and maybe others, and it's not necessary."
Sounds personal to me. Lines up perfectly with her previous characterizations of what it takes to get her vote regardless of the merits in addition to resenting high profile people....all of which comes at our expense.
JM,
Regardless of the term "loophole," you hit the nail on the head... what was presented to downtowners, and apparently council since you had the same impression, was different than the actual language of the agreement. It all comes down to the city communicating to the public. The impression of back door deals is accurate considering how the public is kept "out of the loop."
9:17 - huh? Out of context, yet again. Report the rest of it - I want Paul's projects to stand or not based on their MERITS, not because of the way Paul presents them. It was a sincere recommendation since I had seen the same thing happen before, just not as quickly. I happen to like Paul for his fortitude and admire some of the projects he's built, especially in Sacramento; they have been innovative and mixed use in the best sense. He takes on infill work that most developers shun, and that benefits Woodland, since a lot of our future projects will be infill. But personal like or dislike should have nothing to do with planning decisions. I had more than one argument with the Spring Lake developers over land use designations, affordable housing, etc., and I liked and admired some of them very much for their prior work. We managed to work together. I couldn't vote for Rite Aid until we had addressed my traffic safety concerns, which we did, and I couldn't have voted for Best Buy unless there were some effort to meet the design standards on the sign. The rest of the center was aOK.
Your conclusion that I resent high profile people is nonsense, it's you believing your own spin. That isn't what I said, or even implied. What I said was that even though I don't have a personal like or dislike driving my actions, I'm not sure that's true for some other folks. I'm not anti-growth and I don't hate developers per se, I'm in business and I know you're in business to do business, to turn a profit. My sole issue with any developer, anytime, has been getting them to understand that the city will guide its own future, make its own land use decisions, not the other way around. That has been a consistent position, with infill, new development and commercial. When I'm on council I will have to come to decisions based on different criteria than on Planning Commission, because at that point economic development and fiscal well-being will be my concerns.
Now, have a nice Saturday and enjoy the moderate summer we've had so far. July is coming.
Best Regards
Martie Dote
Anon 9:17:
Please, just let it go. Join the intelligent conversation going on here between members of the community. Maybe you will learn something you didn't already know. (although I doubt that, you seem to know everything.)
Dino, Martie, and Jeff:
Interesting stuff. I am just joining the "political landscape" of Woodland. I have long been interested in and active learning about our national policies and how we as a nation are seen in the international scale, it is a whole other game when it comes to city and small community politics. I will definitely keep my ear to the ground and continue to learn. Thanks for the lessons.
Martie is trying to convince us as a council member she will act differently than she did as a planning commissioner. Wrong again. Remember when we had to close the pool and cut back our library hours? Remember how many kids (and parents) this affected? She voted against Gateway at the exact same time this happened. The project was subjected to a an economic report and its affect on the rest of Woodland. It was the city's report, not the devloper's. It proved that the project was going to generate $3 million in net new revenue while only affecting the downtown merchants by 5% (which was going to be recovered by retailers adjusting). It was proven that County Fair Mall and Wal-Mart did 95% of the damage to the downtown already. Despite this evidence and Woodland's budget being in shambles from the state's 10+ year raiding of our coffers, Dote voted against the one and only means (Gateway) for our budget to recover. The reason our budget is in even worse condition today is because of her defeating Gateway when it first was voted on. Why would we believe she would do anything different today or when the next important project comes along? She did not vote in our best interest when our budget was under water last time. What has changed with Ms. Dote? I expect nothing.
Chris - I agree with you, but this appears to be a barnacle. Happy to talk with you. Hopefully we can discard the polemics and get back to intelligent discourse. It appears engaging with 1:08 is a lost cause - I feel like Hilary being interviewed by Bill O'Riley. Waste of time.
1:08 - You misunderstand me- I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Clearly you have an impairment that prevents you from processing information correctly, and trying to engage with you is a waste of time. I can only restate that there were three votes against - you heard from another one, Jeff. Go interview him. You really have nothing new to say to me - just re-hash, and I have nothing else to say to you.
Chris - the really exciting thing about local government is it's a model for the bigger picture. A local elected official I admire very much gave me the following observation - you need the best people locally because that's where the decisions affect the everyday lives of your constituents. He also gave me some good advice- take the job very seriously, but yourself not so much. Good for most things, don't you think?
Best Regards,
Martie Dote
A no spin zone struck Dote and she can't cope. O'Reily is a tough interviewer because he doesn't let people get away from the facts (i.e. "The Factor"). Facts prove how far left she is. She has no answers to the latest truth about our budget disaster being ignored when she voted against Gateway. She could have done the right thing, but her personal agenda was more important to her. And by the way, Hillary did great when interviewed by O'Reily and it helped her because she answered the tough questions. Later she said O'Reily was much more fair then the main stream media.
The Democrat let Dote get away with the Gateway denial (she was the swing vote), the Rite Aid debacle and then the Best Buy melt down. Staff recommended approval of Best Buy (rare), the City Manager was in disbelief when the PC denied it and the Council over ruled her 5-0. The commissioners who voted against Best Buy are the commissioners who were forced by the Mayor in 2004 to sit through a joint session with the council on Gateway to get them to do the right thing. They have been angry ever since and have had it out for Gateway and Petrovich. He is an easy target because he does not leave other people do his politics. He pushes back which rubs some people wrong and sometimes he goes too far. Get over it Dote. If you have better solutions to truly solve the budget and help us while not raising our taxes or closing our pools, or shutting down our library or reducing our police and fire protection let's see you do implement them. Until then, don't kill the solutions that come to this community by free enterprise because you did not think of it in advance or because you did not "plan" it. That's been one of your lame excuses to defeat projects. The clock is ticking........
Interesting. Someone is pissed. Owell, everything is OK now partner, it got approved. Martie, I really probably agree with you on nothing. But, I am very much able to agree to disagree with you. I think that makes our country great. I do like the fact that you come on here and carry on some open debate about items of interest in this City. If everyone agreed with everyone, this would be a scary place, unless everyone agreed with me:)
You have to take some comments on here with a grain of salt and hopefully they do not get too personal. Debate is one thing, personal hate is another.
Anyways, thank you for your continued debates, even though you are wrong on most of them:) lol
I hope others besides you, Matt and Jeff M, who do read this blog daily, jump on here and get some good debate going. I love hearing peoples ideas and thoughts. I really like hearing the thought process from City decisions makes as well.
The Realist
Anon 1:08
Your assertions are baseless and frankly a little offending to my intelligence. Let me recap and make a comment.
It is your opinion that Wal-Mart and the County Fair Mall has damaged the Downtown by 95% right? Oh, so what the heck, lets push the gateway through because all the damage has been done...
Your logic is ridiculous.
Now for a question:
Do you believe the project is in better shape now, than when it was first proposed? Do you feel that the change over from Auto Mall to "super strip mall" is a good thing? Do you want to live in Elk Grove? I will pay for you to move if you would like.
(sorry that last part was a little bit of a low blow. But it feels like you really "want" that kind of development....)
Hi Realist - we probably agree on more than you think, and even if we didn't, at least the conversation would be enlightening. Thanks for the advice,, but I'm out of salt and not interested in cutting the barnacle slack. He/she/it has been past the red line from the beginning, always re-hashing, not paying any attention to any answers except to take them out of context, warp them and then start over. No matter how many times or by whom the point is made that the Planning Commission is 7 members (not 1) and the Council is five (not 1) we keep circling back to square one - I must be to blame for everyhing because I don't worship Petrovich. Apparently I have powers I know nothing about.
Chris - good luck, and I mean that sincerely. However I think you're inviting a tirade. You apply analysis in the right spots and ask the right questions. When people look at Elk Grove or Roseville and think- cool, all that sales tax revenue, they must be fat city - but not so. All it takes is a downturn in consumer confidence, as we have now, and their budgets slip into the red, and they lay off even public safety staff. They were all sold the same bottle of snake oil- that sales taxes are the panacea for all a city's ailments, but it winds up being the all the eggs in one basket problem. It's not a long term solution. Look what happened to record sales with the ability to download music - or consumer goods that can be ordered on line. No one could have seen that coming, but it's had a huge effect on consumer patterns, and on sales tax revenues. Anyway, it's been good talking to you, Chris and Realist.
Best Regards
Martie
Looks like Martie can't own up to her acts and has learned nothing from this debate. If she had lost her job from the votes she made, I am sure she would think differently. She cost this city $6 million in lost tax revenue due to the two year delay of Gateway that will never be recovered. That's not a tirade, that is fact, something she can't fathom as being her fault. However, immediately after being voted off the council about two years later, we Woodlanders got what we deserved, good responsible leadership that looks out for us. After her comments posted here, it looks like we are all back in the soup and have to rely on 3 out of 4 votes (75%) to get things done that matter and I am sure she will do her best to suck one or two of the other council members her way. She must have lost her grip having now resorted to inane name calling. Chris, thanks for adding another voice of reason.
I lost my job due to the budget cuts
Know what, you're right, and I have to apologize, and thank you. I shouldn't have struck back at "Dote is a lier, Dote is small-minded with a personal agenda, Dote is a fraud, Dote is a disaster, developers have to kiss her you know what" etc. It was late. I'm better than that, so I won't call you a barnacle any more. You do need to realize, though, that even if you have good ideas to share, when you couch them as a screed, they get lost in the anger. You may have missed it, but Chris, the voice of reason, has questioned yours.
I also have to thank you. One of the things I forgot about being an elected official is that there are people out there like you, and I now have a target painted on by back. It also reminded me of a presentation by Colin Powell I saw, about leadership, in which he says (paraphrased, since my use of language is nowhere as elegant as his) that leaders are going to piss off some people sometimes, just by the nature of leading. You can't do it by committee, otherwise you wind up mediocre (his word). It also has reminded me that principles are most important when it's hard to stick to them.
Like I said before, you don't really know me. I'll do my best to represent you,too. I can't possibly understand your bile, but I do sense a great deal of pain. Not to be too new age about it, but if you tried some positive energy and gave up on victimhood, things might turn for you. To 9:33 - you weren't clear about which budget cuts - city, county, state? Woodland took a $28 million cut in revenues this year, but that's the problem when your operating budget is funded almost exclusively with property taxes and sales taxes - that's a significant hit from retail all over the city, not just Gateway. We are in a recession nation wide and a housing mortgage crisis, and this is the result. So far the revenue downturn has been absorbed by not filling vacancies and other savings, but unless there is a turn around this next year, I fear there wil be more severe cuts in store. We'll have to work together and durch zuwenden - get through it.
Happy Father's Day - Jeff.
Best Regards
Martie
So Dote seems to finally get (or is finally willing to admit) she did make a difference on these important matters and was responsible (all or in part) for what she did to this city. She does get that her actions count, but in light of admitting she does get it and apparently always has, she still voted against Best Buy and everything else that could make a difference. Martie is not ignorant by any means. She knows exactly what she is doing. Unfortunately, unless it fits some unproven neo traditional planning model that has yet to work in any city except in huge metropolitan urban cores like NY, she will continue to vote against what works for Woodland.
She sees development fees and sales tax as a bad thing. The majority of Woodland's key revenue for the past four decades came from auto and retail sales tax. Where else does she think money comes from? Property tax does not cover the services it requires like police, fire, infrastructure, schools, etc. The State has been taking more and more of our property tax for the past 15 years. Everything else we have in this town came from sales tax and development fees. What does she propose to do to keep our services from eroding? Nothing I presume. I have yet to hear or read any ideas. However, she knows what she does not want and clearly is going to keep up her voting record of not letting any growth help us. Had it not been for the revenue she alludes to that is no longer present due to the housing crisis, Woodland's budget would be in even worse shape and hundreds if not thousands of jobs would never have been created, nor the property taxes associated with it. All the bonds she endorsed in her hundreds hours of working on Spring Lake that paid for the infrastructure would have been in default and Woodland's credit rating would be gone. But she thinks its a bad thing that we had growth and because that revenue has slowed and we should never go there again. She obviously lives in a bubble and could care less about the people her decisions affect. She was a key vote (not the only one) that led to closing pools, libraries, police, fire, etc.. So long as she can take Colin Powell's quote about making tough decisions, twist it and use it as an excuse to maintain her ultra liberal anti growth positions that's okay with her. Continuing to use her excuse of applying planning principles as being more important than allowing free enterprise to doing what is best for this community, she will keep on doing what she always has done - upholding her liberal ideals that leave us in the ditch while remaining oblivious to reality. Note: 20 minutes after she voted against the Best Buy Wedge for not looking like the downtown, the planning commission (and I assume Dote) approved an extremely contemporary design for Main Street for the former Century Chevy dealership! Stupid me - I guess that developer wasn't a bully and was not high profile.
I find it ironic that Dote now thinks she has a target on her back when all these years she's had a laser dot on every project that came across her gun scope.
Anon 12:50
I do believe development fees, sales tax, and property tax are the three most important revenue streams to a city. However, I also believe that an unchecked amount of poorly planned growth (i.e. classic 1980's sprawl) is just going to make the issues WORSE in a city. You are now creating MORE infrastructure that has to be maintained, MORE area that has to be protected by city police and fire departments, MORE need for school sites...it is MORE, MORE, MORE. If your tax levels aren't high enough you will push yourself further into the hole.
In my opinion, developing DENSITY is a far more important way of generating new/increased property tax revenue. This typically requires no new infrastructure (only upgrades), no new police or fire stations (possibly just upgrades for existing facilities). By upgrading and filling your vacancies in the downtown core with residential and retail infill projects you are still expanding your property/sales tax and both of these strategies will increase your development fee revenue.
I believe the development on the old Century dealership land is GREAT, I think it is bringing population into the downtown that has desperately been needed for a very long time. This population will frequent the businesses downtown and really be a shot in the arm to that micro-economy. We need to continue to promote MIXED USE downtown. these wonderful eateries like Tazzina Bistro and Ludy's need complimentary entertainment, retail, and residential uses around them to really ensure long-term success.
The biggest problem with sprawl development is that it increases our dependency on the automobile. If you have filled up your car lately, it costs a LOT! By needing to drive more, people will have less desire to go to the stores and shop, and they will have less money to spend once they DO get to that store.
So, in a way on this subject I am defending Martie's positions in that sprawl is NOT the answer, and yet, spring lake...and Gateway are just that. Have we learned NOTHING from Natomas?
I do have serious issues with our development guidelines in the sense that I believe they are too restrictive and hold developers to an unreasonable "design style" which can often be in conflict with their potential tenant's wishes. In turn this makes it a lot harder for Woodland to get new national retail chains. The planning commission should take a serious look at the next revision of design guidelines.
I agree with Chris. However, ask any knowledgeable planner or any SACOG representative and they will tell you if you developed every in-fill site in any given city, it would only satisfy about 5% of the need. Just look at Davis with its sky high housing costs and no affordable housing. People who work there can't afford to live there.
We have an urban limit line that we voters decided upon thanks to Matt. We have a sphere of influence. We have decided where our growth is going to be located. There should not be any major impediment or discourse when it comes time to develop these areas. It's planned and logical and was not driven by developers or projects.
I agree. What is all the fuss about if everybody understands where growth is going to occur. Martie you're not going to kill projects we need in the sphere of influence and urban limit line are you? If not, I think this tirade (by both of you) should end.
Hi Chris and 3:47 - Matt promoted the Measure A Urban Limit Line with his own resources, but it was something I heartily supported after watching for years three votes on Tuesday evenings in various counties and cities produce leap-frog development that makes public transit nearly useless, uses up precious prime soils, leads to sprawl, standard 50's suburbs, etc. Measure J in Davis was their answer to the same problem. Originally the council was going to put Measure A on the ballot, and the Planning Commission worked to prepare a preferred boundary which wouldn't choke Woodland but would contain the sprawl and conversion of prime ag soils. We included enough area within the line for anticipated growth to 2050 I think, and the eventual cap in population. Then the council split 2-2 with Neal reclusing himself. With the deadlock, Matt took it to the initiative process, and the voters approved it. Changing it requires another general vote. I helped develop the boundary so of course any growth within it is anticipated; but we haven't updated the General Plan since 2002, and until we have, I'm not certain what type of growth we should plan - housing, or industrial/office park, commercial? For some folks' attention to my record, they have missed the projects I did support, such as the Lofts (for the same reasons you like it, Chris), in fill on Matmor, by the Chevron on I5, etc. SpringLake was my inheritance when I came on council in 2000 - it was the growth area adopted in the General Plan in 1996, and the Specific Plan was already underway. I worked to make it the best project we could get, not to initiate it. My preference would not have been to put it across State Highway 113. Natomas was something we did not want to replicate; however in 1996 the voters decided southeast was better than due south. The 55 acres that became Gateway were annexed in 1991 for a very different purpose than what happened - it was to move the auto dealers off Main Street, open up infill areas, and help them grow their businesses. Even though it's across 102, it wouldn't have been sprawl. Now Paul is working on the 160 acres south of there (Gateway 2). That area is a big chunk of the open space within the Urban Limit Line - I don't know that a Truxel Center west is the best use. Because of the sewer treatment plant, it may not be developable.
Best Regards,
Martie
Martie
Seems to me that the city was told they would have to move the sewer due to flooding. So how is it that just by chance the area being developed is now not in the current flood zone. I would take a bet that fema will revise the map again due to the wall that is now along the interstate and which in fact will divert the water to the portion that was no included. I will forward that information to the corp of engineers to have them look at this again then we will see how that affects Mr.Petrovich's project.
One of the options for the sewer treatment plant was to berm it - basically put a levee around it to protect against flooding. I don't know where the city is on this. I think they commissioned a new map which is diferent from the FEMA one in 2001, but I don't believe FEMA has accepted it as yet, or even if they will.
Martie
This is good. People are talking about important issues that will make a difference. Martie, if there is a solution to any conflicts with the sewer plant, are you on board? It makes perfect sense to grow the city out there. It won't impact houses like the Target will in Davis and we have am freeway interchange with only one side developed. In keeping with not wasting precious infrastructure, we should take advantage of what we have. With the state budget problems and our own, this makes sense.
If the auto dealers can move to the 160 acres you refer to and we can add more jobs and retail, why wouldn't we do that? Please respond to these questions. Again, if it can be worked out where it is environmentally sound, ag land is secured permanently and the sewer plant issue (which I don't understand) is solved, are you on board? I hope you are for it because it seems like a win-win. We still get the auto dealers out of downtown to redevelop those sites and we got Costco and probably can get a lot of other uses we are driving a long way to reach. If you're not for this kind of responsible growth, I am not sure that is good for us. We all look forward to your response as our newest council person. Thank you!
Anon 2:21:
I am not saying that density is the only way to develop. I fully understand you need some growth, you need to spread out a little bit, BUT sprawl, and pushing out to your urban limit line without an adequet density in your core is just bad news. I believe you need to keep your city growing up as much if not more than it is growing out. Otherwise you end up with blight, and a glut of abandoned space in the core when it gets too hard for the common citizen to get there.
I think we can look at cities like Natomas, Elk Grove, and Roseville and learn from their mistakes.
Anon: 3:47,
I wouldn't consider this a "tirade" this is called intelligent discourse. It is the exchange of ideas. I am learning a lot from everyone who is honestly commenting on this board.
Just my .02 though.
My .02. Lasher owned four auto dealerships and the Gateway land for 18 years and could not make it happen. Rick Haynes and Dave Hobblit (our Chrysler dealers) told me they could never have developed the property due to the high cost of infrastructure. All council members knew this from the beginning of the Gateway process. To say that we should have kept waiting (what, another 18 years?) to see if an auto mall emerged because that is what the land was originally zoned for almost two decades ago is absurd. Martie, I don't want to get on your bad side here, but this sounds like an excuse to justify a bad decision.
Anon. 6/15, 2:21 wrote, "We have an urban limit line that we voters decided upon thanks to Matt. We have a sphere of influence. We have decided where our growth is going to be located. There should not be any major impediment or discourse when it comes time to develop these areas. It's planned and logical and was not driven by developers or projects."
This is exactly the language opponents to the ULL were warning against. The Urban Limit Line, catchy in that is seemingly limits urban growth, is obviously interpreted by that commenter as a grow-to line. The catch phrase reminds me of the No Child Left Behind Act - who can argue with not leaving children behind, but the content of the policy is flawed.
I don't know what the "sphere of influence" is in reference to, but the notion that the ULL constitutes planned and logical growth is preposterous.
The ULL measure did not come with any plans - only boundary lines and designated areas of land use. Much of that out by the Gateway Center is classified as residential reserve. Considering the city's Right to Farm ordinance (to encourage and support continued agricultural use of land within the urban limit line of the city until the need for urban development of the land is demonstrated and/or a substantial community benefit is provided), commenter 2:21's claim that "There should not be any major impediment or discourse when it comes time to develop these areas" is also misinformed.
The original Gateway proposal was for an auto mall. Since that failed, that should have been that. There was in-fill available for stores like Costco and Best Buy. We already have a Target. There was no real need to develop the land as a strip mall. Since that did happen, however, let the developers have at it. Does that mean an adjacent Gateway needs to be built because it's inside the ULL? No. That's just a ridiculous assumption.
Dear misinformed: Target, one of this countries largest companies and a Fortune 50 company made it clear they were leaving Woodland since they were out positioned by Wal-Mart and their store at the CFM was the smallest in their entire chain. You can try and call them a liar, but that does not wash here and Woodland would have been worse off had they left. Now we have Costco and a new Target. According to the Woodland Journal, Burlington Coat Factory, a great retailer, is back filling Target's space at CFM. The former K-mart is full. Sounds like a great series of events for our community. Additionally, there are no other locations large enough for Best Buy and all the others that want to be at Gateway. Freeway identity is a must for first class modern retailers if you have been paying any attention to where these tenants have locates for the past 30 years.
If someone tries to leap frog to the edge of the ULL, I will be the first to jump on them as a long term Woodlander. The ULL was approved two years ago! Has there been a flood of applications to develop up to the ULL that we all don't know about? The hysteria that this was going to happen needs to stop since its not happening. It's a scare tactic.
If good projects come forth that abut existing infrastructure and development that have been in the sphere of influence for 18 years (forget the ULL, just focus on the sphere we all approved I think in 1992), then don't get in the way of what the majority of us want. 90+ percent of Woodlanders voted for Costco via a survey that went out with the utility bills a while back. Obviously there is a demand for this type of retail based on Costco's success and Woodland supporting it with our precious dollars.
Yes... misinformed:
Woodland will be worse off if Target left? That is just a dumb statement. I don't know of any individual retail store that makes a city better or worse.
Who is making up the hysteria? 90% of Woodlanders want Costco? Now that's hysterical.
There were/are adequate freeway locations available for big retailers like Costco and Best Buy across I-5. The assertion that I haven't been paying attention for the last 30 years is idiotic.
Your "sphere of influence" (you still didn't define what that is) and "precious dollar" rationale is just empty jargon and has no merit relating to the conditions of the ULL. You stated that it's been two years since its passage... so what? There is no time table to develop land.
As I said before, it is you who is misinformed.
Anon 11:53
You seem to suggest that by giving Target a "more favorable freeway location" that it will satisfy everyone and we will be on our "merry little way to retail tax income bliss!" I believe this is setting a dangerous precident for the city. You are now wagering the future happiness of the citizens of the city against the happiness of a corporate entity. I can reasonably say that if we live in a place like Elk Grove, I will not be happy. I don't think I am in the minority 10% of residents in Woodland (as your 90% of Woodlanders support Costco statement would seem to suggest)
I am all for bringing national retailers to Woodland, however I believe we should be putting the long term interest of the citizens before the ease and profitability for a few developers. Finding adequet infill sites that abut the freeway would have been a much better idea. I could pull up Google Earth and show you 10 BETTER suited sites right now. You just allowed Petrovich and his retail tenants to put themselves into a "me first" position, and the citizens get stuck with the infrastructure cost. GREAT JOB!
Sphere of influence is that property inside the incorporated area of our city.
New development pays for infrastructure, not the taxpayers.
Hi 2:46 - sphere of influence is an area outside the incorporated area. It is the area that the city considers within its influence for development and annexation, and it is adopted by LAFCO. You can get maps from LAFCO that show the city boundary, the sphere of influence and the urban limit line. The ULL was not meant to be a grow-to target- that's one of the problems with someplace like Vacaville, where you hit the city limits about 5 miles before you hit city. The signal to developers is that there whole city area is in play. Without good control at the council level, you wind up with Natomas. It was to prevent sprawl onto the special soils around Woodland. New development not only pays for infrastructure via mechanisms like Mello Roos districts and landscape and lighting districts, but there also can be fees for impacts directly related to that development's impact on current facilities, such as parks and other city services - police and fire, for example. The Community center is being built with a combination of Measure H (and extended) sales taxes and development fees, and there were development fees in the new police station.
Yes, Gateway sat undeveloped for many years because there was no developer for it, and the car dealers sell cars, they don't develop projects. The infrastructure costs were supposed to be covered with limited commercial/retail - that was the initial proposal. Let me put in limited retail and I'll complete the auto mall. That's the reason for the General Plan amendment from auto mall to highway commercial. Later it morphed into no auto dealers and all retail.
Best Regards,
Martie Dote
Hey Chris, Chill on the Elk Grove bashing. I would love to be able to afford living there. Even in a down economy, it is a great place to live. Great schools, shopping, and forward thinking City leaders.
Woodland will never look like Elk Grove. It will not look like Natomas either, (another of your bash recipients).
The people who have lived here forever have been asking for more shopping and entertainment options. The folks who are new here also want more.
Suggesting that Costco, Target, or Best Buy should in-fill would fraction out the whole Mall feel. People drive to a Mall for a variety of selections. Sort of "one stop" shopping. Fewer miles on the car. Your suggestion would make people drive all over town to do the same shopping. In-fill where it makes sense.
Petrovich has land. He needs to put stuff on that land. Any developer who buys land wants to put stuff on it. I am sure it gets annoying some times, as a developer, dealing with a "moving target" from the City. The Planning commission is only ONE stop along his path. He has made connections with a variety of investors.
Please stop bashing businesses, Corporate or other. The City of Woodland makes money from ALL taxes. That is how Woodland collects it's sole revenue. Your argument that somehow Elk Grove made a mistake in supporting commerce, only works in a down economy. When the economy strengthens, (it always does) Woodland will be just that much further behind.
Now is the time for SMART developement. Woodland has a wealthy developer who wants to spend his money in our area. He needs clear direction without all the games.
3:40 has it right. Signed; part of the 90%
Anon 3:40
Firstly, the Gateway plaza is in no way "one stop" shopping (as you suggest. I guarantee you, people are going to drive to Old navy, shop, drive over to Target, shop, and then drive over to Costco to pick up groceries. I really doubt you are going to see many people walking from shop to shop in that gargantuan shopping center. This leads directly into my next point (and the reason I target Natomas AND Elk Grove) It isn't that they side with commerce. They side with this new development model which packs as many big box, and specialty retailers into a piece of land without any regard for the pedestrian experience. It is a completely auto-centric development model. They are here to stay, however, they don't have to be put into these mega-strip-malls. Have you learned NOTHING from 1980's development theory? How many strip malls sit empty or vastly under utilized? Only now are infill retailers like Ross, Marshalls, and TSC beginning to fill our gaping holes.
Maybe you only read a couple of my posts....but if you read them all you would understand what I mean.
Secondly, about infrastructure fees, what I meant was the public gets stuck with the maintenance bill (i.e. the current rise in water/sewer charges coming to a tax payer near you.)
I agree that developers buy land to put stuff on. I also understand that because of our market "system" typically that developer is going to buy land that has the biggest ROI. This this is usually going to be a 'greenfield' site as the mediation/development costs are typically relatively low. Until we begin to force or 'bait' developers into the infill sites, it will always be cheaper to go greenfield.
I agree with you that now is the time for SMART development. I believe Woodland can have national chains, easy development, AND responsible smart development. I think people like Martie have a place at the table, I also believe pro-greenfield people have a place at the table, it is all about balance. However, ultimately they all must make tough choices in the name of their constituents. They have to answer for those choices, come election time.
9:47 last night wrote this to Marite Dote: "If the auto dealers can move to the 160 acres you refer to and we can add more jobs and retail, why wouldn't we do that? Please respond to these questions."
This was in response to Martie bringing up the 160 acres south of Gateway as potentially having some sort of sewer plant issues. 9:47 PM asked several questions that I had an interest in hearing the answers to that posed a "what if" scenario where "if" the sewer plant issues can be worked out as well as the environmental concerns and there was ag land mitigation, would she support such a plan. Martie?
Keep it going, we are almost to 100 comments!
Chris,
Thanks for your perspective on this topic. It seems others are stuck on just rolling out the strip mall because "90%" of Woodlanders want it. Estimations like that are funny. Why would anyone include a ridiculous, made-up number to state a case... it only deflates the argument.
Anyway, what hasn't been mentioned here is the possibility of growing up... not out. Those who falsely claim there is not enough space in in-fill areas for major retailers are not considering second or third story construction. I've been in a two-level Super Target - the idea is not foreign to them.
There are many creative options to save our agricultural surroundings and to provide Woodlanders (and neighbors) exciting shopping experiences.
Show us one multi level Target store in a town with less than 1 million people. I read they have only built five in the entire country, all in downtown urban cores. Target spent 20 years trying to locate in Davis and would not build a multi level store there. They are building the exact same store we are getting in Woodland on the edge of town at Mace Blvd. with freeway frontage. Get real with these comments. You hurt your credibility saying these ridiculous things. Saying that is all we will accept will only keep these retailers from ever considering Woodland - which may be just what you want.
Anon 9:57.
I don't find his comments ridiculous, and I don't think they hurt his credibility. Actually quite the opposite. I believe sticking with the "status quo" and allowing a retailer to dictate your city's development strategy is very backwards. We as a public should be using the only tool retailers or the market will understand: Our Dollar. If you would like to see an example of this theory in action just look at the 'green market'. Before it became mainstream, there were a select few people pushing alternative products and responsibly farmed fish and produce. Now, even Raley's and Bel air sell "responsibly harvested" fish and organically certified fruits and vegetables. These are great examples of capitolism at it's best.
Now, why can't we push this concept into responsible building and city planning? If we as a community demand infill and demand responsible development then it WILL happen. People like Dino, Martie, and me are needed in this discourse. Additionally, we need people on the other side of the fence to help balance 'perspective' so we can all come to the decision that best: "serves the community responsibly"
I once heard a quote that I fancy:
"How do we love all the children of all species for all time"
-William McDonough
Another of his quotes I find interesting if you REALLY read and understand it:
(in speaking of a Cradle to Cradle society)
"Our Goal is a delightfully diverse, safe, healthy and just world,
with clean air, water, soil and power
-economically, equitably, ecologically and elegantly enjoyed-Period!
Which part of this don't you like?"
-William McDonough
Chris, You can call me Buddy, by the way. A lot of my friends call me that.
You commented:
"This leads directly into my next point (and the reason I target Natomas AND Elk Grove) It isn't that they side with commerce. They side with this new development model which packs as many big box, and specialty retailers into a piece of land without any regard for the pedestrian experience. It is a completely auto-centric development model."
It just sounds to me that you do not enjoy this type of shopping. Well My point is that quite a few DO like this type of shopping. YOU don't have to shop there. :)
A pedestrian experience would be better had in our Downtown. The auto-centric experience works for a whole lot of shoppers. Just check out the size ond occupancy of the gigantic parking lots.
I have also witnessed the demise, and re-use of the OLD SCHOOL style strip malls. I think that is still an education in the process.
PS. I have read all your posts on this string. I have also read your comments on other issues here at the Journal. And I DO get your point.
Buddy
9:57 Ridiculous
The first two-story Target opened in 1999 in Gaithersburg, Maryland, centered on a main street.
http://sites.target.com/site/en/spot/store_details.jsp?&storeNumber=1193&referringURL=%2Fsite%2Fen%2Fspot%2Fstate_results.jsp%3Fstate%3DMD
The current estimated population of Gaithersburg is 60,736 (7/2007)
http://www.gaithersburgmd.gov/poi/default.asp?POI_ID=177&TOC=112;177;
Environmental philosophy from the Target Web site:
http://sites.target.com/site/en/corporate/page.jsp?contentId=PRD03-001095
Real Commitment. Real Progress. Real Results.
Minimizing our environmental footprint, one store at a time.
Our Environmental Philosophy
We recognize that we have a responsibility—as team members, as a company, and as global citizens—to minimize our environmental footprint. So we've sought ways to reduce waste, use energy more efficiently, and operate more sustainably. We're proud of our accomplishments and we're continually improving, one store at a time.
One way we're improving the quality of our buildings and reducing their impact on the environment is by following the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) Green Building Rating System that influences several of our design attributes and key design decisions.
Dino:
Quite nice. Well put. I actually didn't know that Target had a "commitment" to doing better as a corporation. I have seen and heard of the steps Wal-Mart is taking. I it is at least a little encouraging. So, stepping back and looking at this situation. Why didn't Target decide to 'go green' in Woodland? Because we didn't force them to. Honestly.
How do we feel about that as a community? I don't feel good about it. It makes me quite sad. Once again, the greenfield site was CHEAPER/EASIER to develop.
Hi Chris - two comments re: density. It is always a fight to get developers or builders to agree to density increases, just as it is to get them to limit cul-de-sacs (which limit pedestrian and bike access to arterials) or pre-select architectural plans for lots they intend to sell. The answer always is they need the flexibility to respond to the market. Some of that is true, but not all of it. We require multiple plans from developers in the SpringLake area just to keep the housing diversified and interesting. We also set up density gradients so higher density apartments or cluster homes weren't cheek by jowl with 3 unit per acre developments. We buffered with 4, 5, and 6 unit per acre densities. However, it is possible if you work at it long enough, and I suspect the same is true for retail, especially as land becomes more expensive and less available. That was one purpose for the ULL - to make in-fill in Woodland more attractive, and the City Lofts project is one result. It is multi-storied, mixed use, with residential on the top floor. I've seen projects like this in Pasadena and they are really vibrant centers of activity. One of my favorite examples of in-fill working out is Pleasanton, a city not unlike Woodland. Someone posted that this neo-urban planning only applies to large urban areas - not true. The principles can be scaled to any venue - it just takes vision. We've already done some of it here. One other thing on density- you might be interested to know an idea floating around amoung people knowledgable about affordable housing and in-fill is to multi-story the County Fair Mall, leave retail on the ground floor and add residential above. At this point it's just an idea, but at least some people are thinking creatively. I think we have a lot of in-fill opportunities in Woodland if we can get past the notion that all development has to be green-field. We need to rethink "growth". Certainly one way to utilize infrastructure more efficiently is to built up, not out. I recall a report by the American Farmland Trust that if cities in California just increased average densities from 5/acre to 6/acre, they could accommodate all the anticipated growth in CA to 2050, without annexing another acre of soil. There is enough land already annexed to do the job.
As I said before, the Planning Commisson worked long and hard to balance the land within the ULL for Woodland's growth the next 30 years. There were extensive discussions and public input before we arrived at the preferred plan, which Matt modified a little for his ballot initiative. The land east of 102 is one of the green field locations, along with the north east industrial area and north of Kentucky. It sounds like 9:17 and 6:57 are asking for a commitment on a project I haven't even seen as yet, only heard about. The problem with the sewer plant, as I understand it, is the odor. I haven't heard whether they will be able to mitigate it or not. The mitigation for the flood plain, as I remember, was to build berms around it, thus taking it out of the flood plain. Re-location of the plant is at least a $100 million proposition. Besides the plant there are 900 acres of city owned land and settling ponds.
Philosophically, as I've already said, I am not anti-growth nor anti-developer. I have never seen a city finance model that doesn't anticipate some growth to stay healthy. Developers bring to the city something the city can't do for itself, but they have to rely on the city's land use authority to get what they want. This implies partnership. As a City Councilwoman I have another responsibility, though, and that is to promote good public policy and act in the whole city's best interest. I represent everyone, even people who didn't vote for me, or didn't vote at all. To be clear, without a solution for the sewer plant problem, without an annexation agreement with the county, without approval by LAFCO, without mitigation for loss of farm land, special soils, and endangered species, nothing is getting built. This is a reality we have to consider. For me, a key factor is at least an economic analysis of the impact on Woodland today and in the future of the size project being discussed, and I would be happier with a General Plan update (last updated in 2002). In the hypothetical case, where all these issues were successfully addressed and the General Plan or economic study showed that building something east of 102 didn't gut the rest of our retail and cause blight in other areas of town, or cause us to overrun our growth cap, then I could consider a project. My preference would be mixed use, though, including office park and higher density affordable or senior residential, maybe with R&D sites for industrial development - something that brings in better jobs than minimum wage retail (we have enough of that) and plans for future growth in high tech or research-related jobs, maybe like a GenTech, or stem cell research. We need to stretch ourselves and think about unique things we can add to Woodland so we don't become Anywhere USA (credits to Dave Wilkinson). You're right Chris, we need balance. That would also buffer the city coffers during the next down-turn cycle, if we diversify our revenue base.
Best regards,
Martie
Martie:
Well put. I find myself siding with you more than I thought I would...but, well put none the less!
(I only say that because of how the Bee portrayed you in their article. I guess it is one more example of "don't believe everything you read")
Does Lois Wolk's 200 year flood protection bill mess anything up with the ULL? Seems like the entire northeast side of the ULL is under the flood protection there. Will the city pay for damages occured by flooding if they allow development?
Someone is misleading us. The example of the Maryland multi level store Target store is over 1 million in the contiguous trade area. Take the population of the Maryland store as a trade area. not just the city limits of a small district in a bigger metropolitan area. San Francisco's city limits contain about 650,000 people but the trade area is several million. You lost credibility here.
Martie, I think 9:47 wanted to know if all the sewer plant, environmental and ag preservation issues were able to be solved, would you support an expansion here. As part of the 90 percent and someone who lost her job due to budget cuts this is really important. Target is re-leased per a previous blogger to a discount retailer that can help those of us that can't afford high prices. K-Mart stayed empty for so many years because they would not sell the property. It filled up in less than a year once the current owners (dare I say a developer) bought it. Mixed use sounds good, but I don't see any large office tenants interested in Woodland.
So are you on board Martie if this all works out and there is evidence it won't create havoc on the exisitng retailers? Many people are interested in this.
The downtown loft project has been in the pipeline for over two years. Why have they not built it? Has the developer at least submitted building plans and paid for building permits? I heard they don't have any money and are looking for partners but the numbers don't work. Has anyone asked them if they have the wherewithall to build this or asked for the analysis that says this works based on reality? I don't think any of us should applaud this project until it shows signs of being real. Until its built and succesful, its nothing but a theory. To say this is our future when its not proven to work is dangerous as other opportunities pass us by.
Martie, and Chris,
Your eutopic model for Woodland is commendable. Government should not micro-manage a community though.
Neither of you are in control of who should develope here. This is still a free country. You are, however, free to decide where you want to spend YOUR money.
JM has shared a few times on this blog that he felt like he was protecting the existing four home improvement stores already in town by voting against a Lowes. Instead, we will have three Rite-Aids. Inconsistant.
If a developer comes to our area with a plan, Woodland should have very clear rules that apply to everyone, equally. Infrastructure, location, signs, landscaping, all good topics for the Planning Commission. Sign colors and logo design are not in your scope. Signage interpretation rules in the Best Buy's case was divided by at least two opinions on the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission got it wrong this time, so the Council corrected it.
5:08 Credibility Expert
Who lost credibility? I blew you out of the water after your flippant comments made at 9:17.
You challenged me to "Show us one multi level Target store in a town with less than 1 million people." I did that.
You also wrote "I read they have only built five in the entire country, all in downtown urban cores." If you actually did some research you would know there are about 35 multilevel Targets.
The population of Yolo and surrounding counties is about 2.5 million, or does this figure not count in your logic? You can't have it both ways in your very weak argument, Mr. Credibility Expert.
Misleading, my ass. Blog again when you have something to add to the discussion.
JM is right on.
The AARP is the most powerful lobbying entity in the United States. Why? Because the Baby Boomer population is about to drive the economy.
3 Rite Aids may not be enough to handle the demand for perscriptions!
For those of you who are relatively new to Woodland, our hospital - Woodland Memorial was once considered state of the art and many aging people moved here as a result.
As for the rest of us who are trying to raise a family, THANK YOU to JM and others who understand that while we may not be elderly, we have sick little ones who need perscriptions - and they need them ASAP, not after waiting 5-8 hours in pain!
Good Lord people. Jeff Monroe is looking at the bigger picture.
Thank you JEFF MONROE, for doing your homework and truly preparing us for the largest demographic shift in our lifetime!
Woodland Mom
Hi 5:52- while the city cannot prescribe who develops here, the city can decide what type of development occurs. The city retains authority over land uses, including location and amount of acreage, and zoning (what types of use). Development arrangements bring the city what it needs- housing or industrial or commercial- and give the developer what he needs- incorporated land to build on, and municipal services to hook up to (water and sewer). It has to be viewed as a partnership, in my opinion.
To Chris- thanks, I think we probably agree on more things than you imagine. Be careful of articles, especially those published a day before the election. The Bee article was a surprise to me - when has the Bee paid any attention to a Planning Commission decision over a sign or design guidelines in Woodland? When interviewed by the reporter I directed him to the three other commissioners, because they actually had more to say that night than I did. Not to happen. I was singled out, I think, because it was Monday, the election was Tuesday, and at least one recipient of Petrovich largesse wasn't doing so well. As it happened I think it backfired. However, like I said, it's water under the bridge, time to move on, and I don't do revenge - waste of time.
City Center Lofts had to iron out some design issues with a Planning Commission sub-committee. Before that they were hung up with how much of the historical buildings to preserve in their new facility. They are coming to the Planning Commission on Thursday for Conditional Use Permit, Tentative Map approval and Design Review. One more step in the process. I don't think they would be continuing to pursue these permits if they didn't plan on building the project. One point my husband likes to make with me- developers are way ahead of most of us - they are planning out 10-15 years, while most people think in year increments (ie, next Christmas) and most electeds think in four year blocks.
Regards,
Martie
Martie,
Re: City Center Loft (off the topic, but while your attention here), has city staff ever defined what "abandonment of Dead Cat Alley" actually means? Considering the plans by the builder to beautify and use the alley, most can surmise abandonment is an entitlement term - however - it's been two years and staff still hasn't provided an answer. They couldn't do it when I first asked, and to this date I have not heard.
The city should retain all rights to the alley. Don't get me wrong... it should allow the new use of the alley, but it should not abandon the title to ensure its future as a continuous passage (a council directive provided by the DCA Proclamation).
Buddy:
Good of you to identify yourself. I hate calling people by Anon and the time they posted, it seems so impersonal.
Anyway, I believe we are going to agree to disagree on this point. I feel that the auto-centric society IS actually one of the biggest problems in society right now. If you do not drive somewhere, you can't get anywhere. I find this relationship of "human-tool" becoming more of a "slave-master" relationship. If you take an honest look at how you move about our communities you will find very few people are walking, riding bikes, or taking public transit. Even if their destination is between 0-2 miles. I find this sad. There is no reason NOT to leave the car at home. I admit, I am just as guilty in this situation, I actually didn't drive for 7 years, relying on mass transit, my feet and a ride share to get around. This worked very well for me. As I progressed in my career and life, I knew I would need to drive eventually. Unfortunately, as soon as I purchased my car, I just fell back into the "classic" model. This society is built on the automobile, and I advocate doing as much as we can to limit our dependence.
Dino: You got rather heated in that last post, but I don't blame you.
Chris,
I have a low tolerance for trolls.
http://www.flayme.com/troll/
dino:
Correction, I meant your 5:55pm post.
Martie:
I wish I could make it down to the Planning Commission meeting this week. I am very interested in the City Center Loft project as well as any development that is going to be happening in the city. Unfortunately I have something planned this thursday. Maybe next time.
Martie still has not answered the question on the 160 acres she referred to. She has answered every other question and offered her opinion on everything else and then some. As a single mother who lost her job due to budget cuts, I and am deeply concerned about our city's economic future. I guess we know her answer. It's no and perhaps never in a million years not even if all the other stuff is worked out.
In her last post, Dote again proves she is biased with anything Petrovich does including his right to support a candidate other than her. I see on the web site he donated $750 to Seiferman. Others gave more to him including several important businessmen in our community. Does she have a problem with everybody else that supported him or just Petrovich? She should recuse herself with this bias so the rest of us don't get hurt - again. Of course that will never happen. Who am I kidding?
Anon 10:06
I don't mean to speak for Martie (as I cannot possibly know what her answer is) but from my point of view:
If said 160 ac was developed in a RESPONSIBLE manner, (as I have described in many posts above) and if there were NO OTHER suitable infill sites available. When I say this, I mean NO OTHER, not just "economically less desirable". Read my post about Greenfield development and you will get what I mean. Then yes, I would be in favor of that development. I will guarantee you, this property does not fit those parameters.
Hi 10:06 - You never clarified which budget cuts - city, county, state? I didn't think the city was doing layoffs. Also, I answered in post 6/17 1:05. Please re-read.
Re: election and campaign support, of course Paul can support anyone he likes, it happens all over the region, I'm only trying to put the Bee article into perspective. I didn't call the reporter, he called me, and I doubt city staff or any commissioner alerted him to the design issue- it's just not something the Bee routinely covers. They pretty much ignore Woodland unless someone gets killed here or is accused of improper behavior towards a student.
Regards,
Martie
Still not an answer Martie.
dino said...
Martie,
Re: City Center Loft (off the topic, but while your attention here), has city staff ever defined what "abandonment of Dead Cat Alley" actually means? Considering the plans by the builder to beautify and use the alley, most can surmise abandonment is an entitlement term - however - it's been two years and staff still hasn't provided an answer. They couldn't do it when I first asked, and to this date I have not heard.
The city should retain all rights to the alley. Don't get me wrong... it should allow the new use of the alley, but it should not abandon the title to ensure its future as a continuous passage (a council directive provided by the DCA Proclamation).
6/18/08 6:46 AM
Hey Dino, I don't want to get on your bad side, but don't you think 2.5 million people in 25 miles is different than 2.5 million people in 2 miles? If not, we would have half a dozen or more 25 story high rise office buildings downtown instead of millions of square feet of flat industrial buildings based on your logic. All we have is the Wiseman building that received a ton of public money in subsidy to be built and has never been fully leased in all these years. Why don't we have a Hyatt Regency or High rise condos?
I don't think your credibility should have been challenged, but your response didn't make any sense to me.
11:20
Yes, it's a lot different. Considering the District of Columbia has about 9,000 people per sq. mile (D.C. is just over 60 sq. miles). Your "shoot-from-the-hip figures have the Washington Metro Area at 1.25 million people per sq. mile. Does that make sense?
The point is that the Credibility Expert tried to have his cake and eat it too. He can't ask for one example, then change the criteria after he was put in his place. The 2.5 million figure I gave was to simply show what our expanded market is, since that's what he tried to do. The fact is, there are a number of Target Superstores in the DC area so his so-called "trade area" is not accurate... and therefore his argument still doesn't hold water.
Your suggestion that Woodland should have high-rises by now in order for a multi-level Target store to be built is way out in left field. You're missing the point of the entire thread.
For all those that are so enamoured with the City Lofts idea and are convinced its feasible and that the developer is going to build it and that our future planning and approvals should be based on this model, think again. The following was sent to me today unsolicited via an email blast:
Dear Client,
Please find the attached marketing package in regard to an infill property in Downtown Woodland, California. The site totals 2.62 acres and will be entitled for 52,235 square feet of ground-floor retail, with 225,000 square feet of residential above. A letter of interest has been obtained from a Northern California Senior Care Facility operator who has expressed interest in being a long-term tenant, manager, or possibly an equity partner if the residential portion of the developed as a Senior Care Facility. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Regards,
Chris Dickinson
National Land Group
Marcus & Millichap Real Estate Investment Services
3741 Douglas Boulevard, Suite 200
Roseville, CA 95661
PH: 916-677-4100
FX: 916-677-4170
cdickinson@marcusmillichap.com
The attached package to this email offers the property for sale! Note the reference to an equity partner as well. Below is what the "developers" are asking for the property everybody thinks is going to be built:
SUMMARY
Property City Center
Property Address 333 Main Street
Woodland, CA 95695
Price $8,242,179
Down Payment 100% $8,242,179
Lot Size (SF) 114,560
Price/SF $71.95
Lot Size (Acres) 2.6299
Price/Acre $3,134,028
Buildable SF 300,000
Price/Buildable SF $27.47
Lot Dimensions Irregular
Type of Ownership Fee Simple
Currently the site is being entitled for a building consisting of 225,000 square feet of residential, 26,285
square feet of live/work space, and 52,235 square feet of commercial. Entitlements are estimated to be
obtained by the end of May 2008. As long as future development stays within the EIR envelope of the
entitled project, changing use should not take more than sixty days with the city. The site is currently
being leased on a month-to-month lease to a car dealership that is paying $10,500 per month.
I am not saying Woodland should not encourage this type of development. What I am saying is it is not feasible and no one should use this phantom project or its planning principles as the reason (or excuse) to turn down real projects with real benefits to the city like Best Buy - which is where this 100+ blog all started.
Hi 3:21 - they are different kinds of projects and not analogous at all. Best Buy is in a highway commercial center with big box anchors - Lofts is an in-fill re-use project in the historical downtown district, including residential, work/live and commercial. Don't confuse it with the signage and design issues that surfaced as part of Best Buy - the two are not related. The lofts project is not the model for future development downtown - it fits the principles of the downtown specific plan- that is the attraction. It isn't generating any planning principles- those were already in place. It simply fits into what we wanted. Check out the site- it is empty. Cars are moved. This tells me they are getting ready to move earth.
Dino - I think you'll find we draw from a large consumer area- up to Williams, past Davis, most of Yolo Co. even some of North Natomas because it's easier to get here than the centers in Natomas. I don't know the exact size, but I doubt the main part of Sacto is included- could be wrong, what with the congestion on Capitol City freeway and the remote location of places like the Galleria and Arden Fair. Anyone know?
Martie
Anon 3:21
You are missing the point here. Development for "Development's sake" is not good development. Does it generate tax base? yeah..does it bring jobs into Woodland? Sure...But does it fit a 'good sustainable building model'? No. Not in any way. If you don't believe it to be a "bad model" to sprawl, just go to metro SF (outside the main city), Sacto, or LA. All of these communities grew out rather than up, they did it because at the time it was the cheaper route to get things built. However, we should be learning from their mistakes. Infill projects breathe new life into blighted areas. There are areas within the developed Woodland area that would greatly benefit from infill density. Not just the downtown. The East st corridor, East Main St, West Main st.
All we are saying here is that sometimes "taking the developers word for it" isn't the best way. Being educated and understanding impacts is a responsibility we should all take on ourselves, We can't just sit back and lambaste our elected or appointed officials because we think they made a bad decision. Go to the planning meetings, make your voice heard...
Hi Chris- you're right, even on a deeper level. This government isn't mine, or any other council member's, or planning commissioner's- it belong to the people who have posted here, and all the ones who haven't. I'm just a representative, but if they don't participate in the forums where the decisions are made, they are abrogating their rights. All of the places I have served - Planning Commission, City Council - we have bemoaned the fact that most of the time we work in a vacuum. People only seem to show up when it's controversial - when they need to be there for the more mundane stuff like the General Plan development, or the sign ordinance, or the downtown specific plan. I don't know, maybe the controversial issues are easier to get around, because certainly they are something we understand easier than reimbursement formulas from the state for property taxes and shifts to cover school financing backfill. How can you expect to be heard unless you use your voice? This string has been interesting and informative, and I will take some things away with me, but you can't count on the other four council members being exposed to this forum, and so if you think you have relayed your message to the majority of the council, you are probably mistaken. So what do you do. In many ways this has been a dialogue, and has some value. If you have a message to be heard, you need to go to the Planning Commission meeting or City Council - take the dialogue there-it isn't just a right, it's a responsibility.
Martie
5:52pm and those defenders of JM:)
I did not get an opportunity to vote on Rite Aid (no say either way). It was not appealed to the council, so I am kind of at a loss with your line of thought.
P.S. There is at least two of us that read this blog. Don't know about the other three.
Martie said:
"All of the places I have served - Planning Commission, City Council - we have bemoaned the fact that most of the time we work in a vacuum. People only seem to show up when it's controversial - when they need to be there for the more mundane stuff like the General Plan development, or the sign ordinance, or the downtown specific plan."
Wrong, wrong, wrong...
The two reasons Woodlanders don't attend these meetings are:
1. These meetings, and their agendas are not communicated to the citizens. Posting meetings at the last possible minute before the brown act says you have to for example. People don't have the time to even decide if the issues on the agenda are controversial or not. Then after these meetings are held, you drag your feet with the minutes. Basically you have lost touch with the regular folks.
2. Low turnout at the polls should be sending a CLEAR message to the career politicians aroud here (you all know who you are). It really does not matter what we think as a community, the elected just do things the way you want anyway!!!
The feeling around Woodland is that our elected do not reflect the views and wishes of it's voters/citizens.
This planning comm. decision fau-paw is just ONE more example of bad leaderships decisions.
Your comments on here Martie only prove and solidify how out of touch with the REAL Woodland you are. Don't feel bad though, you are not alone. There are others on Council that don't represent true Woodlander's. We are a patient people. We will just have to wait till next time and hope for better candidates it two years.
Martie, you do not speak for me, and you DO NOT represent me. I also suspect (from other posts on this blog) that I am not the only one to make that claim.
If Martie thinks that a project like City Lofts is going to be built because its vacant, she is mistaken. Its a fraud of a project and in this long string, its being referred to as the type of a development that all development must occur before any others are considered on the edge of town. Don't think for a moment that this logic won't be used by the Downers (yes I spelled that right) and the council people like Martie who obviously don't want to support what really works and provides benefits to this community. She still has not answered the question.
I think the last post was from another one of the 90 percenters.
What I'm saying is that it has been hard to get citizen participation except for the high profile or hot topics, when in fact that participation needs to happen in the beginning, when plans and standards are adopted that affect the decisions further down the line. We worked two years on the sign ordinance; the Downtown Specific Plan also took years; the SpringLake Specific Plan took nearly 10 years. It is sometimes boring, routine work but the results underpin decisions made later. Decisions like Rite Aid or Best Buy don't happen in a vacumm or frivously, but are based on plans, policies or standards that have been adopted at some time in the past. Admittedly they need to be reviewed from time to time to make sure they are relevant, and the character of a commission or council for that matter changes with the members. Agendas are posted on the city website for both Planning Commission and Council. Go to the department heading and type in agendas in search. The council agenda also contains links to the staff reports. I heard that the Planning Commission minutes were also going to be posted, but not sure when that starts. I'll ask about the council minutes - I do know they are behind on those. You can also sign up with the city manager's secretary to be on an email list for agendas and the city electronic newsletter.
1:29 - I'm not sure where you're going. Are you saying that all infill in the downtown will occur before there is development elsewhere? That's not logical. I've said before, infill is one of the hardest projects to find a developer for, since it is so complicated. Look how long the Porter and Capital Hotel Buildings sat without being re-fitted. Even the Woodland Hotel spent a long time waiting for restoration, and the Cranston building (that actually moved pretty quickly once Tom and Meg got ahold of it). Somewhere in there the County Fair Mall, Raley's Center, WalMart, Home Depot, Yolo Polo Plaza, Pioneer Centers at Gibson and Main, Springlake, and Gateway were built - none of which are in the downtown core. You're not making any sense. The Lofts project is just one in the works - there is also one pending on East St. The consolidated courts project will be coming up soon. We have a lot more happening in our town than just perimeter retail. Regarding that issue, I've said before I'll look at any project if we can clear the substantial hurdles associated with the area east of 102, but until there is a project submitted and the EIR (or appropriate environmental study) is completed, it wouldn't be good public policy, or even intelligent, to commit one way or the other. I'll review any proposals with an open mind. This applies to any project, east of 102, at I5 and West, Road 25 A and 113, anywhere.
Dino _ hopefully I'l find out tonight the plans for Dead Cat Alley.
10:00/10:02 - It wasn't appealed to the council because we were able to re-open the discussion after Paul proposed a compromise to address the traffic safety issues several of the commissioners had, and with re-consideration, it passed 7-0. Some people are happy, some aren't.
10:15 - One of the things I tell my kids is that if you have a problem with something, get inside and fix it, don't just complain. Why didn't you run, or why don't you run in 2010?
regards,
Martie
Thanks for checking on that Martie.
Hopefully you can comment under the new City Center blog... but I'm wondering if the commission or council knows about the marketing for that project? Was the senior care facility use on your radar?
10:15 again,
Martie,
I keep extremely active in my community. I have NO time or interest in serving as a politician.
I vote at every and any election.
I am "in" there and am figuring it out.
Your politico speak (rambling posts), continues to show your dis-connect with us.
Identifying my comment as a complaint is only ONE way to see it. I MEANT for them to be reasons for low turnout at those meetings you wanted a larger turnout from. You know, a problem that NEEDS attention. You offered no solutions to either of my "complaints".
You have consistantly danced AROUND posters questions on this blog. You can't seem to give a STRAIGHT answer. So keep on giving your politico speak around town. I'm sure it impresses a few.
Anon 5:04
I am not sure if you are reading the same posts from Martie that I am reading. Maybe you don't have the attention span to get through her posts...but in her last post she very clearly stated her position on the "160 acre" greenfield, Let me requote it:
"Regarding that issue, I've said before I'll look at any project if we can clear the substantial hurdles associated with the area east of 102, but until there is a project submitted and the EIR (or appropriate environmental study) is completed, it wouldn't be good public policy, or even intelligent, to commit one way or the other. I'll review any proposals with an open mind. This applies to any project, east of 102, at I5 and West, Road 25 A and 113, anywhere."
That seems absolutely crystal clear to me. I agree with her. I think a certain amount of empathy is needed to understand the work a "public representative" does. Yes, some of them are crooked, some are looking out for their own good...but more often than not, I think the local politicians are people just like you and I. They just stuck their head out and are wanting to affect some change. Give them a little break. If you have something you want changed or something you want to push, then show up to the meetings, speak your mind.
Finally, on the topic of "responsible development". I believe balance is in order, it HAS to be a mix of infill AND greenfield. However, we need to be very careful at what we are developing in the greenfield. Verify that it can't be built elsewhere, cherish the greenfield, because once you destroy it, you can never get it back. period.
Ok 5:04 - I like the language so I tend to use a lot of it - it's just a matter of style. I guess it comes from reading a lot.
To simplify- you need to get the agendas either from the city website or by having the city manager's secretary Ana send them to you via email. Go to the website "city of woodland", punch up the department (Planning or Council) and enter agendas into the search engine. You can also subscribe to the e-newsletter. All for free. If you get the council agenda from the website it has links to the staff reports. The Planning Commission minutes will be posted on the web site - I'm just not sure when. I'll find out about the council minutes. I do know they are behind in preparing them. That was the answer to your number 1 item. Here's some more:
The council packets go out the Tuesday before the meeting - that should be plenty of time to decide if there is something you want more information on. The Planning Commission packets go out the Friday before the Thursday meeting - again plenty of time to review them. In the City Manager's office is a public copy of the council packet you can review. Number 2 - if in fact you have been tracking voter turnout you know that it has varied in local elections from 65% to a low of about 20%. Low turnouts happen mostly with school board elections, although this one was low (opinion of many people) because the primary was split off to February and the general isn't until November.
My posts are attempts to provide information people are asking for, and answer questions if I can. Some questions are not possible to answer, either because there isn't enough information about the subject or they are just speculation.
Dino - no, the promotion of the site as a senior care facility was not on the radar. We'll have to see what happens tonight.
Regards,
Martie
Martie, I think the other problem with the meetings is you have to go for hours to get your 3 minutes in. No dialog, no response, nearly like the School board. If there were a way to make the talks interactive or make the reps each respond to commenters, maybe some would show up. Otherwise it is a waste of time.
Good point 9:11. There are some constraints in how the council or commission deals with public testimony. If it's during the Public Comment at the beginning - things not on the agenda - then the rep is restricted from entering into a dialogue with the member of the public. We can ask staff to investigate and get back to the citizen or the commission/council, but we can't take it up and discuss/come to a decision - it wasn't agendized. That would violate the Brown Act.
On public hearings, public testimony can be questioned and used in the deliberation before taking action. Technically I think the public can testify on any agendized item, but usually that testimony is only solicited during noticed public hearings.
The agenda carries approximate times for items, so you shouldn't have to sit very long if you time your arrival. Public hearings are noticed and cannot be started prior to the noticed time. Sometimes when there is a lot of public interest and lots of people show up, the council can adjust the order of the agenda to take up items that might have been later, so people can speak and leave earlier than if the council had followed the agenda order. We used to put the consent items at the end, so issues people had shown up for were taken up earlier, but I don't know what happended to that idea. Don't give up presenting your viewpoints. I know they made a difference for me on some issues.
Side bar - the minutes of the Planning Commission are on the city web site, and in the future will go up as soon as they're approved.
regards,
Martie
Post a Comment