Petrovich pulls out of multiplex process, leaves Cinema West holding the bag
From the Woodland Record:
October 25,2010
The Honorable Artemio Pimentel and Woodland City Council Members
City of Woodland
300 First Street
Woodland, CA 95695
Re: RFP Process
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
Based upon recent events, I am electing to withdraw from the RFP process to build a theater at Main and Third Streets. The issue has become too contentious and I do not wish to put the City Council in a position of having to choose between the more viable project, versus the one that has created so much emotion at the State Theater site.
Read the rest at WoodlandRecord.com.
Posts
24 comments:
Your article expresses a clear misunderstanding of the facts. Not only has Petrovich Development pulled out of the RFP, but Cinema West also has. That doesn't mean that we're not moving forward with our theatre project and, to the contrary, we'll be submitting our complete application forthwith. The RFP process was intended to unite the community, but instead has divided it. In the course of this process, the community has been distracted from the simple fact that 3rd and Main Street is identified as a theatre location in the carefully implemented Downtown Specific Plan and that a theatre project may proceed to be built there. Our RFP application represented our team's efforts toward creating the best possible project for the site, including a plaza and retail spaces that would benefit the entire community. The project's non-theatre components will have to wait now, but Cinema West isn't left holding any bag. We've entered into an agreement to buy the land necessary to build our theatre and we can now move forward without further delay. The community no longer has to face the uncertainty associated with the competing applications and the City will not have to put millions of dollars at risk in order to get the new theatre it deserves. We look forward to bringing a great project to the community and would welcome your input and support.
Dave Corkill
Cinema West
The "article" is Petrovich's letter.
The RFT went out and two developers responded. One has pulled out. Does it mean that the city can only vote on the one left ? West Cinema was included in Petro's proposal now that he has o pulled out, it means Cinema West is also out. I suggest the City continue to review the only left and vote yes or no on it. If the vote is now then.
Advise to Mr. Corkill, yes 3rd and Main were identified in the Downtown Specific Plan as a possible site for theater but so was State Theater. The RFP process must continue without you and Petrovich. Woodland Tea Party Member
If Cinema West is pulling out of the Request for Proposal - they are in fact saying that they don't need the City (RDA) funding - correct? So...can they go ahead and build a theater there anyway? I'm very confused - sorry.
Both Paul and Dave can now move on and knock the dust from their feet. Go find another town to take advantage of!
I find it interesting that Dino, editor & director for the Woodland Record, is sending emails direct to Chase Bank on behalf of Ron Caceres. A good newspaper tells the "facts", and not the opinion or personal feelings of the editor & director. It’s no wonder all of the articles on this subject are one sided....
To Chase from Dino:
Like I asked before, "Is Chase Bank prepared to engage in a dispute with a thousand-plus community members who support a multiplex at that site?"
Dino
What a great day! The State Theater has been asking the City to give them a risky $2,000,000 loan to remodel the old theater. The City obviously won't make a loan that can't be repaid since there's no way for the state to compete against a new theater. Now the risky loan doesn't have to be made and the City will get a new theater too. Kudos to West Cinema for getting out of the red tape. Build that new theater now! Looks like a great win-win situation for the City and let's spend the 2 million on something really good, instead of a pipe dream.
So now the City gets 2 new projects downtown (which it needs), sales tax dollars and development fees from both projects, and they don't need to make a 2 million dollar loan. The state theater is not being harmed, so a developer (maybe even Ron can redevelop it into a much needed community center or specialty theater like the Tower Theater in Sacramento, which might I mention is only approximately 10,000sf) Then we can have both classic non-mainstream films as well as mainstream films. Am I missing something, because to me this sounds like a win-win…
12:31
Yes. You're missing many things.
Please explain what I am missing?
12:04
You're surprised I have an opinion? That I tell my side of the story? Both Woodland Record and Woodland Journal are alternative sources of information... alternative to the city, alternative to the daily democrat and alternative to developers who try to bring schlock projects to Woodland.
Why did you just post part of my email Troll... or should I say Greg?
Here are the pertinent emails that demonstrate fact-finding relating to the issue. It has already been demonstrated that the community has already been angered by the delays of the city and will potentially be just as angry when they discover Chase is two-faced.
# # #
From: Eileen Leveckis
To: "stories@woodlandrecord.com"
Subject: RE: Chase Bank inquiry
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:36:56 -0400
Dino,
Our statement remains the same:
“As we have since 1924, we’re working with the town to serve our customers and the community.”
Thank you,
Eileen
From: Woodland Record [mailto:stories@woodlandrecord.com]Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 3:14 PM
To: Eileen Leveckis
Subject: RE: Chase Bank inquiry
I will be providing a timeline of both person-to-person and formal communication between Chase Bank representatives and real estate brokers so that the Woodland community can be aware of the level of cooperation from all parties on this issue. Please provide a statement that explains why Gregg Aguirre would send such an inflammatory email to the City of Woodland without copying his boss, Greg Vogel.
--- stories@woodlandrecord.com wrote:
From: "Woodland Record"
To: "Eileen Leveckis"
Subject: RE: Chase Bank inquiry
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:30:23 -0700
Eileen,
What is Chase's statement on the exchange below? Apparently, Greg Aguirre forwarded an email to Mark Deven that was between Gregg Vogel and Ron Caceres - the State Theatre developer. Please note that Vogel did not forward the email. Aguirre has been hostile and unresponsive to Ron's real estate team who are merely trying to work out the best deal for the community. With Chase occupying the Tovar lot, the city is losing potential gains in retail tax revenue.
Like I asked before, "Is Chase Bank prepared to engage in a dispute with a thousand-plus community members who support a multiplex at that site?"
Dino
# # #
And here is the original context of the question I repeated to Eileen...
# # #
From: Eileen Leveckis
To: "stories@woodlandrecord.com"
Subject: RE: Chase Bank inquiry
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:45:52 -0400
Dino,
Nice talking to you. Here is our official statement for your story about the multiplex:
“As we have since 1924, we’re working with the town to serve our customers and the community.”
Feel free to call if you have any more questions.
All the best,
Eileen
From: Eileen Leveckis
To: "stories@woodlandrecord.com"
Subject: Chase Bank inquiry
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:02:22 -0400
Dino,
I am responding to your original email, below, to Frank Hall Consulting. Please call me at (415) 315-7930 to discuss.
Many thanks,
Eileen
Mr. Hall,
I understand you, or your employee, are representing Chase Bank in a real estate purchase in Woodland CA. I have some background information about the site selection and want to ask a few questions regarding Chase Bank's plans:
Has Chase Bank closed on the property?
Has Chase Bank submitted plans to the City of Woodland?
If so, Chase Bank been given approval - or were they encouraged - by the City of Woodland to submit plans?
Are you aware of a potential redevelopment agency conflict with that site?
What are Chase Bank's plans if the city does not allow the site to be used for a bank?
Is Chase Bank prepared to engage in a dispute with a thousand-plus community members who support a multiplex at that site?
Is Chase Bank prepared to locate nearby if the redevelopment agency assists them?
Is Chase Bank willing to partner with the redevelopment agency and possibly build a multiplex above the bank building?
Thank you for your time on this matter.
Dino
12;31/12;37
You're missing the purpose of the RFP, to select one multiplex, not parts of one and the other. The purpose was not about one developer dropping out and then making a bid to develop a project outside the scope of the RFP.
You're missing the purpose of the RDA... to facilitate redevelopment projects within the area (which happens to include the historic downtown) not destroy them. The Third and Main plan will destroy one historic asset and neglects another historic asset (so it IS being harmed).
You're missing the fact the State Theatre Renovation and Expansion project will not work as just the State Theatre Renovation project. Caceres never intended to use the State as community center. Probably because it won't work. Does the Cinema West project come with plans to revitalize the State? No.
You're missing the potential of additional retail opportunities that will be lost if the State project isn't accepted. Already Petrovich has dropped the retail component out of the Cinema West equation. And with Chase and the City pulling their shenanigans, the potential of the State Theatre project will be lost if Chase can't simply locate across the street... which is reasonable and feasible.
You are missing the fact that the State Theatre group has played by the rules, have laid out exactly where they are in negotiations and budgets, yet the city keeps moving the target and did not simply rank the development projects by July 6 as they were supposed to.
That's just off the top of my head.
11:03
Possibly and no. They will need approval to build which would mean lots of hurdles including the provision of parking. Just because a type of use is allowed in a zone does not mean automatic approval by the city. At some point the city - if there were any form of reason in city hall - would also have to realize the stategy of "taking my ball home" against the overall benefits to the community. A city is able to dictate what it wants to look like.... and so far you have seen what has been produced by our leaders.
12:06
You don't know what you're talking about.
If Chase moves forward on that lot after this then I will refuse to do business with them. -Community Developer
I have the same aquestion for Mr. Dino. Why are you interfering with Chase Bank's plan to build a new bank. Is your goal to interfere with every development that's good for the City? Do you juat want to be "Mr. Alternative" and turn the city upside down for no good reason? Let the State Theater die the death it deserves since because otherwise it will bleed the City dry. Would you loan your money on a sub-junkbond development? A responsible person, such as you should be, would advocate not risking huge amounts of public money on pipe dreams. You sound like an educated guy, so put yourself to use in a constructive way.
Same question as what? You asked more than one question.
To the poster at 12:13, how is Chase building a new bank good for Woodland? They are already located here. Isn't the State theater project a new development? Didn't the city issue an RFP for it? I thought so. I guess Dino isn't against every development project.
It is looking a lot like check. Is checkmate in your future?
Personally I am sick of the theater drama. It is the same folks on each side posting over and over again the same things.
It would have been good for the downtown on either end of the block and my bet is it will end up at the new Gateway or in another city. At least we still get Chase, which will be a big help for small business's on this end of town.
D - It just my opinion and appreciate you keeping us up to date but my vote is for more Halloween, first Friday, candidate review, Giants ... or something else...
Brenda,
It's too bad this city is always trying to settle. We could have it all with the Chase relocation (remember they are nothing new, just moving from the mall which will make another empty spot there), a renovated historic theater WITH brand a brand new multiplex WITH more retail and another saved historic asset (Electric Garage) WITH even more retail there... or heaven forbid keep Hoblit for the $200,000 a year in tax revenue. Yep... let's just settle for "at least" one new building. It will be interesting to see what our "leaders" do, or don't do as in most cases.
Dino, et al,
It is so sad to see this process come to such an end. By pulling out of the process, and pursuing a 'different direction' Petrovich, and Cinema West have just elevated the process to the next level of contentiousness and rigor. IF the plans are to build at the site of the 'Electric Garage', a contributing building to our historic district, they will inevitably run into stiff opposition to their CEQA EIR.
However, in the end I feel most disappointed in our City Council, Redevelopment Agency and our community leadership. It is just befuddling to me that they didn't have the resolve or commitment to follow their own timeline as outlined in the RDA RFP.
I personally support the State theater project because I believe it is the 'right thing to do' to preserve our historic resources wherever appropriate. Seeing this process executed per the schedule would have been adequate consolation for me. Now, the city is left with a bigger mess, because they couldn't follow their own regulations.
In my opinion this sets our redevelopment plans back decades. Without appropriate housing stock and 'off-hours' uses, our downtown will never be more than a boutique destination for the eccentric and nostalgic.
Our City leaders have failed us. I urge all that read this blog to let them know exactly how we feel. Write them a letter, send it to your media resources (Woodland Record and Daily Democrat), they were put in office to serve the citizens and it is our duty to demand their attention.
I agree Chris.
I too am surprised how little communication our city leaders are having with its citizens. NOTHING from Deven or council in the press. Shameful!
Post a Comment