Measure P: Q&A Round One

Ed. Note – This post is one in a series of balanced articles and columns written to inform the electorate about the upcoming election on November 3rd when Davis voters will be asked to vote whether or not the agricultural land at Wildhorse Ranch should be converted to a housing development.  Click HERE for our full coverage.

Over the past few weeks, readers of DavisVoice.com submitted questions that they wanted both campaigns on Measure P to answer. We chose six of those questions and edited them to the best of our ability to ensure fairness. Both campaigns were given 4 days to answer these questions with the only qualification being that they keep their responses to under a total of 1,200 words. This series of Q&A will run in 3 separate columns over the weekend. We’ll let you decide if we’ve provided an appropriately fair forum for the discussion this matter.

Since we received the “No on P” responses first, their responses will be first… as indicated in the initial email that was sent to both campaigns. For full disclosure, the “No on P” response was submitted by Greg Sokolov and the “Yes on P” response was submitted by Denise Hoffner on behalf of Bill Ritter and Yes on Measure P.

Today’s Questions:

1.  Is Wildhorse Ranch compatible with the surrounding land uses?  If so, why?  If not, why not?

2.  Does the Wildhorse Ranch project design change the City’s development standards in regards to energy efficiency, open space preservation and affordability?  Please explain.

After the jump, find the answers to your questions.

1. Is Wildhorse Ranch compatible with the
surrounding land uses? If so, why? If not, why not?

No on P Response to Question 1:

Wildhorse Ranch is currently zoned as agricultural (ag) land. This was part of the development agreement in 1995, when the Wildhorse development was approved. Wildhorse Ranch reneges on this development agreement and adds housing on the periphery of Davis, far away from downtown retail and UC Davis. Due to these factors, the City’s fifteen-member Housing Element & Steering Committee ranked the Wildhorse Ranch site 27th of 36 sites for future development.

This ag land parcel also returns a much lower share of property taxes to the City than the average.  This land generates only 2/3 as much in property tax revenues for the City and the project is a bad deal fiscally for the City.  The City’s optimistic fiscal model states that the project will break even over an arbitrary 15 year period, but after the project loses money in perpetuity.

—————————————

Yes on P Response to Question 1:

Introduction to the Yes on Measure P Responses: Thank you for this opportunity to address your readers. We hope this provides a starting point for those of you just tuning in to this issue. We were a little hesitant at first to respond because of the public positions taken by some of the people running the Davis Voice but we decided to do so after disclosing our concerns. Any lawyer knows that those who choose the questions control the terms of a debate. In the spirit of full disclosure, readers should know that The Davis Voice editor Kemble Pope who sent the following questionaire (sic) has publicly challenged in at least one City Council meeting the Measure P project. Moreover, Steven (sic) Souza, the publisher of The Davis Voice has also publicly opposed Measure P. We really wish that a truly neutral person had created this forum but we will participate, nonetheless. We just want readers to know that the questionnaire was structured by people in the No on P camp.

Editor’s Note: Kemble Pope, during public comment at one City Council meeting, asked that the Measure P election be delayed in order to give the Open Space & Habitat Commission (of which he is past Chair, and current Vice-Chair),  Natural Resources Commission, Recreation & Parks Commission, and the Safety & Traffic Commission the opportunity to comment and offer advice on the project features.  That request was denied. Councilman Stephen Souza has commented and voted on Measure P at two different City Council meetings. At the first meeting, he
voted to delay the election and voted to not certify the project’s EIR. At the subsequent meeting, he voted to approve the Developer’s Agreement between the City of Davis and Parlin Development and he voted in favor of changing the zoning to allow the project to move forward if approved by voters. Neither Pope nor Souza have made an endorsement for or against Measure P.

Yes. WHR is surrounded on three sides by urban uses and connects the newly constructed Covell bicycle underpass to two major sections of the Wildhorse Greenbelt and Bikeway. The location allows the project to take advantage of a pre-existing well on the property to care for WHR’s open space areas. The parcel is just right for the kind of small scale green development planned. WHR received the Sierra Club endorsement in part because the project qualifies as in-fill and it is within the city limits.

_______________________________________________________________________

2. Does the Wildhorse Ranch project design change the City’s development
standards in regards to energy efficiency, open space preservation and
affordability? Please explain.

No on P Response to Question 2:

The affordable aspects of the project are quite modest and merely follow City requirements. Unlike many other developments, including Wildhorse itself, there is no affordable housing for sale. The cheapest units, attached townhomes, will average $451,000 when the project is built, according to figures that the developer supplied the City. This is not “really affordable.” Unlike many other cities, the City of Davis has also already exceeded it affordable housing targets and is under no pressure to build more.

Despite the energy savings claims, there is no mechanism to measure or enforce these standards. Also, transportation is by far the largest component of greenhouse gas emissions, but was ignored by the developer in the environmental analysis. If WHR becomes a bedroom community for residents who work outside of Davis, as many people think is likely, many of the energy savings benefits will be lost.

We believe that green, enforceable standards should be part of future Davis development. However, at the current time more development is not needed. The City has 541 units which are unbuilt and the University has 1500 units coming online with the massive West Village project—we simply do not need more housing now.

The project paves over open space when there are other sites in the City which are true infill sites and already developed. Why should we pave over open space land now when we don’t need more housing and when other truly infill sites are available?

—————————————-

Yes on P Response to Question 2:

It has the potential to, but only if City of Davis officials and staff hold future development to the GHG standards WHR has committed to in its baseline Measure J commitments. Through lax enforcement, Davis lost the ground breaking momentum that Village Homes delivered.

Hopefully it won’t make that mistake a second time. One of the reasons many people who are often opposed to new development in Davis are supporting this project is because they want to raise the bar when it comes to what Davisites should be able to expect from developers around these issues.