Housing Shortage: Yes on L Offers Housing Choices
October 20, 2018
Guest Commentary
By Dave Taormino, a Davis Housing Provider, WDAAC Developer
Housing Shortage: Yes on L Offers Housing Choices
Davis is one of only a few cities in California that has a self-inflicted shortage of homes and apartments. A massive housing shortage exists in the Bay Area because of the lack of land and tremendous job growth. The same problem occurs in Southern California.
Davis needs more housing of several types: for seniors, locally based employees and more student complexes on campus. At least student apartments have made progress, but none for seniors and others.
The Cannery, has been criticized heavily because 75% of buyers are from out of town or out of the U.S. The New Home Company has advertised state-wide to draw out of area buyers to their development. That’s why we created the Davis Based Buyers’ Proposal.
The expensive homes, narrow streets, tall and crowded looking urban design are generally unappealing to Davis residents. Yet, the No on L leaders think it’s a terrific design: the model for future Davis neighborhoods. I recommend readers “drive” to the Cannery and stand in front of the four-story “lock and leave” condominiums being advertised in Sacramento and San Francisco and imagine the new Davis housing model and your place in it.
By my count, for over 18 years the people in the No on L group have led campaigns to veto 1,800 homes and 2,600 student apartments. How is it possible that in one of the most educated and relatively wealthy cities in the U.S., with a renowned University that only one student apartment complex has been acceptable to them in 18 years? Not one single-family home, on any size lot is suitable. Does that make sense to you?
And now, even housing for Davis seniors can’t escape their wrath. For the last two months the extreme side of the No leadership has attempted to eviscerate every aspect of West Davis Active Adult Community. The good news: several past members of the No group objectively evaluated the neighborhood and support yes.
According to the No side’s propaganda EVERY DESIGN CONCEPT of this mixed-density, single-family, single-story neighborhood is fatally flawed. Not to end there, they write this about our elected City Council:
“… impact fees are not fair or equitable and represent egregious violations of the public trust. This is an abusive developer give away and funding amounts to the subsidizing of developer profits by Davis taxpayers…” (Handout from Alan Pryor, CIV Energy Forum 10/14/2018) emphasis mine
Typically, “egregious violations of the public trust” and “abusive” are words commonly contained in criminal indictments of public officials. Is there no limit to their outrageous claims and downright meanness?
No mention of 18 Davis Commissions and City Council hearings where legitimate concerns of good-hearted persons were addressed. Their real goal is preventing, yet again, needed housing, until Davis voters capitulate to monolithic, four-story glorified apartments like the Cannery or something similar.
The No leadership holds the one perfect view of what Davis housing designs are allowed for others and fiercely attack anyone who suggests anything remotely different. There is only one way and it’s their way.
So, let’s get back to the basics of West Davis Active Adult Community.
First, 380 well-designed cottages, bungalows, condominiums and single-family homes on lots varying from 1,280 sq. ft. to 5,200 sq. ft. with an average lot size of 3,600 sq. ft. Perfectly designed for seniors to age in place.
This will allow eight percent (8%) of the current Davis senior homeowners to comfortably age at home in a specially designed environment for their years 70 to 95. 92% of Davis seniors won’t have these same choices. There’s no space.
76 of the 380 homes will be sized and affordable for young families, new UC Davis faculty and staff and other locally based employees.
Second, 150 very affordable senior apartments providing room for roughly 170 seniors. Based on statistics from other Davis senior apartments, 70% of residents are typically single senior women and approximately 37% are minorities.
Many of these seniors have incomes ranging from $1,000 - $1,500 per month or less, about what a UC Davis student now pays for a “bedroom” in an apartment in West Village on campus.
Third, three acres for a senior oriented facility, likely assisted living and Alzheimer’s care along with other senior services.
Yes on L offers housing choices. No on L offers Davis nothing.
"By my count, for over 18 years the people in the No on L group have led campaigns to veto 1,800 homes and 2,600 student apartments. How is it possible that in one of the most educated and relatively wealthy cities in the U.S., with a renowned University that only one student apartment complex has been acceptable to them in 18 years? Not one single-family home, on any size lot is suitable. Does that make sense to you?"
Would you please tell us how you arrived at the figures of 1,800 homes and 2,600 student apartments?
Posted by: Steven Kahn | October 20, 2018 at 07:21 PM
“The Cannery, has been criticized heavily because 75% of buyers are from out of town or out of the U.S. The New Home Company has advertised state-wide to draw out of area buyers to their development. That’s why we created the Davis Based Buyers’ Proposal.”
Instead of developing a policy that excludes “outsiders” and likely unlawfully discriminates on the basis of race, why not address the Cannery problem by limiting marketing to the local region instead of advertising statewide?
Posted by: Eric Gelber | October 21, 2018 at 10:32 AM
"By my count, for over 18 years the people in the No on L group have led campaigns to veto 1,800 homes and 2,600 student apartments. How is it possible that in one of the most educated and relatively wealthy cities in the U.S., with a renowned University that only one student apartment complex has been acceptable to them in 18 years? Not one single-family home, on any size lot is suitable. Does that make sense to you?"
I don't think Dave Taormino will answer my question regarding how he arrived at his figures. And rather than speak to his tactics, I'll let The Davisite's characterization of his behavior at a recent forum point to who he really is.
But let's take a look at the above paragraph he wrote. That paragraph ends with, "Does this make sense to you?" And it doesn't make sense to me, not because of his argument but because of this complete mischaracterization of the the facts andhis complete distortion of the past.
First, who are these shadowy No on L folks (that dread cabal) who have challenged past projects. In every case, every initiative, the group has been composed of different people with a few central figures. Mr. T would have people forget that Mike Corbett ran on Measure C, one of the first initiatives to hit Davis. Measure C won. Secondly, the people who organized the Measure J which gave the people the right to vote on new projects, those folks forced a vote by the citizens of Davis. The people of Davis passed that Measure overwhelmingly. Are the people of Davis to be included in the shadowy No on L group?
Then came the Measure on Covell Village. Many different people met regarding that measure, some the same but many new people. Once again, the supposed cabal of No on L folks forced a vote by the people of Davis, thanks to Measure J. And the people of Davis voted to turn down Covell Village. Were the people of Davis also part of the shadowy No on L folks. Mr Taormino would have us forget they were citizens of Davis, all of them.
There are more examples but I'll leave it at that. Mr. Taormino twists the facts entirely. It seems to me that Mr Taorimino doesn't like the democratic process. And, in the end, he would rather blame a small group rather than the people of Davis.
So when Taormino asks, to prove his point, "Does this make sense to you?" I say, No, it surely doesn't. Why? Because he will always twist the truth, to prove his point.
All this said, I believe Measure L will pass handily. But it won't be because Mr Taormino's antics persuaded them. He is more of a hindrance than a help. The people of Davis will probably vote yes because Measure L looks good to many voters.
In the end, Mr. Taromino's half truths and delusions and conceits will be forgotten, lost in the wind, as they deserve to be.
Posted by: Steven Kahn | October 21, 2018 at 05:50 PM
The La Buena Vida condos in Davis are a mix of 1 & 2 story units. The 2 story units have a 480 sq ft lot size and the 1 story unit is 780 sq ft. These condos are very roomy and inhabited by a mix of students, families and seniors.
New developments should be more not less dense than La Buena Vida. Studio options could easily turn something similar to La Buena Vida’s 4 unit lots into 6 while still maintaining a warm community feeling.
I’m a big YIMBY but “yes in my backyard” isn’t “yes” to just any building. These look like large condos designed to appeal to people that want an exclusive/excluding environment. This is contrary to the spirit of YIMBYism.
Mr. Taormino begins by saying “no” on L people think the Cannery is “terrific” but then goes on to portray the same people as being growth obstructing, propaganda wielding NIMBYs that don’t care about our senior community members.
After also calling “no” on L people “extreme”, Taormino goes on to complain about one resident’s wording as “outrageous” only to then ponder if our “downright meanness” is indeed endless.
This appears to be an attempt to illicit first fear then ill-will towards one’s neighbors. It’s an immature approach to persuasion and comes across as bullying. This proposal looks like an irresponsible use of land. I imagine this is why Taormino has resorted to this type of argument.
Posted by: Fran | October 22, 2018 at 01:24 AM