Soroptimists offer cash grants to women
Effects of Excessive Increases in City of Davis Employee Compensation from 2011 to 2021 on the City's Ongoing Budget Crisis

Developer asks for reconsideration of conditions for Bretton Woods

Bretton-Woods-Tentative-Site-PlanThe following background information for the Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday, October 12th was shared with the Davisite yesterday: 

The following is my position on the Paths:

“Why am I requesting reconsideration of path Map Conditions?
Staff’s insistence on wide concrete paths destroys the character of Bretton Woods. It will have both physical and mental negative ramifications on its residents.

This is not the pedestrian path design that I campaigned on and that went to the voters for approval. It’s not the path concept envisioned by the Development Agreement nor the one that the Planning Commission and City Council approved to be submitted to voters nor is it the plan the voters thought they would be getting when they voted yes on the project.”

Dave Taormino


October 3, 2022

Dear members of the Planning Commission:

At your Commission hearing next week, October 12, you will be presented with a request for reconsideration of a handful of conditions that were imposed on the Bretton Woods tentative maps after the Development Agreement was executed. In some cases, we are requesting reconsideration because the staff interpretation of the conditions at the design level exceeded the condition, and in others, because the condition imposed is the opposite of what was presented to the public from 2016-2020, as well as the Development Agreement and Preliminary Planned Development. After two years of thoughtful consideration talking to future residents, working on engineering, and computing the cost of implementation we have reached the conclusion that these particular conditions, as imposed, are either infeasible or do not align with the vision for Bretton Woods or are contrary to specific Development Agreement negotiated terms.

A table is included in the front of your binders, which provides evidence that the requested revised conditions are consistent with the commitments that were made by the Applicant in the Development Agreement, comply with the Bretton Woods PD zoning, and are consistent with the baseline project features approved by the electorate. We are merely requesting that you revise map conditions to better reflect the project as it was supported by the citizens of Davis and to benefit future Bretton Woods residents. This binder also includes extensive background materials supporting the requested revisions.

Given the materials presented to you herein, we hope that you concur that what we are asking for today is consistent with what we presented to the voters, and helps to achieve the overarching vision of Bretton Woods.

We appreciate your time and attention to these Bretton Woods details. We look forward to enjoying this new neighborhood with you in the near future.


David Taorino [sic]

Download Reconsideration Binder_Front Pocket Documents

Download Reconsideration Binder_Table of Contents through Exhibit D-10.07.2022

Download Reconsideration Binder_Exhibit E - Exhibit P


Todd Edelman

I don't have time to wade through this, and I don't see a summary.

BUT multi-user paths are a stupid idea, especially within projects. They compromise everyone. They can be dangerous for everyone.

This stupidly-sited peripheral project will have a tiny bicycle-modal share and really who is going to walk anywhere from here? West Ponds? Nope, Taormino wouldn't pay for an elevated crossing of W. Covell. All the way to the Marketplace through the tricky 113 access points? Crossing of 113 to North Davis? Someday. Hospital? Clinic? Sure, whatever, but there's no dignified walkway, just sidewalks made for parking lot access....

So are many going to just ride bikes around the complex? Maybe some little kids visiting grandparents... you want them on the internal paths, sharing the space with elders?

Wide paths will increase speeds, but the problem is not the width, it's the sharing. Seriously, IF there are robust bike routes for getting off-site, just make the internal paths walking (and wheelchair, etc.)-only.

Ron O

Not sure what to think of this either (and not planning to study it, in detail), but switching from concrete to asphalt for that paths likely saves money for the developer.

The elimination of separate, decomposed granite shoulders ensures that all users must share the same path. And narrowing the path ensures that there's less room for users (including those in wheelchairs, etc.).

In any case, it's interesting that the "tone" of this developer has drastically changed, from his earlier letter.

Toni Terhaar

If Dave Taormino wants to protect the plan that was approved by the voters then why did he sue URC to take away the memory care unit that was in the plan?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)