Back on April 1, the Vanguard visited the Westlake site and took photos of possible code violations. The Vanguard has now learned that following those photos, the city of Davis issued a notice of Violation to the property owners on April 9, 2009.
In particular, two items were cited, the loading dock “filled with earth” and a cracked window that had been boarded over.
This means that April 9, 2009 marked the first time, the city cited the Westlake owners for either the visual blight of the window or the violation of filling in the loading dock.
To make matters worse, the notices of violation were somehow sent to the wrong address.
“Notices were sent to both 1970 Lake Suite A, and 1970 Lake Blvd., Suite #1.
Follow up inspection was 4-21-09. Inspection determined that this was an incorrect address, correct address not confirmed immediately.”
The city reports:
“The status of violations and notices for the site was checked, and a follow up Notice of Violation was sent to the correct address of 1260 Lake Blvd. on May 27, 2009. The multiple addresses used for the site contributed to error in getting the notice sent to the right address to reach the property owner.”
Somehow though the owner managed to get one of the notices because the window was fixed very quickly after receiving the notice of violation.
Here is the picture of the window from April 1, 2009:
Here is the picture taken on June 3, 2009:
However, as one can see from this picture the loading dock remains filled with earth. According to the city’s Code Enforcement staff, the owners have until June 11, 2009 to comply with the ordinance.
April 1, 2009:
June 3, 2009:
If that doesn’t happen, they can issue another notice of violation and this time with a fine. Fines can eventually reach about $500. The person I spoke with mentioned that they could theoretically issue a new violation each day after it reached a certain point.
Time is running out frankly for the city to flex its muscles here. We have another casualty of the inaction by the owners and the city on this site. “Teach Your Children” a store that provides educational materials to children and schools has moved from their Westlake location to 231 E Street in downtown Davis. The condition of the Plaza and the lack of an anchor store was a key factor in that move.
It is only a matter of time before the remaining businesses either move out or fail. That will leave the city of Davis with a huge empty property.
At the Council’s June 23rd meeting, the council will consider the resolution put forward by Councilmembers Heystek and Souza that reaffirms the City Council’s “support of the City’s General Plan’s neighborhood shopping center concept” and “reaffirms its support to preserve the zoning requirement at Westlake Plaza specifying the inclusion of a minimum 15,000 square-foot grocery store” and most importantly “pledges to devote City resources, as part of a coherent economic development strategy, to support neighborhood efforts to recruit a grocery store tenant at Westlake Plaza.”
At the same time, the council will hear the appeal of the Westlake owner to rezone the site so as to not require a grocery store at Westlake. The planning commission heard the original request about a year ago and overwhelming rejected the request along with a request to greatly reduce the squarefootage required by the city devoted to grocery retail.
What is clear is that time is of the essence here. There was interest by several grocers including the Delanos early this year and that has fallen apart. The city as judging from the lack of code enforcement for the broken window and filled loading dock until the Vanguard ran pictures on April 1 and the city finally got involved on April 9, has dragged its feet here. In the meantime, West Davis residents are without a local shopping option and thus must at least drive a few miles to Safeway in the Marketplace.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
“We have another casualty of the inaction by the owners and the city on this site. “Teach Your Children” a store that provides educational materials to children and schools has moved from their Westlake location to 231 E Street in downtown Davis. The condition of the Plaza and the lack of an anchor store was a key factor in that move.”
But their new location on the E Street Plaza is probably a better location, even without the blight and with an anchor store.
As I said, I live in the area and I agree that it would be nice to have better stores and restaurants in Westlake Plaza. One problem is that DANG’s stance at the moment is an awkward mixed message for businesses: “Please come open a store in Westlake Plaza. You would lease from a delinquent landlord who we don’t trust at all.”
Businesses generally prefer not to walk into a quarrel. This quarrel seems to be over who should pay to renovate the plaza. The city’s leverage seems relatively minor: all of the compliance problems put together seem pretty cheap compared to fixing the interior of the large store. It is surely important to make peace with the landlord, difficult though that may be.
It makes me sick to see this spot that should be a vibrant business center providing services to the large population of West Davis sit empty and badly managed. I cannot imagine a place that would be more perfect for Trader Joe’s. As a realtor in Davis, I am finding that my West Davis listings are not as hot as they once were compared to similar properties in Wildhorse and South Davis and I wonder if Westlake is part of the problem
Jamie
Would think you are right and additionally West Village from UCD looming with its traffic, etc has an impact. Even with all that the city has allowed to be dumped on South Davis, e. g., fast food outlets and freeway signs, South Davis has appeal!
Jamie
Would think you are right and additionally West Village from UCD looming with its traffic, etc has an impact. Even with all that the city has allowed to be dumped on South Davis, e. g., fast food outlets and freeway signs, South Davis has appeal!
If you support there being a neighborhood grocery store at Westlake please come to the Council meeting on June 23rd and speak or show your support. As a DANG board member I am grateful that our work has arrived at this important stage. Many thanks to David Greenwald and the Vanguard for giving a voice to our concerns.
[quote]As a realtor ([url]http://www.movingtodavis.com/new/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19&Itemid=35[/url]) in Davis, I am finding that my West Davis listings are not as hot as they once were compared to similar properties in Wildhorse and South Davis and I wonder if Westlake is part of the problem[/quote]Jamie, are you comparing West Davis now with Wildhorse and S. Davis now? Or West Davis now with those other neighborhoods some years ago?
Also, just as a curiosity, how would you characterize the current r/e market (for single family houses) in Davis now? Do you think we already bottomed out (on prices) and are now on the upswing? Or do you expect prices to stay flat or fall more in the next 12 months?
As a matter of public policy, the status of our r/e market has some importance. The city has approved the construction of (approximately) a couple hundred new homes which have yet to be built. If demand is still falling, it’s probably not a good idea to flood the market with yet more homes on top of those. On the other hand, if we already hit bottom and it’s becoming more of a seller’s market, then planning for more homes (such as with Wildhorse Ranch) could make sense. …. My sense is that home prices in Davis will [i]fall[/i] over the next 24-36 months, as the budget crisis in Sacramento reverberates here with deep cuts at UC Davis and job losses for Davis residents who work for the state in Sacramento.
“One problem is that DANG’s stance at the moment is an awkward mixed message for businesses: “Please come open a store in Westlake Plaza. You would lease from a delinquent landlord who we don’t trust at all.””
Do the owners live in Davis? Maybe the attitude of the owners is indeed the issue here. To their credit they did invest in fixing up the front area of the mall a year ago. But on the other hand, they’ve shown profound disinterest in blight issue (a very easy, relatively inexpensive thing to take care of), merchant tenants have other complaints about the owners, and they appear to have passed on at least one reasonable chance to have a grocery market.
Would it be worth it for them to look into selling the property to someone else who might care a bit more?
[quote]Fines can eventually reach about $500.[/quote]Five hundred dollars is [i]nothing[/i] next to the amounts they are losing every month in rental income, which (I have been told) are in the range of $27,500-$33,000. (The commercial r/e agent I spoke with works in Sacramento, not Davis, but told me that 22,000 s.f. site should fetch anywhere from $1.25 to $1.50 per s.f.)
[i]Do the owners live in Davis?[/i]
As I understand it, the majority owner lives in the Bay Area. He has local “representatives” (not sure what that means).
[i]Maybe the attitude of the owners is indeed the issue here.[/i]
Sure, it could be. But to quote from an inane in-flight magazine ad, “In business, as in life, you don’t get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate.” (I wouldn’t be surprised if the guy who peddles that slogan lost his shirt in a messy divorce. 🙂 Still, there is a good two cents of wisdom in it.)
If the man is willing to sell, then that could be a solution, or at least a way to move forward. Even then, there would have to be a buyer. But this is not what DANG has been saying. Here is a quote from a DANG web page ([url]http://groups.dcn.org/dang/2009-promising-deal-to-bring-quality-grocer-to-west-davis-gets-derailed[/url]): “Based on your recent action and on your history with us and the community, DANG is not willing to accept your suggestion for us to take on the additional responsibility of finding financing for [b]your[/b] project, only to have [b]you[/b] torpedo it again!”
Somehow it doesn’t seem likely that there will be any deal, either a store or a sale, unless the discussion moves beyond, “This is all your fault! Pony up!”
[quote]As I understand it, the majority owner lives in the Bay Area.[/quote]Farrokh Hosseinyoun’s office is listed in Oakland. Jim Barcewski (who I’m told is a minority owner) has offices in Vallejo and San Rafael.
Okay, a modest proposal:
1) Davis is not hardly short of either retail or office space at the moment.
2) The university will supposedly construct West Village, any day now, but the project has been delayed several years and they still haven’t broken ground.
3) Despite the real estate crash, the rental vacancy rate in Davis is still approximately zero. Even with West Village and some new campus dorms, there would presumably still be a shortage of student housing.
4) The stores that are in Westlake are hurting for customers.
If you put all of that together, would it be possible to redesignate some of the unused space in Westlake Plaza, especially the office space, for student apartments? Unlike West Village, in fact unlike all of the infill and outfill projects that are usually discussed, the building already exists.
I like Greg’s idea. The rental vacancy rate is way too low.
[quote]If you put all of that together, would it be possible to redesignate some of the unused space in Westlake Plaza, especially the office space, for student apartments?[/quote]Good idea. How many of the office units are vacant?
As I read the parking code ([url]http://cityofdavis.org/cmo/citycode/detail.cfm?p=40&q=1780[/url]), a 1,000 s.f. office must have 2 parking spaces. A 2-bedroom apartment requires only 1 parking space. Thus, if a 1,000 s.f. office were converted into a 2-bedroom apartment, Westlake would have a surfeit of parking.
Even if it is not cheap — I’m sure it’s not — to build out a 2-bedroom apartment from a blank office unit, if the demand is there for an apartment but not there for an office, then it likely would make good financial sense to convert this. Also, having people living in Westlake would provide some new customers for the existing retail spaces.
Westlake is not zoned for apartments, it is zoned for business. We need retail, not more apartments.
[quote]We need retail, not more apartments.[/quote]Greg’s suggestion was not to replace retail with apartments. His idea was to take the unoccupied office space (which now exists but for which he suggests there is no demand) and convert that into apartments. Insofar as that might have an effect on the retail in Westlake, it would be a positive.
[i]Greg’s suggestion was not to replace retail with apartments. His idea was to take the unoccupied office space (which now exists but for which he suggests there is no demand)[/i]
Yes that is my suggestion, but you don’t need to take my word for it. You can go to Westlake Plaza and see for yourself. The second floor of the south part of the plaza is even emptier than the ground floor.
Many of the businesses in Westlake Plaza, e.g. Soap City, seem student-oriented. If some of the vast extra space were used for apartments, it could help keep some of these businesses there alive. Including a grocery store, for that matter.
As for zoning, the whole point of engaging the city council is that the council controls the zoning.
I think that it’s really sad that Westlake Plaza has so many empty rooms while many UC Davis students can’t find a place to live in Davis. But this is not only about doing the generous thing, nor only about being true to the concept of infill. It’s also about potentially helping with some of DANG’s aims too.
The point is, the owner of Westlake is artificially keeping retail out of there. The space is zoned commercial, part of it for a neighborhood grocery store. Making some of it into apartments is not the answer. Make the landlord do what is necessary to attract business, or start fining him for blight.