Last Hurdle For Proposed Carlton Plaza Davis Assisted Living Facility

By Elaine Roberts Musser –

OLD NEWS (Background information)

After listening to concerns with respect to the proposed Carlton Plaza Davis assisted living facility, and city staff’s recommendation against approval,

The Davis Senior Citizens Commission passed the following resolutions:

1. “The Davis Senior Citizens Commission recommends the Senior Housing Guidelines be used in evaluating this project.”
2. “Preliminary evaluation of documents provided by city staff and the developer indicate this project would essentially conform to the major elements of the Senior Housing Guidelines.”
3. “The Davis Senior Citizens Commission respectfully disagrees that the proposed land use is incompatible. Surrounding facilities have set a precedent of residential use near that location with Eleanor Roosevelt Circle and student housing already in place.”

The Yolo County Commission on Aging & Adult Services passed the following resolution: “The Yolo County Commission on Aging & Adult Services is highly supportive of the proposed Carlton Plaza Davis project, to bring more assisted living and a needed dementia care unit to Davis.”

City staff spokeswoman Cathy Camacho indicated both the Davis Police Department (DPD) and Davis Waste Removal (DWR) were opposed to the placement of this assisted living facility because they were afraid their own activities would be incompatible with such a residential facility. We were told DWR at some time may have to expand its operations on site, which could create additional noise and odor. The DPD may have to raise its noise level if it, too, decides to do the same.

County and City Commissioners together with City Council Liaison Sue Greenwald questioned the premise of such objections. Any increase in noise and odors would be an incompatible use with already existing residential facilities nearby, such as Eleanor Roosevelt Circle, a senior housing complex, Rancho Yolo Senior Mobile Home Park, and student housing. Ms. Camacho then did an about-face, claiming it wasn’t an odor or noise issue. Commissioners then asked specifically what the problem was. When no sensible answer was forthcoming, commissioners asked a different question. Was it that DPD and DWR wanted the lot to remain vacant in perpetuity, just in case they might expand operations someday? In which case, commissioners pointed out the city should purchase the property in all fairness to the owner.

Ms. Camacho insisted there was no interest in purchasing the property by either DPD and DWR for expansion. Apparently both have enough onsite acreage for that eventuality. So the only objection Cathy Camacho could come up with is that offices needed to go into that space, not any type of public institutional use. When asked why offices are that much dissimilar from public institutional use, Ms. Camacho could only answer “because they are different”. Yet ultimately she couldn’t really give a definitive example that would explain city staff’s extremely negative position on this project.

So I took a look at the more detailed city staff report on the subject. In fact, I would argue the reasoning used in this report to deny approval was tortured logic.

• City staff argued on the one hand there is a potential problem of “future [DWR] expansion of waste sorting facilities”, but conceded “it is hard to know if this will become a reality”.
• City staff argued on the one hand the potential “issues” that can arise in regard to “industrial land conversion to non-industrial uses”, but conceded “that would be difficult to justify as a primary basis for a denial recommendation given other non-industrial uses already in the area”.
• City staff argued on the one hand “the proposed use would not be consistent with the allowable uses” but conceded “the proposed General Plan Public/Semi-Public land use designation allows for community facilities, including hospital and medical accessory offices”.
• City staff argued on the one hand “the project at the proposed location represents lost opportunity for …business”, yet the lot has stood vacant for years.
• City staff argued on the one hand “the land use incompatibility outweighs the potential benefits of the project at this location”, but conceded

o            “there are only a handful of existing facilities in the city offering similar services, most with waiting lists”;
o            “there are limited undeveloped parcels within the city of the size desired to accommodate the project…other possible sites for project type would likely have equal or stronger cons for proposed use vs. other land use choices or preferences”;
o            “the project would be desirable to seniors and residents with aging and ill family members who would otherwise have to relocate outside Davis”;
o            “the facility would provide needed services to seniors with specialized care needs, offer a range of assisted care level options, provide long and short term care”;
o            “the facility would provide…new job opportunities”;
o            the “use could also promote patronage and economic stimulus to nearby existing businesses in the vicinity”;
o            the use would result in the “generation of new property taxes”;
o            “the project would generate construction jobs andwould result in substantial capital investment”;
o            “the applicant has a successful track record of developing and managing senior care facilities”

• Also it should be noted city staff conceded there have been only “two …comments …received…”, both in the negative but VERBAL ONLY – in other words nothing that anyone was willing to put in writing.

I have actually walked the site. The noise levels from trucks traveling on Fifth Street and the continual passing trains were far louder than any noise generated by DWR or the DPD.

Commissioners also pointed out if Carlton Plaza Davis were built, it would have an on-site bus shuttle. The Carlton developer has agreed that ERC could possibly share. Currently, ERC has no such transportation service. The two facilities could partner for social activities as well. As it turns out, another senior community is located directly across the street, Rancho Yolo Senior Mobile Home Park. A very nice senior enclave could be coordinated, which would be to the benefit of all concerned. Furthermore, the proposed Carlton Plaza Davis facility will provide a dementia unit, something Davis currently is in need of.

NEW NEWS

The Planning Commission heard all the arguments and voted approval of the proposed Carlton Plaza Davis assisted living facility. The matter has now been set to be heard by the City Council on February 2, 2010. The City Staff report is now recommending approval, after obtaining input from the public, commissioners and DWR. Many may see this as one more example of how City Staff flip- flopped on an issue, but I do not necessarily see it in the same light. Let me explain.

Proper political process actually worked in this case after a certain amount of prodding, and very well I think. The developer came up with a proposal that would have put a facility for the frail elderly in the middle of a parcel zoned light industrial, right next to DWR and DPD. These two entities purposely located in an industrialized area so they could carry on activities that might be noxious if carried on in the middle of a residential neighborhood. City staff was put in the unenviable position of trying to voice the understandable complaints of DWR and DPD.

But because the city has insisted on a policy of infill rather than sprawl, residential uses have begun to sprout up in unlikely places – near industrialized zones or wherever empty pockets of land can be found. Hence we have now created a potential planning problem that needs to be addressed. There is no blame here, just a need to balance competing interests. City staff, by keeping an open mind, took heed of what the public and commissioners pointed out – the residential part of the city has grown out to meet the industrialized part, which creates a natural tension between the two.

In consequence, because of the city’s “infill not sprawl” policy, DWR and DPD are no longer permitted to engage in certain industrialized activities that would create impermissible amounts of noise or odor in relation to nearby residential neighbors. City staff took cognizance of that observation, and in all fairness changed its position. However, it took strong commission and public input to make sure all sides were heard. In other words, the political system worked the way it was designed to function, with City Staff closely paying attention to what citizens really want.

That is all by way of saying how important citizen input is, either through public comment or participation on city commissions. But it also makes it very clear how important is insistence that our City Council and Staff adhere to proper public process at all times. If that occurs, the end result will be much better planning and a greater number of satisfied citizens. Nothing gets the blood boiling with vigor more than when someone feels they are not being given any opportunity to have their concerns voiced nor taken into account.

Categories: