Earlier this week, the Davis Downtown Business Association released Five Downtown Action Items for Davis. These ideas are conceptual and the DDBA is seeking considerable community discussion and feedback about them.
They are also looking to explore the five areas via an official task force with city staff and members of the Davis City Council.
The five ideas include:
- Create an E Street Promenade on E Street between Third Street and the Davis Commons shopping center at First and E streets;
- Locate the U.S. Bicycling Hall of Fame in a permanent facility downtown;
- Develop city-owned parking lots for other uses;
- Build at least one moderately sized parking structure; and
- Install festive, year-round weatherproof LED lights in an over-street canopy and in trees and shrubs.
I know the city has had plans to do some sort of structure and redevelopment project in the area between E and F and 3rd and 4th. I think that idea has been paused due to funding concerns.
One thing that strikes me is that if the downtown is looking at an E Street Promenade that might put the parking idea that I like into play. That would be a complex that has an entrance on Olive Drive and would be a multi-storied building over the train tracks with pedestrian only access that would drop people off at the corner of First and F. That would be only a block away from the new promenade and it would avoid the problems of dumping traffic directly into the downtown streets.
That idea might address the issue of a parking structure that the DDBA is proposing, would enable the DDBA to possibly redevelop parking lots that already exist, and provide good access to the proposed promenade.
Obviously, I would like to know more about the new promenade and what it would entail but on the surface it sounds like an interesting idea. It is also obvious that it would not be a short-termed project and will take a lot of planning, but it seems like a good idea.
On the Bicycling Hall of Fame. Obviously it is a great honor for the city of Davis to house the Hall of Fame. However, I was opposed to the idea of displacing the teen center in order to temporarily house it. To me it showed misplaced goals by the council majority.
But if we are to host the Hall of Fame, we need to provide a good venue for it which will be a regional draw at the very least. I think it needs to be in a prominent location where the tourist traffic can support local restaurants and entertainment options. So I would like to see some sort of joint planning to use the museum to full effect.
To me, keeping the Museum in the downtown is the only realistic option. The best location is probably towards the southern end of downtown, so perhaps in the new promenade as part of the anchor.
As I said above, as long as the city finds a solution, to where they want to put the parking structure, that makes sense, I think re-developing the parking lots is a feasible way to go.
Finally installing LEDS lights is fine and a fairly straightforward project that I do not believe most people would object to.
I think in addition to assessing the five DDBA goals, the public should weigh in on what their own ideas and goals are for the downtown. The process should not be a top-down directed process, but rather a process that the comes from the public and moves up through the ranks.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Couple of comments…
A parking structure off Olive Drive will put at least one trip per vehicle (more likely ~ 1.8) using the parking on the “minor leg” of the intersection of Olive/Richards. Intersection will fail (more).
Parking structures are very expensive, particularly to acquire the downtown property (city’s main vision is block between 3rd & 4th, F & G). How much would this cost, and who pays?
The current plan that’s on hold would put the parking structure where Kinkos is, that would use redevelopment money. Part of the reason it’s on hold is redevelopment money is at least in doubt right now.
This use of RDA funds strikes me as more productive than giving a sweetheart deal to Hanlees. Parking places are getting harder to come by these days downtown.
It would also be useful to think about another anchor store downtown. Borders and the GAP keep people shopping in the area who might otherwise go elsewhere. Another midsize store might help draw more shoppers. Like it or not the downtown merchants compete with other stores in Davis and elsewhere. The restaurants seem to be doing quite well (at least the good ones) but other local merchants seem to be struggling. Ultimately the success of the downtown is drive by the success of local businesses. Having the downtown as a place where people go AND SHOP is critical.
I concur with Dr. Wu’s point on priorities (Han-Lee’s vs. saving toward parking structure downtown)… but David, you’ve expressed a preference for an Olive Drive location, and have not addressed the traffic issue.
You also seem to propose that RDA fund 100% of the cost, when the ‘benefit’ appears to be disproportionally accruing to the downtown businesses and/or property owners. Between increased sales tax revenue to the city & possibly tax increment to RDA from increased property values, does this “pencil out” or is it a use of taxpayer money (yes, RDA funds are that) to benefit businesses and/or the property owners who lease space to them? Ironically, we might force smaller businesses out of the Core if the proposed improvements increase “property values” in the Core and the property owners (who are generally not the businesses) decide to raise lease rates and make more of a profit. There are a number of city “incentives” that ostensibly are to encourage local businesses, that actually enrich the property owners downtown, instead of the businesses.
[quote]parking….complex that has an entrance on Olive Drive and would be a multi-storied building over the train tracks with pedestrian only access that would drop people off at the corner of First and F.[/quote]
I like this idea a lot. How much of the downtown traffic is local and maybe coming through town (Russel, 5th, B street, F street, etc..), could that traffic be rerouted to the freeway, or would we end up clogging an interstate with local traffic, much like Fairfield does? maybe the 4th street parking garage and other existing lots can handle a lot of the local traffic and the out of towners and SODA traffic will use an Olive Dr complex. Sounds like a big expensive proposition, but well worth exploring, this is the first that I’ve heard of it.
davistownie… Olive Drive has an off-ramp (ONLY, no on-ramp) to I-80 on its east end. All other traffic to/from Olive Drive goes thru the intersection of Richards/Olive. Not good. Nishi development would probably have less of an impact on that intersection than a parking structure. Get real.
BTW… finding a way to safely et bikes/peds from Olive to the Core is a great idea… very costly, but a good idea nevertheless. Better use of money than the Han-Lee idea…
Where would the money come from? How about roads first? Don’t tell me it’s different money pockets!
Actually the Borders store location would have been perfect for Trader Joe’s
Trader Joe’s being a food retailer would have drawn a much broader customer base to the downtown. The parking lot also provides ample parking for retail food customers, which is very unusual for a downtown Davis location.
The Real Question: What is your E Street Pedestrian Mall Anchoring to?
Although an excellent idea to close a couple of blocks in downtown to a pedestrian mall (How about some nice large oaks and cottonwoods down the middle of the asphalt baked street for some shade?)…
Counting on an over priced specialty retailer in disposable income non essentials as an “anchor” for downtown economic viability at 1st street… Well let us see what happens when Borders has to roll over $360 million in commercial debt next July 2011 on rapidly declining income…
How Long Will Davis Borders be Around?
Borders posted a Q1 2010 loss of $64.1 million, Borders book sales drop in digital shift. Borders sales were down 15% nationally year over year in 2009. They carry a heavy debt burden and pressure from a vulture hedge fund as Border’s largest share holder.
Has Anyone in Davis Seen so Many Empty Stores in the Downtown in the Last 20 Years?
Few can deny a seismic shift in downtown business and citizens shopping habits. In my 20 years in Davis I have never seen so many stores move and so many store closures. Change is a foot. The future viability of more over priced knick knack shops and Thai restaurants is questionable.
The downtown needs more restructuring than just some lights and parking. Downtown needs some viable business models that are thinking ahead. Support the pedestrian mall… but the product mix of Davis downtown businesses needs some serious reflection if they want to remain viable.
Has anyone seen Main St. Woodland lately?
I Guess The Vanguard Doesn’t Support Hyperlinks
Sorry…
1st sentence paragraph 4 was a link to a Reuters article:
02 Aug 2010
Borders book sales drop in digital shift
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64Q30A20100527
dmg: “•Create an E Street Promenade on E Street between Third Street and the Davis Commons shopping center at First and E streets;
•Locate the U.S. Bicycling Hall of Fame in a permanent facility downtown;
•Develop city-owned parking lots for other uses;
•Build at least one moderately sized parking structure; and
•Install festive, year-round weatherproof LED lights in an over-street canopy and in trees and shrubs.”
1. What exactly is meant by a promenade? If it closes off a street or two to traffic, will that create traffic problems? What is the purpose of this proposed promenade – how will it improve anything exactly? I’m not really understanding the concept.
2. We dumped the teens out of their own building to house the Bicycle Hall of Fame, and now we learn this was only a temporary solution for locating the Bicycle Hall of Fame? Frankly, I have to wonder where our priorities lie as a town – perhaps we need to give the teen center back to the teens. Talk about poor planning, exalting inanimate objects over our youth…
3. We don’t have enough parking downtown, so why would we want to eliminate parking lots by developing on them? The parking lots are located at various strategic points in the downtown, to make it easier for those with mobility problems (disabled and frail seniors) to get to their destination.
4. A new parking structure? My understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) is that the current parking structure we already have is underutilized. If that is true, why in heaven’s name would we want to build another one? Also, parking structures are terribly expensive, and with RDA money being limited, I don’t see this as a very viable alternative.
5. Festive lights? I’m OK with that, but I don’t really think it will cause more shoppers to go downtown, just bc some festive lights have been added.
6. The loan that was given to Hanlee’s very well may put a lot of tax dollars in the city’s coffers. Hanlee’s has a huge incentive to create that tax revenue, since for every dollar over $133,000 (I think that is the correct number), it will be forgiven the same amount on its loan. If my figures are correct, if Hanlees were to generate $2.4 million in tax revenue to the city, the loan would be totally forgiven. But wow, wouldn’t $2.4 million be good for the general fund?
7. If we build a parking garage, or a promenade, just how much new tax revenue is that going to generate exactly? That is a reasonable question that needs to be answered.
In cogitating on this issue, I asked myself what types of businesses do I frequent in the downtown area, and why. What businesses do I shun. Obviously this is anecdotal, but I think may be somewhat helpful for this discussion.
1. I tend not to shop in a lot of downtown stores bc they are extremely overpriced.
2. The restaurants however, are pretty good. Most have reasonable prices, and good food. If they are too pricey or the food goes downhill, competition from better restaurants will kill them off. Also, a lot of restaurants have outdoor eating, giving a nice friendly feel to the downtown area. Winters and Woodland are beginning to copy it with their own outdoor eating areas. Davis still excels with sheer number, quality and prices.
3. I shun downtown businesses that have had a history of trying to keep competition out of Davis. I won’t name names, but all of you probably know what businesses I mean.
4. I spend a lot of time in Kinko’s downtown, bc of their self-service model and excellent customer service.
5. Watermelon Music is one of my favorite stores downtown. There is no store like it even in Sacramento, for quality of goods sold, customer service, excellent layout.
6. Downtown businesses are very geared toward students, restaurants and coffee shops allowing customers to study for hours even if they don’t buy but a single cup of coffee. It generates good will, and again gives the downtown and outlying business areas an extremely friendly village feel.
7. The grocery stores are very customer oriented, prices are usually pretty good if you use customer discount cards.
8. Pharmacies are outstanding, w excellent customer service.
What would be my suggestions to improve the downtown?
1. I know an idea that was floated about some years ago was satelite parking with shuttles running downtown (that was closed to cars), but that is probably pie in the sky in the current economic climate. But what about having a shuttle run between Target and downtown? Target has a huge parking lot, might be willing to cooperate to bring customers to its own store, yet I know I would be willing to park at Target and take a shuttle downtown to avoid the traffic/parking problems at peak hours in the downtown.
2. Parking is a definite problem. Why are we allowing out of towners to park at the train station free of charge?
3. Start making the downtown look more attractive architecturally. Some of the awful architecture/colors are jarring. Businesses might be willing to cooperate on this.
4. I really miss the mural that was by the Davis Ace Hardware. It was classy, excellent art, and was an interesting use of wall space. The mural on The Paint Chip is another example of clever mural art. How about encouraging businesses to do more of that sort of thing – it lends interest and uniqueness to buildings and doesn’t necessarily cost the city anything.
5. Try and encourage more stores like Watermelon, that fill a very specialized niche that cannot be found anywhere else nearby. Easier said than done, I know…
Just some food for thought…
I agree that the Borders downtown could be in trouble because the chain is in trouble. I think the Davis store does fine but overall Borders is not doing well. Its stock (BGP) is $1.19, generally a price this low is a sign of distress and a quick perusal in yahoo finance indicates the chain is in trouble. Like many retailers they over-expanded during the boom years (e.g. the Natomas store which close over a year ago because nobody went). In addition Borders has to compete with Amazon, which is killing them (no sales tax, larger selection, Kindle, great used book selection, etc). THeir music section has shrunk to nothing–people are downloading everything now. The DVD section is larger but again they are living on borrowed time. The only good news is that Barnes and Noble is also hurting, but B and N is more likely to survive for a number of reasons.
So I agree any planning for the downtown should consider the likelihood of a Borders bankruptcy. Its possible another chain bookstore could open there or someone (Amazon, B and N) would buy out Border’s profitable stores which would likely include Davis’ store.
Any shopping area needs anchor stores. Downtown Santa Barbara is a model for how to bring in a mix of local businesses and chain stores. Of course we are much smaller, but that is what one needs to do. Other downtowns in the central valley are getting killed. We have the advantage of a college campus nearby and a vibrant restaurant trade, but a healthy mix of retail would benefit enormously. Larger chain stores have economies of scope. Some might like to see all boutique local stores but its not viable in Davis–many other bloggers on this page seem to agree.
I want to keep our downtown healthy. It benefits all of us. It makes Davis a better place to live and incidentally helps real estate values as well. The changes mentioned in DG’s post sound fine but the history of urban renewal is littered with grand schemes (costing lots of money) that failed. Downtown Tracy is a case in point.
We need viable anchor stores downtown and the more retail we have on the periphery (think Target) the harder it is to bring people downtown. I don’t think all our retail needs to be downtown, but we need some core shopping downtown that draws people. If Borders goes belly up we could be in for a rude shock.
ERM: this is all great feedback. I wish there was a formal way for the DDBA and others to get public input of this sort.
A shuttle between Target and the downtown is probably a non-starter, since I doubt the businesses at either end would fund it or see the benefit. I know Rich has mentioned connecting Unitrans into the downtown, and that seems like a good thing to work toward.
I’m sorry to hear the parking structure near Union Bank is on the back burner. Parking downtown is issue #1, #1, and #3 IMO. It is the primary reason people don’t go or stay downtown.
The prices at downtown stores are related to the lease rates. I wonder if lease rates are going down in this economy? I note there has been some shuffling of stores (Alphabet Moon, Bizarro World, nestware) related to getting better lease rates or smaller locations.
I got a kick out of this one:
“3. I shun downtown businesses that have had a history of trying to keep competition out of Davis.”
I got the impression from another thread that you opposed boycotting stores — such as Target — for political reasons….
I have to say, I’m beginning to have a pretty sour feeling about this Bicycling Hall of Fame. Somebody please explain to me why this is worth the effort that is being put into it. So far it’s Bikes 1, Teens 0.
Don: Actually Joy Cohan asked me to do this, and on a Saturday in August, why not? I’m sure she appreciates whatever feedback she gets.
Isn’t the Santa Monica promenade experiencing huge vacancy problems? How is the economic health of other pedestrian malls around the country? Seems I read a news article a while back stating that promenades nationwide are proving to be economic non-starters. Sorry, I can’t remember the source. Just how much research has been done on how other promenades are performing? Where can we access the raw economic data and subsequent conclusions drawn from that research? I’m just asking….
Improving downtown viability could certainly start with some nightlife. There are two (count ’em – 2) successful bars downtown: Sophie’s Bar and Little Prague’s Bar, where people DO gather. The others are either dives or lightly patronized. I consider Sudwerk’s and The Graduate outside “downtown”. As far as live music venues go, downtown is seriously lacking any proper venues – that will support a band like, lets say, Davis-based Mumbo Gumbo or Barry Melton’s band, or the many gifted national touring artists who used to play the Palms Playhouse. If a venue could somehow appear in downtown Davis, it could easily attract 150-300 people (from the region–not just Davis) 3 or 4 times a week, which would be a great boon to economic vitality. And shops could benefit from early evening shoppers and from window displays that would bring shoppers back during the day.
Of course I realize this vision of Davis at night is anathema to those who sport “Keep Davis Boring” bumper stickers on their automobiles. But if you want a vibrant downtown, look what Santa Barbara has done, look what Petaluma has done, look what an “Ag College” town such as Ft. Collins Colorado has done. If you really want to be successful at invigorating the downtown economy, emulate successful strategies.
An interesting article about pedestrian malls:
[url]http://americancity.org/columns/entry/2272/[/url]
One sign that Borders is in trouble is that they’re now selling toys in the kids section of the bookstore. I don’t mean just a few niknaks, but substantial shelf space. Is this a store that promotes reading among kids? What is their mission, here?
[quote]
I have to say, I’m beginning to have a pretty sour feeling about this Bicycling Hall of Fame. Somebody please explain to me why this is worth the effort that is being put into it. So far it’s Bikes 1, Teens 0. [/quote]
As I understand it, this decision was made for several reasons. First, the teen center was underutilized. Did you have any teens that used it? And there are other places in town where teen activities can be accommodated, and have been this summer.
Second, there is only one Bicycle Hall of Fame in the country, and bringing it to Davis will ultimately have multiple benefits, only one of which I will mention in this comment. If done right, it will not only be a regional draw, bringing in people to spend money at restaurants and other stores in downtown, but could be a national draw, benefiting the whole region – not just downtown Davis.
Of course, if you have no interest in bringing people from outside Davis into downtown to spend money, then your sour feeling is certainly justified, but that seems a little parochial to me.
JRBERG: I agree with your second part. I’m not certain that the teen center was underutilized, to the extent it was, I think the city could have done more. I agree though that given the fact that this is a draw to Davis and Davis pride’s itself on being the bike capital of America, I’m alright with the focus, and now I want to ensure that the project succeeds.
Somehow I trust it will be a priority, even though there are a lot of other priorities that have been ignored.
I agree with westof113, a good music venue such as The Palm or the Mystic in Petaluma would be a HUGE improvement to our downtown.
I was picturing the Olive Dr parking structure south of Richards, behind Borders and than connecting to whatever the E street thing turns out to be. There is a off ramp and on ramp in both directions of I80 there (Richards). Richards may need to be widened, but not under the tracks as much traffic would not need to enter downtown. Seems like a long way out kinda thing, and may be a moot point if downtown turns into a Woodland/Dixon/Vacaville ghost-downtown.
that’s Palms not Palm
[quote]”The loan that was given to Hanlee’s very well may put a lot of tax dollars in the city’s coffers. Hanlee’s has a huge incentive to create that tax revenue, since for every dollar over $133,000… it will be forgiven the same amount on its loan.”[/quote] Elaine, I don’t understand your continuing promotion of this scheme for $1-million of Davis tax money. It still looks like a somewhat shady (or, at least, not well thought out) give-away to me, one that could go bad any number of ways.
It appears to put a [u]ceiling[/u] on the tax revenues that you suggest will be flowing into our coffers since everything over $133,000 (or $100,000 or whatever) will go to pay off the loan. (Doesn’t that mean that nearly half of the $2.4-million of taxes for which you’re hoping will be lost in give-backs to Hanlees?)
If moving to Davis makes business sense for Hanlees Auto Group, why not keep [u]all[/u] the taxes that the dealership generates for us? Hanlees already has “huge incentive” to generate taxes: They’re in business to make money for themselves. But, if it does not make business sense for Hanlees to move without the $1-million bonus involved, that likely means they don’t expect business will be as good as you’re hoping.
Your “best possible scenario” for both parties will result in Hanlees VW getting a tax rate of just above 50% of its (potential) Davis competitors and its own other dealerships here for the next 12 years. We will be getting 3.5% interest on the loan, unless that’s also to be forgiven.
Beyond that, how about the wisdom (and morality) of stealing a business from a neighboring city? Do we figure the same business will display too much integrity to bail on us to another after they’ve exhausted our special deals? Instead of the alleged stabilization of taxes, they’re cut in half for 12 years then…who knows. And, of course, I’m sure this has been structured by city staff so we won’t lose anything if the new VW dealership doesn’t make it after all.
Finally, is this the very best use of these funds, eliminating an existing but “underutilizing” auto repair shop? Did the idea just pop up; who first proposed it; was it competed to several auto or other dealers? What other projects are on hold for this $1-million project? Priorities, please!
just saying: think Han-Lee… these are the folks who will reap the profits with little or no risk… see also Zip cars… the city’s desire to find $1 of revenue prompts the to spend $10… the private sector nurses from the public sector again… to compensate, perhaps we should put all public employees @ minimum wage…
“As I understand it, this decision was made for several reasons. First, the teen center was underutilized. Did you have any teens that used it? And there are other places in town where teen activities can be accommodated, and have been this summer.”
Yes. My son and his friends used the teen center regularly when they were in their early teen years — 12 to 14 or so, which was really the age it was appropriate for. When I picked him up there, it was being actively used. The teen center has not been replaced by any single drop-in facility. As Councilmember Heystek pointed out at the time “the drop-in component is crucial to a teen program.”
[url]https://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2934:what-became-of-the-davis-teen-center&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79[/url]
As you will recall from that previous Vanguard article, the big issue with replacement of the teen center by the bike museum had to do with process and lack of input from teens and their parents. There was little if any notice to those who used the facility. Staff proposed this change primarily for reasons of economic development. The only evidence of underutilization was a survey which indicated that a low percentage of Davis teens used the site. But “the facility was utilized more than four times by over 100 teens during a six month time period and at least once by nearly 500 teens.”
Davis has something like 20 commissions, including a Bicycle Advisory Commission and a Business and Economic Development Commission. But it has no Teen Commission.
Don Shor: “I got a kick out of this one:
“3. I shun downtown businesses that have had a history of trying to keep competition out of Davis.”
I got the impression from another thread that you opposed boycotting stores — such as Target — for political reasons….”
I hadn’t really thought about whether I am opposed to store boycotts in general. I do feel perfectly justified in taking my dollars and spending them where I so choose. If I get poor service, or don’t like something about a store, I shop elsewhere. I think most people do this. All that is by way of saying I don’t frequent downtown Davis businesses just bc the business is in town and I should support our Downtown. I support those businesses in Davis that give good customer service, have good prices or specialized products I’m looking for, and don’t try and keep other business from moving into Davis bc they see any competition as a threat. That is just my personal view.
As to boycotting stores, generally I suppose I think it is ill advised if it involves political issues. I don’t feel I have the right to impose my political views on anyone else. In many cases, I think the myopic protesters haven’t even thought ought exactly what it is they are boycotting and why, e.g. BP boycott of local gas station, Davis Food Co-op attempted boycott bc it sells goods made in Israel. If a customer doesn’t like what a store is doing, they are free to spend their dollars elsewhere. But the store is there to do business, make money, and service customers. To inject politics into the mix is a recipe for economic disaster, IMHO, especially with the economy being the way it is.
JustSaying: “Elaine, I don’t understand your continuing promotion of this scheme for $1-million of Davis tax money. It still looks like a somewhat shady (or, at least, not well thought out) give-away to me, one that could go bad any number of ways.
It appears to put a ceiling on the tax revenues that you suggest will be flowing into our coffers since everything over $133,000 (or $100,000 or whatever) will go to pay off the loan. (Doesn’t that mean that nearly half of the $2.4-million of taxes for which you’re hoping will be lost in give-backs to Hanlees?)”
The loan is from the RDA, and can only be used to remove city blight. The city will get ALL tax revenue from Hanlees VW. So this project is being used to remove blight, but will also generate tax dollars, ALL of which will go into the city coffers. How many other projects using RDA funding generated tax dollars for the city? Does anyone know?
Don Shor: “As you will recall from that previous Vanguard article, the big issue with replacement of the teen center by the bike museum had to do with process and lack of input from teens and their parents. There was little if any notice to those who used the facility. Staff proposed this change primarily for reasons of economic development. The only evidence of underutilization was a survey which indicated that a low percentage of Davis teens used the site. But “the facility was utilized more than four times by over 100 teens during a six month time period and at least once by nearly 500 teens.
Davis has something like 20 commissions, including a Bicycle Advisory Commission and a Business and Economic Development Commission. But it has no Teen Commission.”
Well said Don, and I am in complete agreement with you.
[quote]”The loan is from the RDA, and can only be used to remove city blight. The city will get ALL tax revenue from Hanlees VW.”[/quote] So, is this really a [s]redevelopment[/s] cash redistribution project? The city keeps “ALL tax revenue from Hanlees” and, therefore, the RDA won’t be getting its $1-million loan returned if Hanlees makes its loan forgiveness thresholds? And who gets the interest payments?
I have to question whether replacing one auto dealership with another is a good use of “city blight” funds. Approving an “auto row” already is a trade-off of what we want our city to look like, an attempt to balance that with our economic development desires/needs.
I’d rather that money be used to improve the deteriorated places where we live, gather and regularly shop in Davis. Do you know from where this auto dealer idea generated, and what other proposals were being considered for the $1-million?
[quote]”Locate the U.S. Bicycling Hall of Fame in a permanent facility downtown….”[/quote] David, is this really suggesting that the bicycle museum is not already in a permanent facility? Maybe this wording should have been something like: “Convince Davis to move the museum closer to different businesses than it’s close to now.”
I don’t remember that anything was said in the rush to kick out Davis kids from the Teen Center about this just being a temporary solution for the museum. Regardless, I agree with Elaine, you and the others about how we handled this project. It’s interesting that this is another decision justified on “underutilization” of a existing property.
“I don’t remember that anything was said in the rush to kick out Davis kids from the Teen Center about this just being a temporary solution for the museum.”
The utilization of the Teen Center as the home of the UBHOF has and is viewed as a temporary solution. That has been the case from the get go. I’m astonished to hear a contrary claim. Even the City’s application to have the USBHOF moved to Davis identifies the TC as a temporary home and the application goes on to identify a possible permanent home. The TC is simply not large enough to be the permanent home of the USBHOF. Granted, the TC can be expanded, but no such decision has been made.
A number of posters have commented on the viability of closing a portion of E Street to vehicular traffic. The DDBA has not advocated for such a closure, nor did the Enterprise article quote any DDBA officials suggesting a full street closure. The DDBA is advocating for improvements to be made to the intersection of 1st and E streets plus the first two blocks of E Street to make this area more pedestrian friendly and to enhance the Downtown experience for visitors and locals alike. Keep in mind that this intersection and corridor is what most Downtown visitors first experience when they emerge from Richards Tunnel. The range of possible improvements extend from simple bulb outs and more trees to the installation of bollards, with a wide range of possibilities in between. The DDBA is advocating the creation of a task force to examine the feasibility of each of the possibilities within the range, obtaining community input, selecting one or more of the possibilites, and then constructing the improvements. What reasonable objection could there be in conducting such an examination? Financial? Well, why the heck do we have an RDA and why do we have a $26 million dollar fund for improvements?
“Davis has something like 20 commissions, including a Bicycle Advisory Commission and a Business and Economic Development Commission. But it has no Teen Commission”
Why stop there? It seems that toddlers are under-represented too. Why don’t we have a commission for toddlers and newborns?
You must think that the City, with all of its commissions, is running a lean machine. Part of our budget problem is that we have too many commissions. Everything is studied to death, while City staff burns hour after hour…..
[quote]”The utilization of the Teen Center as the home of the UBHOF has and is viewed as a temporary solution. That has been the case from the get go. I’m astonished to hear a contrary claim.”[/quote] Well, DT, you could’ve fooled me. I was astonished to learn of that little detail.
And, maybe, David as well: The word “temporary” or “temporarily” doesn’t appear in the Vanguard’s coverage until today. Check it out in “What Became of the Davis Teen Center? (August 6, 2009)” @ [url]https://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2934:what-became-of-the-davis-teen-center&catid=58:budgetfiscal&Itemid=79[/url] When did you find out about this being temporary, David?
Then, in David’s tribute to Heystek’s legacy: [quote]On May 5, 2009, the city staff recommended reuse alternatives “exist for the Third and B facility that may better take advantage of the facility’s downtown location and future economic development efforts in the area.”…The staff report recommended and council approved the idea that: “the Third and B Building is ideally located and can be easily adapted for use the US Bicycling Hall of Fame headquarters and museum, rendering it the preferred option at this point, due to its potential to be a significant national, and even international destination that is uniquely fitting to the Davis’ reputation as the nation’s leading bicycle city and a commitment that furthers the city’s downtown and economic development goals.”[/quote] The staff report may be gobbledegook, but I don’t see much of a hint that the kids are losing their drop-in teen center building just temporarily until the bikes move on. You’d think that would’ve been a big selling point to Lamar and others who supported the teens in this move.
And, maybe, Debbie Davis. I can’t locate anything in the Enterprise that highlights this as a temporary move.
And, maybe, the group’s own Executive Director: [quote]”After recently relocating from New Jersey to Davis, California, the nearly 25 year-old U.S. Bicycling Hall of Fame now occupies an 8,000 square foot building in the heart of downtown where its national headquarters and museum reside.”[/quote] No mention on his site or the museum’s that the new home is temporary.
And, maybe, the RDA/City Council at the March 29, 2009, meeting(s) where the RDA appears to have given the City some undisclosed amount of cash and voted to: “Direct staff to commence negotiations on a lease agreement with the US Bicycling Hall of Fame and/or the California Bicycle Museum for the use of Third and B as the Hall’s headquarters combined with a nationally prominent bicycle museum.” Anyone know how the city plans to use the cash, and what the RDA plans to do with the building after the unannounced “temporary” stay by the bicycles?
And, the Sacramento Press, DavisWiki, the Aggie, the Bee, the Daily Democrat. [quote]Samples: “The U.S. Bicycling Hall of Fame sits in a three-story building, formerly a teen center.” ‘The Third and B Street location for the museum replaces the former teen center.”[/quote] Not a hint of any temporary nature in the coverage.
If the need had been announced as temporary, there might have been more support expressed. On the other hand, there might have been questions about why the City needed to sell the building in order to accommodate a temporary need.
One has to wonder if the transaction was it all about the money, and the teens be damned? You shouldn’t be astonished that yet another thing has slipped through the Council and ODA without adequate, informed public participation that (SURPRISE!) benefits a few Davisites.
DT: “The DDBA is advocating the creation of a task force to examine the feasibility of each of the possibilities within the range, obtaining community input, selecting one or more of the possibilites, and then constructing the improvements. What reasonable objection could there be in conducting such an examination?“
None. I think this is an excellent plan, and I’m glad to see DDBA proceeding in such an organized and focused manner.
Random: “Part of our budget problem is that we have too many commissions.“
Whether they use commissions or some other method, I think it is important that stakeholders in any council decision be heard and represented somehow in the decision-making process. IMO there are two groups not well represented in Davis: teenagers/young adults, and renters.
I also don’t believe it to be accurate that we have too many commissions or that that has led to our budget problem.
Don, I agree with you. The DDBA is showing great leadership in dealing with these issues in an organized way.
David, I agree with you. It’s great to have the Hall of Fame and the museum in our town.
“3. Start making the downtown look more attractive architecturally. Some of the awful architecture/colors are jarring.”
The vacant lot located at 413 E Street is listed for sale. I encourage you to purchase the lot and have an architecturally attractive building constructed.
DT Businessman: “erm: 3. Start making the downtown look more attractive architecturally. Some of the awful architecture/colors are jarring.”
The vacant lot located at 413 E Street is listed for sale. I encourage you to purchase the lot and have an architecturally attractive building constructed.”
If I had the money I would. However, how does that take away from my opinion? I personally find the disconnected architectural styles and gaudy color schemes in this town jarring.
dmg: “I also don’t believe it to be accurate that we have too many commissions or that that has led to our budget problem.”
don shor: “Whether they use commissions or some other method, I think it is important that stakeholders in any council decision be heard and represented somehow in the decision-making process. IMO there are two groups not well represented in Davis: teenagers/young adults, and renters.”
It is my understanding that city staff do not get paid any extra for their mandatory participation in city commissions. The idea that commissions are part of our budgetary problems is something I think SOME city staff members or the City Manager have floated out there for convencience’s sake. The fact of the matter is we have all sorts of commissions representing inanimate objects, such as bikes and trees, but no commission to represent our youth (both teens and college students), who are a major part of this town and who need representation at the governance level. This is shown clearly by the usurpation of the Teen Center for the Bicycle Hall of Fame without any input from teens themselves. Nor were teens consulted when the Teen Center was created, which was unfortunate, and probably contributed to its underutilization.
And note Just Saying’s commentary, which points out that most of us were unaware of the temporariness of the usurpation of the Teen Center by the BHOF. Frankly, I find it insulting that teens were temporarily shoved aside, to house the BHOF, just so Davis can pat itself on the back for having been chose as the site for a “prestigious” museum. Will the teens be allowed to return to the Teen Center, once the BHOF is housed elsewhere? And how many of our RDA dollars will go towards creating a permanent site for the BHOF – I cringe to think. I personally don’t think the BHOF is going to be that big of a commercial draw for our city, but I could be wrong (and hope I am).