by Rob White
A less obvious portion of the Davis community has a need. The small business community doesn’t have access to the necessary space for growth. Some of these businesses came from good ideas at the university and they are now growing so fast that they cannot find places that will accommodate their growing space needs. Some are restaurateurs looking for places to put new dining concepts. Some are service businesses that will change the way we use our smartphones and the web. And some are collectives looking to host inventor communities that become centers for new business startups.
Let me give you some examples to illustrate.
There are several small technology companies (currently under 50 employees) that were founded in Davis and have grown so dramatically in the last 24 months that they are on track to double in size again in the next few years. That’s a potential at least a few 100 new career-track and professional jobs that could be in Davis. These are companies that create products and require supply chains for their parts – and, some of these supply companies could (would) be in Davis. These are companies that serve global markets, which leads to increased exports and the potential for more imported capital. And these are companies that will need to invest in new manufacturing equipment and facilities as they grow, which increases the land-based property taxes AND the unsecured property taxes on equipment AND the amount of workers in Davis requiring services like food, clothes, and entertainment.
I have also been approached by several restaurant entrepreneurs with some new concepts that are not currently found in Davis. Ideas that will serve residents and students alike. Dining experiences that will be a strong addition to the landscape of choices already in Davis. And they bring with them employment opportunities for our local young adults, students, and chefs at all scales. They will create new sales tax receipts, require produce from our local farms, and again encourage the supply chain to be in Davis.
And most surprisingly, we have several business concepts evolving in Davis that serve the business startup community. These are sometimes called maker-spaces, or tech shops or tinkerer labs. They are effective at building a very strong sense of community for those people that might sometimes be called the creative-class, the entrepreneurs and the innovators. These spaces fuel new ideas, teach kids hands-on manufacturing techniques, and inspire many to get involved in technology, science, engineering and the arts. And eventually, these same creators start businesses that hire employees, pay taxes, and require services and supplies.
So what is the issue?
The one constant theme I have heard since beginning in Davis 2 months ago is that there is a significant lack of space for growth. Our downtown doesn’t have a very large inventory of for-sale buildings and spaces for lease can require costly tenant improvements. There is an extreme shortage of commercial and light industrial spaces that are greater than 10,000 square feet and appropriate for technology companies. And we have very few options for companies that need to develop facilities greater than 100,000 square feet.
But I can tell you who does have these options available. West Sacramento, Woodland, Dixon and North Natomas. These cities are all within 15 miles of our community and almost every growing Davis business I have talked to has at least engaged one or more of these communities to determine their opportunities. The businesses will tell you that cost is a factor. Or that location is a factor. But the biggest factor appears to be that these other cities have empty spaces that are already built and require very little modification for move-in.
In talking to businesses I always highlight the fact that inexpensive student workforce and highly skilled labor are found most readily in Davis. And that Davis is the best home for companies that require interaction with researchers or want to be associated with a vibrant downtown and good transportation links. I also mention that Davis is one of the few places that provides a sense of community and quality of life that executives and decision-makers find attractive. These are just part of the equation and complexity in decision-making for company growth plans. And we have had some successes and kept several high profile companies in Davis.
But for every company that can’t find a home in Davis right now, whether a local startup or one trying to move in to town, there is an unintended message that gets sent to the business community – we are full. Though this is a challenge, I believe that the Davis community has proven time and again that we can meet these obstacles and turn them in to opportunities. I think there is a growing awareness of the need for more jobs, more revenue for community needs and more diversity in our business landscape. And if we can address this issue effectively, we will set ourselves on a pathway to economic vitality that will increase local employment and provide us with a robust business sector that can be heavily engaged in philanthropy and community-building activities.
If you want to be part of the dialogue on ways to address this issue, come to the next DSIDE meeting on June 13th at 8:30 am at the Davis Chamber of Commerce. Future meeting dates, times and location will be posted at www.dside.org. Or come to the net Business and Economic Development Commission meeting. Or share your thoughts with a Council member. You can also follow the efforts of business leaders and City staff and post your own successes on twitter (#DavisCA and #InnovateDavis), email Kemble Pope at the Davis Chamber of Commerce (director@davischamber.org), or email me directly (rwhite@cityofdavis.org). It is our time to shine and I am convinced that as we wrestle with the needs of business in Davis that our outcomes will continue to strengthen our standing as world leaders in innovative ideas and solutions.
Rob,
What you have just posted is pretty much the standard argument of the folks who initiated DSIDE, and the Chamber. My understanding is that your job is as follows:
[i]” The CIO will report directly to the City Manager and is tasked with working on technology-based economic development throughout the community, branding, advocacy, and partnership enhancement with the business, research, academic, and capital sectors.”[/i]
What does that have to do with restaurant opportunities? Do you really wish to get in the middle of the peripheral development debate as part of your job? I urge you to go back through the Vanguard and read some of the lengthy discussions that have been held here on that topic. Because peripheral development is the unspoken policy outcome of the argument you are making here. And I don’t think it’s a battle you really want to get drawn into. I think you may be spending your time speaking to a small circle of folks locally on one side of that issue, and I think you will quickly find that there is little appetite for peripheral development among the public at large.
Why is that photo illustrating this article? Subliminal advertising for a political issue?
Don: I had this conversation with Rob on Tuesday. The bottom line is that Davis residents have choices to make here. Rob’s position is that he’s not the decision maker but rather will facilitate whatever plan the public and the council come up with.
Just Saying: I was actually looking for the business park map but ran out of time, that’s an aerial of Cannery.
Peripheral development has to happen. We are a city of over 100,000 during most of the year. This “FEAR OF ANYTHING THAT IMPACTS THE DOWNTOWN” is beyond obsessive and borders on paranoia.
Rob White is absolutely correct here. There is a severe shortage of CRE properties and commercial zoned land, and Davis is missing out on quality jobs and services that would improve the community and enhance our lives. The property West of I-113, North of the hospital, and the property North of North Davis Farms should be developed. It is has perfect access from 113, and it is low grade farm land. The Cannery should be developed as a business park.
Davis earns a measly $7,752 in retail sales revenue compared to a state average $12,561. Even a city like Danville has a Costco and Home Depot. Danville’s downtown is vibrant and wonderful. Commercial properties are being developed on the periphery. We need to tune out the crazies and NIMBYs lacking rational contribution to this issue, and allow development. We will all be fine. We will all be better off.
Yeah, a few people used to promote that as a business park site. But, nobody with any businesses or development money was interested. Now, as Don noted, we’re looking at peripheral opportunities to improve small business opportunities for Davis’ future. Maybe if we’d been more creative with our RDA free money, we’d be better situated now to implement Bob White’s ideas.
“Peripheral development has to happen.”
says who? you’re going to have to convince the voters on this and from i’ve seen, that’s going to be difficult for you to do.
Don Shor: “[i]Do you really wish to get in the middle of the peripheral development debate as part of your job?”
“I think you may be spending your time speaking to a small circle of folks locally on one side of that issue, and I think you will quickly find that there is little appetite for peripheral development among the public at large.[/i]”
Don, what is so scary about this topic for you that you would try to dissuade Rob from getting involved in the conversation? You cannot lead the discussion on innovation and economic development unless you are willing to look at the infrastructure required for innovation to take place. Economic development may involve peripheral growth, but why try to stop the conversation in advance just because you fear one potential outcome?
Mark: it’s not his job to look for sites for restaurants. If in fact there is a demand for such a site, I believe there’s vacant space near Target.
[quote]I have also been approached by several restaurant entrepreneurs with some new concepts that are not currently found in Davis.[/quote]
Then he should refer them to the business development team at the city offices.
When I see movement on Nishi I will believe there is effective policy coming from these conversations. Until then, it’s just the drumbeat for development in far west Davis or on the Mace curve. Both of those are non-starters.
[quote]Rob White is absolutely correct here. There is a severe shortage of CRE properties and commercial zoned land[/quote]
Then, if that is the key issue, ConAgra should remain as a business site.
[quote]beyond obsessive and borders on paranoia.
We need to tune out the crazies and NIMBYs lacking rational contribution to this issue
what is so scary about this topic for you[/quote]
Some people value economic development above other things. I believe the majority of Davis voters and non-transient residents value the quality of life, the environment, and the town character as highly or more highly than they value increased economic development.
That is the framework for the debate that growth proposals will occur in. Calling people crazy, playing the ‘nimby’ card, and pretending we’re scared or paranoid? No, that isn’t a conversation. Though we’re used to it.
There are infill opportunities in various places. There is one site, Nishi, where there is little built-in opposition. ConAgra has business opportunities as well as housing opportunities. I doubt that most Davisites feel a shortage of restaurant options here.
So it is possible to question the premise that Davis lacks available land for small startups or expanding businesses to the point of needing to develop on its margins. There are adverse consequences to development, involving fiscal, infrastructure, transportation, and environmental issues to consider. And less tangible but probably more important: those quality of life and town character aspects.
The problem I have with Rob’s essay is it sounds exactly like what has been written before, mostly by people who want to annex land and build on it. We’ve had this conversation. There are options to pursue before you look to annex. There are things Rob and others could be doing [i]right now[/i] to promote economic development. So it sounds like a rerun of old arguments, pointing toward old proposals, and I’m still waiting for someone to start on the less contentious options [i]first.[/i]
We need more housing in the ConAgra part of town. Obviously, it the wrong place for a business park or it would have been one by now.
As I mentioned, the only people trying to advance that kind of development don’t have the where-with-all to do anything more than talk about it. And to fight every effort to use it for housing that we need for a healthy community.
The “Mace curve”? Now, there’s a perfect place for development. There’s some ag land out there, but we’d be limited by the causeway. Perfect. But, are there any developers interested in working with the city to provide business zoning in that area?
Mace curve is some of the best agricultural soil in the world. It should be completely off the table.
[i]you’re going to have to convince the voters on this and from i’ve seen, that’s going to be difficult for you to do.[/i]
I don’t think so. The voters want this just like they wanted Target. All we need to do is shout down the minority NIMBY statist activists that claim caring intent while working to keep Davis an affluent and elite bedroom community inhospitable to families, jobs, shopping and people of lower economic means.
Because there are plenty of examples of communities with fantastic downtowns, fantastic quality of life, and peripheral development and peripheral retail (including some standard big-box stores), we would be justified in shouting down the Davis NIMBY statist activists. These folks are generally not rational in their arguments. They hype the fear of change, so I say let’s hype the message of their irrational ways.
I know, Don. I guess we could’ve said the same thing about most of the land now covered by Davis concrete, etc. Same with lots of Central Valley cities, highways, other development.
The idea that our city is an island–constricted by “completely off the table” surrounding land–is the cause of many of the problems now troubling Davis. It’s time to take another look at identifying a sphere of influence agreement with the county.
Sometimes we need to encroach on limited amounts of large-scale, mono-agricultural land (that relies on massive amounts of irrigation water and chemicals for its productivity) in order to provide a greater good. (Maybe we can buy up development rights for like land around Woodland, Dixon, etc., to mitigate own needed development.)
” The voters want this just like they wanted Target. “
the only reason the voters wanted target is enough students cared about the issue to vote. had it been left to the permanent residents, target would have failed. you have not polled people, you have no idea.
So are you going to push to restrict students from voting the next time? Last time I checked they are residents of the city and have a vote. They also have needs they would like to have met. More shopping choices. More jobs… both part-time while they attend school, and career options when the graduate. Students like restaurants too. I asked several of them and they confirmed this.
And, related to the permanent residents. Times have changed. Economic considerations are more prevalent and attention-getting. Road and park maintenance needs revenue to fund it. We have crappy business tax revenue coming into the city coffers even as we have this world-class research university as our local partner. I think you are foolish to thing that there is this consistent voter power to block new development. There is a also lot more muscle behind economic development today… even without RDA.
“So are you going to push to restrict students from voting the next time? Last time I checked they are residents of the city and have a vote”
Of course, but they voted for a specific store that they would utilize not some amorphous parcel that will never be developed before they leave davis.
[i]Of course, but they voted for a specific store that they would utilize not some amorphous parcel that will never be developed before they leave davis.[/i]
We can get them to understand the value. Especially as it relates to job opportunities.
Don Shor: “[i]Mace curve is some of the best agricultural soil in the world. It should be completely off the table[/i].”
I will have to dig out my soils map and take a look, but I am willing to bet that Nishi has some high quality soil too. If soil quality is the determining factor, why is Nishi ok, but the mace curve and the area around the hospital are not?
It sounds to me Don that what you really want is a hard ‘no development’ border around the existing city limits. I would respect that position if you just came out and said it. Instead, you seem to prefer attacking any discussion about economic development as a discussion in favor of urban sprawl and lump all the people who disagree with your position as having the evil intent of ruining the quality of life in Davis.
We learn by discussing our problems and [b]all[/b] of the possible solutions. In my opinion, when you declare something is ‘off the table’ in advance, you just pronounce to everyone that you have no interest in learning.
“We can get them to understand the value. Especially as it relates to job opportunities. “
Most are not going to come out and vote. Target was a unique circumstance and it tilted the election. and btw, had target been on the other side of mace, forget it.
Rob
Can you comment on the Cannery site. Seems to fit the needs you describe.
Don Shor: “[i]I believe the majority of Davis voters and non-transient residents value the quality of life, the environment, and the town character as highly or more highly than they value increased economic development.[/i]”
I believe that quality of life and the town character have already deteriorated, and will continue to do so in an increasingly irreparable manner, as long as we fail to create and implement a plan for our long-term economic health and vitality.
Sitting still simply allows the decay to continue, and will ultimately result in the complete loss of the things you claim to value so highly.
Davis Progressive wrote:
> the only reason the voters wanted target is enough
> students cared about the issue to vote. had it been
> left to the permanent residents, target would have
> failed. you have not polled people, you have no idea.
I know quite a few “permanent residents” that voted for Target and I was also aware of a large number of students that not only voted against it but were going door to door with flyers trying to stop it. I did see some polling data at the time and the (low voter turnout) student vote was split, so I don’t think it is fair to say that students forced the Target on permanent residents that did not want it…
[quote]”So are you going to push to restrict students from voting the next time? Last time I checked they are residents of the city and have a vote”
“Of course, but they voted for a specific store that they would utilize not some amorphous parcel that will never be developed before they leave davis.”[/quote]Wonder how they’d have voted on a Measure R item if Target had been proposed for the Nishi property or some other peripheral site.
SoD, good points re. the attempt to blame students for Target.
SODA, SODA, SODA, there you go again. The cannery site is on a fast tract to mixed development. It would be interesting, however, to see whether Rob plans to fight the apparent direction of the council on this matter.
JS
What doesn’t match up with Cannery and Rob’s description of needs???
SODA, you’ve made a really good observation. It seems like Rob’s description is pretty much in line with Sue Greenwald’s arguments for the cannery potential. I’d like to hear what he thinks about it generally and in the face of decades of no success for that option and of the council’s present direction.
[quote]We learn by discussing our problems and all of the possible solutions. In my opinion, when you declare something is ‘off the table’ in advance, you just pronounce to everyone that you have no interest in learning.
[/quote]
Interesting, because in the past you have stated that we should not build on prime agricultural soil.
I have previously stated that the area around the hospital is suitable for development, though I have no idea whether it would meet with public support.
[quote]shout down the minority NIMBY statist activists that claim caring intent while working to keep Davis an affluent and elite bedroom community inhospitable to families, jobs, shopping and people of lower economic means. [/quote]
As long as this kind of crap is part of the discussion, there won’t be a discussion.
Here, again, is the interactive soil map:
[url]http://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/soilweb_gmap/[/url]
Without fail, somebody points out that we have built on good soils in the past. I don’t know why that seems to anyone like a reasonable argument for continuing to do so, but I will just reply that it is the stated policy of Yolo County that agricultural soils will be preserved. Nearly everything east of town is very high quality ag soil. There are areas of clay soil north and northwest of town. I guess you’re all saying ag soil should not be a factor in deciding where to develop?
Don, why would you be inclined to defend the NIMBY statist activists? What other name(s) would you suggest to help classify those people that are against everything but for keeping things the same?
By the way, I don’t see you in that group. I see you as a downtown merchant protecting his self-interests.