By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
Davis, CA – Why does a place like Davis have a housing crisis? Trackside is becoming another object lesson of just how difficult it is to build housing in a place like Davis—even after a project gains approval.
To be clear—mistakes were made with respect to the project. The process was unnecessarily contentious and that process immediately burned any goodwill between the applicants and the neighbors.
But here’s the thing. The project was approved back in 2017, and while I questioned whether the project would deliver the needed housing for the community—particularly given the amount of neighborhood angst—the process has ultimately completely failed.
A lawsuit was filed by the neighborhood in 2017 and while it initially succeeded in halting the project, ultimately the developer prevailed but not until 2021.
At that point, the original developer moved to sell the property and entitled project last year.
An article in the Sacramento Business Journal on Friday noted that a group in the East Bay including Pathak Trust and Sharmda Sampda Trust bought the site and entitlements.
But housing is off the table, at least for now.
The city told the Vanguard that while they were aware that they were in escrow, they were provided no information about the buyer and have not talked to the buyer to 
understand their intentions.
The city affirmed that the entitlements remain valid, so they could proceed with a project once the finance market improves.
That was the gist of the article in the Business Journal.
“The plan as far as I know is to take it as a retail value-add investment,” said Scott Kingston, one of three Turton Commercial Real Estate Brokers on the deal. “We’ve already got three potential tenants.”
The new owners, according to the Business Journal, paid $2 million for the property, which currently has two single-story buildings with 11,825 square feet of retail space.
But Kingston also told the publication that they will not pursue the full entitled project—which called for four stories, 56,000-plus square feet of residential space in 27 apartments and 7320 square feet of retail space.
That becomes an option, he said, “as the debt and equity markets improve.”
Bear in mind, just because Trackside was approved for a certain type of housing does not mean that the project proposal cannot be reworked. One option that was apparently in the works at one point was for it to be converted to an affordable housing project.
For now it will remain an under-utilized retail project with no housing.
It also remains another indicator of how difficult it is to actual build housing in Davis—even when it is desperately needed.
This is not the first project that has been fully entitled but has been unable to actually get built. People who argue for infill projects might want to bear in mind just how difficult it is to actually build these kinds of projects in this environment.
This is totally due to the combined tyranny of NIMBYs and Measure J. Some commenters on this site and that other site clearly fall in to this category.
Hardly a tyranny when Measure J was democratically put in place by a vast majority of the voters.
So you don’t believe in the possibility as Madison framed it as “tyranny of the majority”?
So in turn could one say it’s the tyranny of Newsom and YIMBY’s trying to force housing on communities?
Your argument was that a vote could not be tyrannical, are you backing off that now?
No, I’m pointing out that tyranny can be used in any context if one so chooses. It just depends on what side you’re coming from.
But that’s not what you said, what you said was: “Hardly a tyranny…” So are you backing off that comment?
Walter, what you describe as tyranny, is simply democracy. You appear to be advocating for autocracy. Is that a correct interpretation of what you are advocating for?
What is it that you don’t like about democracy?
Not just Davis — the broker clearly pointed at interest rates as the obstacle, which is a problem everywhere. Implying that Trackside is a no-go because Davis is a difficult place to build is a non-starter.
I’m wondering if this is another instance like the U-Mall property, where you have a developer who “knows” one kind of real estate, but doesnt understand mixed use.
We have a society which is emerging from 100 years of strict euclidian zoning: business goes in one place, housing goes someplace entirely different and people take cars in between. It seems that our population of developers have evolved to specilize within these clean-cut euclidian distinctions.
Remember the story written here about the CalTrans Whiseltblower? She was saying that people basically had to RETIRE, in order for change to happen in that Organization. The old guard doesnt know anything different than “always make every street wider”
Certainly this thing where developers only really “know” one way of doing business was at play with Brixmoor and the U-Mall. They never once considered including housing by themselves… the automatic assumption was that they needed to find “a partner”.
Do I correctly recall that few of the newly proposed downtown housing developments are vertical mixed use? If so that is further evidence of this trend.
If this is the reality of the situation, then, in order for us to get mixed use housing over-retail, we may need to consider zoning which REQUIRES mixed use. Its not an option, its not just one use of the allowable space uses.. it is THE kind of construction that is allowed there.
I fear that this is a pattern that will continue to repeat itself if we don’t get really specific with our planning and zoning.
Housing math just isn’t mathing, a Fed president says, ripping into NIMBYism and homes that are ‘increasingly unattainable for too many workers’
Tom Barkin, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, sees math that doesn’t add up for too many—and he thinks “NIMBYism is real.”
In Oregon, rural school districts have puzzled over how to provide enough housing for teachers. In rural Arizona, hospitals are renting out rooms to staff members. In Massachusetts, the state has helped support temporary housing for summer workers on Cape Cod.
What’s even more of a shock, though, is that one-fourth of homebuyers pay at least $3,000 per month, Black Knight data shows. This is placing more and more folks into the house poor bucket, with many spending upwards of 60% of their paychecks on their mortgage.
To make matters worse, wages and home prices aren’t growing at the same pace. Average hourly earnings have increased 21% since 2019, Barkin said, but the S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller Home Price Indices shows a 48% jump during the same time period.
https://fortune.com/2023/11/18/housing-market-math-nimbys-not-working-tom-barkin-richmond-fed/amp/