After making a late effort to put the Mace Ranch Innovation Center in a stripped down version on the ballot for November, the developers have sent a letter pulling out and effectively for now ending their proposal.
The Letter dated June 16:
On Tuesday night we were pleased and excited to present a proposal which we had carefully crafted to get a viable innovation center project before your electorate on the November 2016 ballot. In direct response to significant Council, commission and community feedback our intention was to give the City the “first phase” of the MRIC project that would increase tax generation for the city and provide a revenue stream that would make development of the site immediately viable. The proposal also incorporated the balance of the project into the city as urban reserve to foster a more thorough discussion of what elements a modem innovation district in Davis should contain, possibly including an ancillary workforce housing component. This proposed approach represented a significant compromise on our part but we felt it was best for the community and us in light of current circumstances.
The reception to our proposal was disappointing, with a majority of the Council expressing a variety of concerns and focusing on perceived obstacles to its implementation. Foremost among these, despite the fact that we’ve already been working with the city for about four years on our proposal, was a desire to have our revamped project undergo substantial and costly additional processing before the matter is referred to the voters. And it was clear that a majority of the Council is not inclined to proceed with referring our proposal to the electorate for a November 2016 vote. Given this reality, we have concluded that our reformulated proposal, including a November 2016 ballot measure, lacks Council support and we are therefore today ceasing our processing efforts. We would request that the City certify our project environmental impact report, which has been prepared with great effort and at great expense. It will then be available should we or some other party be prepared to proceed with a project in the future.
Should the City at any time in the future want us to recommence our innovation center efforts, we would certainly entertain a request from you to do so. Should we receive such a request, we will need to be confident before proceeding that (1) there is a clear path to the electorate and (2) the processing that we will be required to undergo will be reasonable and cost effective.
Let’s remember that what Dan Ramos brought to the council on Tuesday was a joke. Just watch, there are no details, just promises that they would figure it out later:
https://youtu.be/mlFPSXcaf8o
He clearly was not ready to move ahead with the project. It was very generous of the council to give him a week to come back.
Suggestion – in the future, don’t “undergo substantial and costly additional processing” by engaging in significant, last-minute “revamping”, as you’ve described it.
But, thank you for your honest statement that you ultimately intended to pursue housing, on the site you described as “urban reserve”.
I don’t know – maybe some still hold out hopes that a “second city” rising up beyond our borders (far from the University and downtown) can bail out the old, dysfunctional city.
They mentioned housing in their press release last week.
Just wondering – if the city proceeds with this (even though there is no proposal), how long is it “good for”? (In other words, is there an “expiration date”?) Also, would it apply toward the latest (half-proposal)?
Ron, the EIR has a five year shelf life if the CC approves it. They can change it later with minimal effort, shielding themselves from owning up to a bad EIR now. I think the CEQA rules have been violated by the current product, and the CC should not cooperate with the developer trying to use the current defective product.
After all they should spend a million on a new EIR rather than revamp the current one for a lot less.
Cite your source for the 5 year figure, or put a plug in it, Mr H! I call BS, unless you can provide real cites.
Quick answer… there is no “shelf life” to a certified EIR, per se… that said, acting on such an EIR, if a reasonable person could reasonably argue changed conditions, etc., one would be a fool not to at least do an “update”, perhaps via a new, focused EIR. Anyone who opines that it has only a very limited life, or that if a year from now they have the same proposal requiring a complete “do-over” is either ignorant and/or a BANANA, IMO.
Robb Davis was supportive of the MRIC project at City Council but was also very articulate as to what he was looking for in the MRIC project before voting to put this on the ballot. This video clip could be no more clear.
https://youtu.be/B2C65buhMes
It seems Ramos decided he could not get it done.
Seems rather obvious that they couldn’t get it done in such a compressed timeline.
Agreed and Ramos set the timeline.
Maybe. Or his investors did.
Another one bites the dust. So in 2013-14, we identified three spots for IP’s and we have none now. Crumbling infrastructure, no housing and yet some people think we’ve done well?
No growth wins again. Nothing perfect was proposed.
Is the only current hope that Measure A passed, or that they were close enough, even if they lose by a razor margin, they come back in November?
Time to crunch the numbers on a larger parcel tax measure and new fees.
TBD: maybe so. Maybe the City should actually do a cash flow analysis, follow the recommendations of the FBC and Robb White and the 5-0 Motion by the entire CC to follow the new process, and come up with the real numbers that needed to be funded, and when, and then we design a revenue stream for those needs.
Just throwing these three Hail Mary passes for the exterior projects made no sense for Davis. Works in Stockton, to be sure, but not here.
Nishi is fixable in a deal, and the next exterior project really should be around Sutter Hospital. Ramos Land is in a terrible location.
Mike: “Works in Stockton, to be sure, but not here.”
I normally agree with you, but I’m not so sure that it works that well for the city of Stockton, either! 🙂
“Maybe the City should actually do a cash flow analysis, follow the recommendations of the FBC and Robb White and the 5-0 Motion by the entire CC to follow the new process, and come up with the real numbers that needed to be funded, and when, and then we design a revenue stream for those needs.”
Pretty sure they have and pretty sure it’s Rob White with one “b”
“Nishi is fixable in a deal” @ Michael Harrington
I assume he means a “deal” where the City cuts him and his client a check to go away.
Seeing some of the comments re: development review… Ted Puntillo called it a “spanking machine”, years ago… it is obviously much closer to “let’s make a deal”, and/or “extortion on behalf of the public” now… coupled with a vox populi vote.
And “optics” should be the final criteria…
Additional processing? We hadn’t finished the previous processing when the pause occurred, and now they want to proceed with a new proposal without any “additional” process. To me, this shows a lack of respect for citizen input.
Don’t even get me started on “carefully crafted.”
Fingers are being pointed at the city when what is needed is a look in the mirror.
Roberta, yes, the developer really screwed the pooch on this one. He gamed the Nishi team by elbowing them out of November, forcing Nishi to go too fast to the ballot. Then once Nishi was on the ballot, he “paused” his to see how the June ballot turned out for Nishi. Then, seeing that the voters have probably turned down Nishi, he senses an opportunity to rush in there with a new project, and keep the second half in thee urban reserve category so he doesn’t have to plan it now.
Ramos gamed the CC: he thought they, led by Rochelle Swanson, would be so desparate for a project that the CC would accept nearly anything and throw it on the ballot. Thankfully, the CC did not cooperate.
CC: please do not cooperate with Ramos on anything to do with that EIR. Make him bring back a fresh EIR to go with whatever project he wants the City to consider.
His current product is defective and is subject to litigation if it is certified.
One final comment: If this gaming strategy was coming from Ramos’ hired experts, then they really torched their client. How clueless.
I’ll say one thing more: I suspect there is a ton of animosity from the Whitcomb-Ruff team flowing towards Ramos and his brother, for gaming Nishi and keeping them off the November ballot. Maybe “hatred” might not be strong enough?
Doubt it
It’s absurd that the developer would think they could call a two-month ‘time out’, and then come back to the city council with a demand to hold the original timing by stating “November or Nothing”.
The City of Dixon is ready and willing to welcome an innovation center to town. We have hundreds of acres on I80 that are within 4 miles of UCD. We are well aware of the long-term benefits to our community and recognize the value of working with the development community to quickly bring the project to fruition. We of course do not have all of the problems with hand-wringing and fretting over every inconsequential project detail and therefore are much easier to work with in delivering projects. We have a robust citizen engagement process and our folks are business friendly. In fact, we welcome all businesses to Dixon that have experienced difficulty with Davis.
The above free advertisement from the City of Dixon brought to you by: Measure R.
I’m surprised Dixon has any acreage available given that multi-billion dollar movie soundstage deal it signed on to. Oh wait. I forgot. That was a scam that Dixon’s city leaders ate up with a spoon …
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article3599904.html
Hey Jim! I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Real cheap!
http://www.davisenterprise.com/forum/opinion-columns/dixons-visions-of-grandeur-fueled-con-artists-scam/
DOH! You got be there..nice shot.
Jim: With all due respect, I do think your post was ill-considered.
yeah, but it’s still Dixon.
That is a cheap shot.
But the truth.
Ramos publicly throws Davis under the bus on the way out the door. Not very smart.
It looks like his list of conditions for them to “entertain a request” from the city to come back to the table was cut short. I didn’t see “(3) agree upfront to allow 850 housing units.“
Good, now maybe the City Council can focus on infill in the downtown area. How many people saw Joe Minicozzi when he came and with such clarity and verification proved that development downtown was the best thing to do economically and to revitalize the city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhvKIaLjOJ8
Yes… should the City unilaterally do that, or just be open to property owner requests?
Philosophically. Do you believe that the City (including all residents, at least a majority) has the right of approval/lmandate for any change? To any property, including yours?
Doesn’t infill change the character of the city too?
As will the failure of the city to have adequate resources to pay for basic services and infrastructure
Relax folks… There has never been a better time for innovation in the history of Davis! We have made a tremendous amount of progress in the past few years.
•The University, after decades of being the hermit kingdom when it came to intellectual property, has actually opened the doors and is actively supporting the formation of businesses around IP coming from the campus.
•The City, after so many years of being actively anti-business, has completely turned around and not only unanimously supported the development of innovation parks but has spent money to hire people in support of making this happen.
•The People, after several stinkers got turned down by the Davis voters under Measure R(J) in the past; the Nishi project essentially broke even. As one of the developers of this project I am not even a little disapointed by the outcome- it was a learning experience and it will pass by a wide margin the next time. That being said, I am still holding breath unti the final vote count…
•The Ecosystem, In Davis we used to be able to host its entire entrepreneural community around a lunch table (Salquist, Akers and Soderquist) now we have a thriving ecosystem being developed! Davis Roots, Green Drinks, Jumpstart, Davis Angels, The Big Bang, Citris, Venture Catalysts and the Entrepreneurship Academy to name a few organizations. Dozens of new business leaders have joined the community in recent years! In five years we will look back at this list of pioneers and chuckle as theier numbers will be cubed.
•Area 52. Not to toot our own horn here- but this is huge. We have invested millions (and quite a few more to go) in creating a 38,000 square foot business accelerator, heavy incubator and restaurant for the community. Every day we are touring new companies looking to locate here and use the facilities being developed and offered.
•Finance. Rasing money in this area was incredibly difficult in the past. Now I routinely talk to people in Davis talking about raising $10, $12 and $100 million funds for innovation HERE. We just had a $650 million equity fund locate HERE in Davis. My own company, Sierra Energy just partnered with a $2.5 Billion equity fund. In short- this city is doing great.
I think that the timeline for what we proposed at Nishi still makes sense, we will need a place for people to “graduate” their start-ups to over the next few years. The 325,000 square feet at Nishi will be a great start and I think correctly sized to do the task in about 4-5 years. I do think that the other locations considered by the city will be needed as well over time.
I guess what I am saying is that now is not the time for hand wringing, moping or complaining about the process. Davis innovation is accelerating at an amazing pace for our community. It is entirely appropriate that the community adopt a “go-slow” approach in growing to meet this opportunity- it is a huge change and it should be approached with caution.
For my part, I am going to finish Area 52 over the next year and ensure that there is a series of great new business opportunities for our community for the future. Where they will go after that is up to the voters!
Mike Hart, I like your positive attitude. Instead of moping because Measure A probably failed you’re looking for the project to improve and bring it back to the voters. Too bad others can’t have the same attitude.
While it is disappointing that MRIC has pulled its application again, it is entirely the Ramos developers decision to do so, rather than place the orignal 228-acre commercial-only project on the ballot. This whole episode simply reveals what the original objective really was was for the Ramos group. And that was to have a 850-unit high density residential project as ts priority, and then to include innovation park assuming they they were able to get it built and get it occupied.
It would have saved everyone time and money has the Ramos group made clear from the beginning that they were pursuing the enormous number of high density housing units, particularity since they would have no affordable housing requirement, just like Nishi.
Since the original RFEI was put out by the City for innovation park, it was clear that housing was not part of what the community was asking for in and innovation par, but an innovation park only to help the City with revenue, the community was being forthright. Unfortunately that was not the case with the MRIC developers. If City Staff had anything to do with bringing in the housing component, well then they can share the blame too.
Finally, I see by the letter that the Ramos developer group while pulling the plug on the project, these developers are now asking to have the EIR to be certified. I can not understand why the City would do this now, since if there is hope of a project returning there, well it would need to be defined to see if it was the same exact project but also to see if any other land uses or other changes like increase traffic flows which have changed at the pint that any new proposal came forward, if it is a completely new proposal the current EIR should not apply. So why would the City certify it now?
But I wish to express my thanks to Brett Lee, Robb Davis and Lucas Frerichs (this is just the order that they made their initial comments) for pointing out the many problems with this last minute project which was half the size with no details and mostly undefined as “urban reserve”. The Council was clearly being pressured to move forward with the “take it leave it” situation. However, the new proposal was unacceptable for many reasons, particularly since it was trying to include “urban reserve which is a “wild card” for any type of development “to be determined later”, which made no sense to move forward with. There is zero chance this proposal would have passed on the ballot being so undefined and asking for entitlements for what would not be revealed until the developers secured their annexation. At least the Ramos group was pursuing housing which means it could have all have turned out to be 126 acres of housing later on for the “urban reserve” portion.
Again, it is too bad that the Ramos developers could not follow through with what the community asked for and which they originally promised to deliver, which was a 228-acre commercial-only innovation park without housing, which could have made the November ballot. The failure of the MRIC project to move forward is entirely on the Ramos developers, not the City, not the City Council, not the community, and certainly not Measure J/R.