Recent Changes for "Covell Village" - Davis Wikihttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_VillageRecent Changes of the page "Covell Village" on Davis Wiki.en-us Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2011-07-26 10:19:19TomGarbersonLink draft rewrite page <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ''This page is a bit messy. Feel like cleaning it up? Check out the ["/Draft" draft rewrite] and see what you can do with it!''</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2011-02-15 22:57:14JasonAller <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 292: </td> <td> Line 292: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> I like historic artifacts, and I think a society should do what it can to preserve the best of what we do, but they should then bury the rest and build something new on top of the ruins. Lets save future acheology jobs. That way, you don't have to sprawl the settlements outward. Sure, there will always be people who want the wild wild west home in East, West, North (though shrinking), and South of Davis, but I bet a whole bunch of people would happily live in "high" rises downtown. If you are going to call yourself a city, act like one and build up. Leave the damn owls and farmers at peace. ["Wayne<span>&nbsp;</span>Schiller"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> I like historic artifacts, and I think a society should do what it can to preserve the best of what we do, but they should then bury the rest and build something new on top of the ruins. Lets save future acheology jobs. That way, you don't have to sprawl the settlements outward. Sure, there will always be people who want the wild wild west home in East, West, North (though shrinking), and South of Davis, but I bet a whole bunch of people would happily live in "high" rises downtown. If you are going to call yourself a city, act like one and build up. Leave the damn owls and farmers at peace. ["<span>Users/</span>WayneSchiller"<span>&nbsp;Wayne Schiller</span>] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2011-02-13 08:47:15JasonAller <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 303: </td> <td> Line 303: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-06 14:26:19'' [[nbsp]] Not sure where to integrate this right now: Approximately 180 units will be dedicated for low income (less than $48,000 a year) housing, as [http://californiaaggie.com/article/?id=10421 recently decided by] the ["City Council"]. They will be "64 cooperative units, 63 municipal low-income units and 40 low-income apartments, all in central locations within the village." (["Mike Cor<span>r</span>bett"]) </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-06 14:26:19'' [[nbsp]] Not sure where to integrate this right now: Approximately 180 units will be dedicated for low income (less than $48,000 a year) housing, as [http://californiaaggie.com/article/?id=10421 recently decided by] the ["City Council"]. They will be "64 cooperative units, 63 municipal low-income units and 40 low-income apartments, all in central locations within the village." (["Mike Corbett"]) </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2010-10-25 12:13:28SteveDavisonUpdate <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ||&lt;#E0E0FF&gt;'''Location'''||<br> + ||Northeast corner of ["F Street"] and ["Covell Blvd."]||<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 4: </td> <td> Line 7: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ''Also see:''<br> + ["Cannery Park"]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 6: </td> <td> Line 12: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The development required a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land was outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline could not change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure <span>i</span>s called ["Measure X"]<span>. Measure X failed</span> "No" 58.7% <span>to</span> 41.3% "Yes."<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> For specifics of the project, see also City of Davis [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf Summary of Baseline] as well as the [http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf actual baseline] that w<span>ill</span> b<span>e on the ballot.</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The development required a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land was outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline could not change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure <span>wa</span>s called ["Measure X"]<span>, it failed to pass with</span> "No" 58.7% <span>and</span> 41.3% "Yes."<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> For specifics of the project, see also City of Davis [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf Summary of Baseline] as well as the [http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf actual baseline] that w<span>ere on the</span> b<span>allot.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2009-11-15 17:31:53KemblePopeVoter % were wrong, changed to reflect info from Yolo County Elections Office <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 6: </td> <td> Line 6: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The development required a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land was outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline could not change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"]. Measure X failed "No" 5<span>9.9</span>% to 4<span>0.0</span>% "Yes." </td> <td> <span>+</span> The development required a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land was outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline could not change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"]. Measure X failed "No" 5<span>8.7</span>% to 4<span>1.3</span>% "Yes." </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2008-09-28 17:44:36JasonAllerlink fix, 36 redirects left to fix <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 414: </td> <td> Line 414: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Couldn't the kids just take the coupon, say they were going to vote yes and vote whatever way? I think to much is being made of the pizza coupons. It sounds like the free hotdogs at used car dealers, just a way to get someone to listen to your views. That said, there seems to be other shadiness going on from both the yes's and the no's. ["rocksanddirt" r&amp;d] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Couldn't the kids just take the coupon, say they were going to vote yes and vote whatever way? I think to much is being made of the pizza coupons. It sounds like the free hotdogs at used car dealers, just a way to get someone to listen to your views. That said, there seems to be other shadiness going on from both the yes's and the no's. ["<span>Users/</span>rocksanddirt" r&amp;d] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2008-09-26 17:53:21JasonAllerlink fix <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 358: </td> <td> Line 358: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> If the above chart is incorrect then someone should make a new table that contains housing price information (''["TravisGrathwell"] tried to find out where the above stats came from and was unsuccessful''). The information should be as accurate as possible, including the general information approved by the by the ["City Council"] as well as what the current developer's figures are for house prices. There is merit in including figures on what Davis residents can afford. After all, much of the debate is surrounding affordability. The only question is how to calculate it. Someone should check the reports on house affordability and adjust them for when the homes will be available, up to inflation, etc. In fact, this page should probably have an entire "Prices" section because the issue is tricky to approach. It would take a bit of time, but it's definitely worth it! </td> <td> <span>+</span> If the above chart is incorrect then someone should make a new table that contains housing price information (''["<span>Users/</span>TravisGrathwell"] tried to find out where the above stats came from and was unsuccessful''). The information should be as accurate as possible, including the general information approved by the by the ["City Council"] as well as what the current developer's figures are for house prices. There is merit in including figures on what Davis residents can afford. After all, much of the debate is surrounding affordability. The only question is how to calculate it. Someone should check the reports on house affordability and adjust them for when the homes will be available, up to inflation, etc. In fact, this page should probably have an entire "Prices" section because the issue is tricky to approach. It would take a bit of time, but it's definitely worth it! </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2008-09-06 10:15:13JasonAller(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 428: </td> <td> Line 428: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * I agree. If you criticize Covell Village beging unaffordable, what alternatives do we have to provide more affordable housing than the proposed development? I make $70-90k/yr, my wife can't work, we don't qualify for affordable housing program that Davis offers, and the current market is way too expensive for our income range. CV at least offers some units that we can afford and that is certainly better than nothing. I also wonder how many people crying that CV is unaffordable actually are in the market to buy their first homes... --["Users/WillamJones"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * I agree. If you criticize Covell Village beging unaffordable, what alternatives do we have to provide more affordable housing than the proposed development? I make $70-90k/yr, my wife can't work, we don't qualify for affordable housing program that Davis offers, and the current market is way too expensive for our income range. CV at least offers some units that we can afford and that is certainly better than nothing. I also wonder how many people crying that CV is unaffordable actually are in the market to buy their first homes... --["Users/Will<span>i</span>amJones"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2008-09-06 10:12:14JasonAllerlink fixes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 259: </td> <td> Line 259: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[Comments]] ''2005-06-08 19:23:59'' [[nbsp]] homes in davis are overpriced as it is. --["RohiniJasavala"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-06-09 20:30:44'' [[nbsp]] You'd think that a college town would be proposing housing affordable to college students. For some reason, this isn't the case. --["ChristopherMckenzie"]<br> <span>-</span> Maybe they don't want to encourage an increase in college students. I don't know if this is really the case with Davis, but often in college towns the townspeople regard the students as a nuisance rather than as bona-fide community members. --["KenjiYamada"]<br> <span>-</span> While I don't think it's the duty of the town to supply plentiful housing for students, I think too many people in the town ignore the University's contributions. In addition, the number of students admitted is largely determined by the UC Regents. The University will be growing, whether the citizens of Davis like it or not. The best thing they can do is control how that growth will be handled. I think too many people think they can stop the growth, when it is clear that they can't. --["MattCzarnowski"]<br> <span>-</span> Of course they can. Since when are legal mechanisms the only method for controlling population growth? All the city has to do is not allow any developers to build, creating a housing crunch, leaving UCD as the school that's "decent, but it's impossible to find a place to live! I'm going to Riverside instead!". --["DomenicSantangelo"]<br> <span>-</span> Well, the citizens of Davis can control new housing developments within their boundaries, but they certainly have very little say outside of those boundaries. UCD can build more housing on their own land. The county can approve housing just outside of the city limits (similar to the Mace Rance debacle). The fact is that more people will be going to school and working in Davis, and thus the effective population will be increasing, regardless of what the residents would like. --["MattCzarnowski"]<br> <span>-</span> This is all not the point. I am not anti-growth, I'm against building million dollar homes in a town where a lot of the workforce is already forced to commute from Woodland, Dixon, and Sacramento. The against is not full of old people that hate growth but engineers, architects, and city planners that see this as a strategical nightmare and a bad idea where responsibility and practicality is second to maximized profits. --["ChristopherMcKenzie"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-06-27 16:56:49'' [[nbsp]] This development is not intended for student housing. It is supposed to be a solution for work-force housing, assuming that ["West Village"] will handle student growth. --["SharlaDaly"]<br> <span>-</span> That is EXACTLY the problem. So we have affordable student housing, like The Lexington, where apartments cost $1800/month. What about Allegre or any of the other new housing developments for the spendthrift low budget student. Davis is an unfettered orgy for real-estate developers. These proposed student housing developments are simply more dense (but nowhere close to dense enough) developments with the same ridiculous price range. I dunno if you come from a family that had a stable with wild horses and a 50 acre garden in their backyard, but most people can barely afford this stuff. It's not like there is an ocean or a lovely mountainside nearby. I guess that UC school means "free to rape" for any developer that comes by. 2 bedroom/2 bath in Woodland: ~$700 - Davis: ~$1050. Any questions? --["ChristopherMckenzie"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[Comments]]<span><br> + <br> +</span> ''2005-06-08 19:23:59'' [[nbsp]] homes in davis are overpriced as it is. --["<span>Users/</span>RohiniJasavala"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-06-09 20:30:44'' [[nbsp]] You'd think that a college town would be proposing housing affordable to college students. For some reason, this isn't the case. --["<span>Users/</span>ChristopherMckenzie"]<br> <span>+</span> Maybe they don't want to encourage an increase in college students. I don't know if this is really the case with Davis, but often in college towns the townspeople regard the students as a nuisance rather than as bona-fide community members. --["<span>Users/</span>KenjiYamada"]<br> <span>+</span> While I don't think it's the duty of the town to supply plentiful housing for students, I think too many people in the town ignore the University's contributions. In addition, the number of students admitted is largely determined by the UC Regents. The University will be growing, whether the citizens of Davis like it or not. The best thing they can do is control how that growth will be handled. I think too many people think they can stop the growth, when it is clear that they can't. --["<span>Users/</span>MattCzarnowski"]<br> <span>+</span> Of course they can. Since when are legal mechanisms the only method for controlling population growth? All the city has to do is not allow any developers to build, creating a housing crunch, leaving UCD as the school that's "decent, but it's impossible to find a place to live! I'm going to Riverside instead!". --["<span>Users/</span>DomenicSantangelo"]<br> <span>+</span> Well, the citizens of Davis can control new housing developments within their boundaries, but they certainly have very little say outside of those boundaries. UCD can build more housing on their own land. The county can approve housing just outside of the city limits (similar to the Mace Rance debacle). The fact is that more people will be going to school and working in Davis, and thus the effective population will be increasing, regardless of what the residents would like. --["<span>Users/</span>MattCzarnowski"]<br> <span>+</span> This is all not the point. I am not anti-growth, I'm against building million dollar homes in a town where a lot of the workforce is already forced to commute from Woodland, Dixon, and Sacramento. The against is not full of old people that hate growth but engineers, architects, and city planners that see this as a strategical nightmare and a bad idea where responsibility and practicality is second to maximized profits. --["<span>Users/</span>ChristopherMcKenzie"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-06-27 16:56:49'' [[nbsp]] This development is not intended for student housing. It is supposed to be a solution for work-force housing, assuming that ["West Village"] will handle student growth. --["<span>Users/</span>SharlaDaly"]<br> <span>+</span> That is EXACTLY the problem. So we have affordable student housing, like The Lexington, where apartments cost $1800/month. What about Allegre or any of the other new housing developments for the spendthrift low budget student. Davis is an unfettered orgy for real-estate developers. These proposed student housing developments are simply more dense (but nowhere close to dense enough) developments with the same ridiculous price range. I dunno if you come from a family that had a stable with wild horses and a 50 acre garden in their backyard, but most people can barely afford this stuff. It's not like there is an ocean or a lovely mountainside nearby. I guess that UC school means "free to rape" for any developer that comes by. 2 bedroom/2 bath in Woodland: ~$700 - Davis: ~$1050. Any questions? --["<span>Users/</span>ChristopherMckenzie"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 275: </td> <td> Line 277: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> While I, as a student who has to pay for overpriced housing, think it's messed up - even maybe a little immoral - to overcharge kids who are just trying to go to school, it's by no means unethical. And if I cared that much, I'd move to Woodland or West Sac. --["DomenicSantangelo"]<br> <span>-</span> It is by all means unethical. It's called extortion, profiteering, and maybe even racketeering. I don't think companies have a legal right to set up shop and start doing business here without first going through the City. Rarely, if ever, except in the case of selling alcohol to minors, is the priveledge of having a business ever revoked. And with the high turnover rates, shady institutions like ["Acadian Properties"] will have a fresh batch of suckers every year. Abusing the opportunity to do fair and honest business by ripping people off methodologically and repeatedly as much as possible and by backing away from assumed responsibilities is one of the worst possible offenses for a business and should be punished resulting in forced shutdown or relocation. --["ChristopherMcKenzie"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Which shifts the problem but doesn't solve anything. Price the housing high enough to force the students out of town and they'll end up either having to own cars (with an increase in traffic, pollution, helping drive gasoline prices up, and helping use up our limited supply of oil) or lean on public transport. Which means straining the public transportation systems until they build up. An increase in their use also means using more resources. Either way it's more cost and inconvenience for the students and a strain on one or more parts of the traffic infrustructure, to the benefit of some businesses but to everybody else's detriment. Not all costs can be counted in dollars. --["JeffreyNonken"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-07-17 02:21:13'' [[nbsp]] If they DO go out full fledged with this Village, they better re-arrange their blueprints and dedicate a park to ["The Jagged Tree"]!! That park, if made cool enough and preserved the tree, could be on par with Slide Hill! --["AndreHarris"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> While I, as a student who has to pay for overpriced housing, think it's messed up - even maybe a little immoral - to overcharge kids who are just trying to go to school, it's by no means unethical. And if I cared that much, I'd move to Woodland or West Sac. --["<span>Users/</span>DomenicSantangelo"]<br> <span>+</span> It is by all means unethical. It's called extortion, profiteering, and maybe even racketeering. I don't think companies have a legal right to set up shop and start doing business here without first going through the City. Rarely, if ever, except in the case of selling alcohol to minors, is the priveledge of having a business ever revoked. And with the high turnover rates, shady institutions like ["Acadian Properties"] will have a fresh batch of suckers every year. Abusing the opportunity to do fair and honest business by ripping people off methodologically and repeatedly as much as possible and by backing away from assumed responsibilities is one of the worst possible offenses for a business and should be punished resulting in forced shutdown or relocation. --["<span>Users/</span>ChristopherMcKenzie"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Which shifts the problem but doesn't solve anything. Price the housing high enough to force the students out of town and they'll end up either having to own cars (with an increase in traffic, pollution, helping drive gasoline prices up, and helping use up our limited supply of oil) or lean on public transport. Which means straining the public transportation systems until they build up. An increase in their use also means using more resources. Either way it's more cost and inconvenience for the students and a strain on one or more parts of the traffic infrustructure, to the benefit of some businesses but to everybody else's detriment. Not all costs can be counted in dollars. --["<span>Users/</span>JeffreyNonken"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-07-17 02:21:13'' [[nbsp]] If they DO go out full fledged with this Village, they better re-arrange their blueprints and dedicate a park to ["The Jagged Tree"]!! That park, if made cool enough and preserved the tree, could be on par with Slide Hill! --["<span>Users/</span>AndreHarris"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 287: </td> <td> Line 289: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-09-19 15:24:40'' [[nbsp]] I'm a reporter for the Davis Enterprise doing a series of stories on Covell Village. If anyone who visits this page wants to buy a house in Davis, or is hoping Covell Village passes in November so they can buy a house there or has any thoughts at all on Covell Village that they'd like to share, please write to me at [[MailTo(cstjohn AT davisenterprise DOT net)]]. Is it okay to solicit here? Anyway, I'd like to have the voices of real residents in my articles, as well as City Council, etc. Thanks. --["ClaireStJohn"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-09-20 13:54:51'' [[nbsp]] Outside of the overly-high prices, I think the biggest issue here is going to be traffic. There's no easy way to get on the 80 going West from that location. Either you take Covell west to the 113, or you take Pole Line south, and then double back on Richards. Either way, that's going to seriously impact the area traffic-wise. Me = voting no. --["AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-06 12:22:51'' [[nbsp]] I had a pro-Covell Village door-to-door propagandaist drop by my house last night. He asked me if I was voting for or against Covell Village. I told him against. He asked why, and I bought up the traffic concerns. He tried to rebut, but really had nothing, so he left. I find it kind of sad that they've resorted to canvassing the streets. Someone obviously stands to make a lot of money (and it ain't me). --["AlexPomeranz"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-09-19 15:24:40'' [[nbsp]] I'm a reporter for the Davis Enterprise doing a series of stories on Covell Village. If anyone who visits this page wants to buy a house in Davis, or is hoping Covell Village passes in November so they can buy a house there or has any thoughts at all on Covell Village that they'd like to share, please write to me at [[MailTo(cstjohn AT davisenterprise DOT net)]]. Is it okay to solicit here? Anyway, I'd like to have the voices of real residents in my articles, as well as City Council, etc. Thanks. --["<span>Users/</span>ClaireStJohn"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-09-20 13:54:51'' [[nbsp]] Outside of the overly-high prices, I think the biggest issue here is going to be traffic. There's no easy way to get on the 80 going West from that location. Either you take Covell west to the 113, or you take Pole Line south, and then double back on Richards. Either way, that's going to seriously impact the area traffic-wise. Me = voting no. --["<span>Users/</span>AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-06 12:22:51'' [[nbsp]] I had a pro-Covell Village door-to-door propagandaist drop by my house last night. He asked me if I was voting for or against Covell Village. I told him against. He asked why, and I bought up the traffic concerns. He tried to rebut, but really had nothing, so he left. I find it kind of sad that they've resorted to canvassing the streets. Someone obviously stands to make a lot of money (and it ain't me). --["<span>Users/</span>AlexPomeranz"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 297: </td> <td> Line 299: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Another really interesting development is that the developers inked a deal to place a ["Trader Joe's"] in Covell Village if the project is approved. Pro-Covell Village individuals claim this is a great opportunity to get one of the most desired stores to come to town. Anti-Covell Village folks think that Davis could attract a Trader Joe's without Covell Village and cite evidence of Trader Joe's investigation into a Davis location that has existed for some time. Covell Village supporters respond that the unique location of Covell Village was most attractive to the Trader Joe's corporation. --["PhilipNeustrom"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-06 14:29:44'' [[nbsp]] I've been hit twice by the Yes on X people. They have slick brochures and printed newspapers. Someone's going to make a lot of money if this passes, and it ''ain't'' us! For the residents, we get air pollution, traffic, more cars and fewer bikes (yes -more cars automatically means fewer bikes), higher sewer costs, etc. These people will not be university students, so this changes the 'character' of the town too. As far as "affordable", don't make me gag. How many of us could buy a home there? This whole thing is all about money for the developers, and nothing at all about what would actually benefit our community. Remember, it was the developers who proposed it -it's not as if we all got together and said "let's plow under that field and put apartments there" to make Davis a nicer place. --["SteveDavison"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-06 15:08:22'' [[nbsp]] It's not really ''less'' bikes. I don't think they'll start taking and hiding peoples bikes. It's not necessarily that horrible for the town though - I mean, there&amp;#8217;s more then just developers. Think of all the massive tax money that will be coming in, not just from the construction and possible new shops but from the influx in population - a whole lot could be done. It would also fare very well for most of the businesses in the town. I think I saw something about a school or two as well? It is growth and development yes, but there are positives in it too. It<span>&amp;#8217;</span>s inevitable that the city of Davis will change. Be it more students or more families moving here, you can<span>&amp;#8217;</span>t keep it as a small town with a farm school forevah. Some people think it<span>&amp;#8217;</span>s a little arrogant to spend four years here and then decide that is the best time and way to keep it. I work with people who graduated from UCD in the 60<span>&amp;#8217;</span>s, and they can<span>&amp;#8217;</span>t believe how much the town has changed. I don<span>&amp;#8217;</span>t think the term suburban wasteland need necessarily apply either. If it<span>&amp;#8217;</span>s well planned, it can work. You can keep it well spaced, keep parks and green space without being forcibly obvious and surrounded by roads. I think Danville in the east bay area is a good example of that. Or the newer parts of San Ramon in the hills. The problem for that stuff comes down to how most of core Davis wasn<span>&amp;#8217;</span>t well planned for much growth. Hence stuff like the crappy ["The Worst Intersection in Davis" intersection]. The point of it isn't affordable housing for college students either. I see a lot of houses being completely remodeled and rennovated around town. I'm sure that's also pretty expensive, but there are people who can/do shell out the money for a bigger or newer house (instead of one built anywhere from 10 to 50 years ago). Maybe some people just want a more "''respectable''" neighborhood away from places students can rent, something nice and new in a great place like Davis. Or people working in Sac who just love Davis, but can afford bigger/(potentially) nicer houses. I don't think the prices are absolutely crazy outrageous for Davis though. Especially for families wanting to come in from more expensive places. Likewise, I may not like the prices I have to pay for an apartment here, but I damn sure appreciate it once I visit friends at UCLA and see what they have to pay. But ever go out on Mace to the Country Club? Driven through it? There are tons of homes in the millions. Really nice ones too. I saw just a single one of them on a listing downtown for 1.75 million. 1.75 ''million''. And it wasn't even for the biggest and newest of those. I don<span>&amp;#8217;</span>t know enough about the entire issue, but just wanted to throw out way too many quick observations/comments from glancing at everyone elses. -["EdWins" ES]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-06 15:52:38'' [[nbsp]] "sad that they've resorted to canvassing the streets" and "hit twice by the Yes on X people"? I would be so glad if that's how poliitical campaigns were generally run. An effective canvassing operation requires lots of people who believe in something enough to make an effective argument for it - so it's a much less money-biased way for campaigns to be run. (Yes someone could hire lots of people to canvass, but they won't be effective.) A democracy works on the free exchange of ideas, and this doesn't only mean letting people say what they want - it also means citizens need to listen fairly to those they might disagree with. I know Davis is far too big for this, but i would feel sooo much more comfortable if this was decided in a town meeting where people would feel a small amount of shame about voting without having heard a good chunk of the debate, and maybe some attempts at compromise to be made, and the whole thing could be tabled for a few months for more discussions if there was a lot of disagreement. This comment should not be construed as an argument for or against the measure, but merely as an observation about how we think about our democracy. --["AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-09 08:37:50'' [[nbsp]] Now that I've had time to look more deeply into this project my feelings have changed. The arguments which are being talked about aren't the important ones, just the knee-jerk emotional ones. Many things are beyond the developer's control, such as "affordability". No matter who does what, they're still going to be 'unaffordable' because they hit market rate which in Davis is 'unaffordable'. We all want something for nothing, but alas... So the real question is what's good for the community -and what are our options. 1. Leave it as farm land (but for how long?), 2. Split it into individual lots and sell individually for people to build homes on, 3. Have a planned development -and what type (Village Homes or Mace Ranch)? Davis is growing 1.8% (or such) per year, regardless. If that is the case, then the issue becomes what kind of growth -planned or unplanned (as a division). People don't buy lots and build their own houses like in the old days, so that is probably unrealistic. Looking at the plans and talking with Mike directly I've decided that it really is as good as one can get for a planned development. I was fascinated to hear that Village Homes had 'enormous' opposition to its creation too. Now I believe that if this fails, there will just be more 'stupid structures' instead and a great opportunity will have been lost. Mike said something like 'if this fails, I'm going somewhere people will actually appreciate my work'. Now I believe the choice isn't between growth or no-growth, but between a 'green' type division and a 'concrete' type division. "It's become about 'winning', not about what's best for Davis" --["SteveDavison"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-09 21:21:42'' [[nbsp]] What is missing from the comments of opponents of Covell Village is a rational alternative. While many of the negatives that they point out -- such as traffic problems, pollution, etc -- have merit, they really don't offer a better choice. After all, Covell Village looks like an extremely nice neighborhood to live in. It has more open space and more ammenities than any other neighborhood in town. And Davis is going to grow over the next decade -- we have an agreement with [http://www.sacog.org/ SACOG] that we will grow by 250 houses a year, which is 70 more units a year than Covell Village adds. So the question that must be asked of opponents is this: if not in Covell Village, where do you propose adding the 1,864 units that will be built, plus the other 636 houses we have agreed to? And what will the development of the houses and neighborhoods you propose cause in terms of traffic and so on? It is mindless to just think that the rejection of Covell Village will mean that Davis will not grow any more. --["RichRifkin"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Another really interesting development is that the developers inked a deal to place a ["Trader Joe's"] in Covell Village if the project is approved. Pro-Covell Village individuals claim this is a great opportunity to get one of the most desired stores to come to town. Anti-Covell Village folks think that Davis could attract a Trader Joe's without Covell Village and cite evidence of Trader Joe's investigation into a Davis location that has existed for some time. Covell Village supporters respond that the unique location of Covell Village was most attractive to the Trader Joe's corporation. --["<span>Users/</span>PhilipNeustrom"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-06 14:29:44'' [[nbsp]] I've been hit twice by the Yes on X people. They have slick brochures and printed newspapers. Someone's going to make a lot of money if this passes, and it ''ain't'' us! For the residents, we get air pollution, traffic, more cars and fewer bikes (yes -more cars automatically means fewer bikes), higher sewer costs, etc. These people will not be university students, so this changes the 'character' of the town too. As far as "affordable", don't make me gag. How many of us could buy a home there? This whole thing is all about money for the developers, and nothing at all about what would actually benefit our community. Remember, it was the developers who proposed it -it's not as if we all got together and said "let's plow under that field and put apartments there" to make Davis a nicer place. --["<span>Users/</span>SteveDavison"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-06 15:08:22'' [[nbsp]] It's not really ''less'' bikes. I don't think they'll start taking and hiding peoples bikes. It's not necessarily that horrible for the town though - I mean, there&amp;#8217;s more then just developers. Think of all the massive tax money that will be coming in, not just from the construction and possible new shops but from the influx in population - a whole lot could be done. It would also fare very well for most of the businesses in the town. I think I saw something about a school or two as well? It is growth and development yes, but there are positives in it too. It<span>'</span>s inevitable that the city of Davis will change. Be it more students or more families moving here, you can<span>'</span>t keep it as a small town with a farm school forevah. Some people think it<span>'</span>s a little arrogant to spend four years here and then decide that is the best time and way to keep it. I work with people who graduated from UCD in the 60<span>'</span>s, and they can<span>'</span>t believe how much the town has changed. I don<span>'</span>t think the term suburban wasteland need necessarily apply either. If it<span>'</span>s well planned, it can work. You can keep it well spaced, keep parks and green space without being forcibly obvious and surrounded by roads. I think Danville in the east bay area is a good example of that. Or the newer parts of San Ramon in the hills. The problem for that stuff comes down to how most of core Davis wasn<span>'</span>t well planned for much growth. Hence stuff like the crappy ["The Worst Intersection in Davis" intersection]. The point of it isn't affordable housing for college students either. I see a lot of houses being completely remodeled and rennovated around town. I'm sure that's also pretty expensive, but there are people who can/do shell out the money for a bigger or newer house (instead of one built anywhere from 10 to 50 years ago). Maybe some people just want a more "''respectable''" neighborhood away from places students can rent, something nice and new in a great place like Davis. Or people working in Sac who just love Davis, but can afford bigger/(potentially) nicer houses. I don't think the prices are absolutely crazy outrageous for Davis though. Especially for families wanting to come in from more expensive places. Likewise, I may not like the prices I have to pay for an apartment here, but I damn sure appreciate it once I visit friends at UCLA and see what they have to pay. But ever go out on Mace to the Country Club? Driven through it? There are tons of homes in the millions. Really nice ones too. I saw just a single one of them on a listing downtown for 1.75 million. 1.75 ''million''. And it wasn't even for the biggest and newest of those. I don<span>'</span>t know enough about the entire issue, but just wanted to throw out way too many quick observations/comments from glancing at everyone elses. -["<span>Users/</span>EdWins" ES]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-06 15:52:38'' [[nbsp]] "sad that they've resorted to canvassing the streets" and "hit twice by the Yes on X people"? I would be so glad if that's how poliitical campaigns were generally run. An effective canvassing operation requires lots of people who believe in something enough to make an effective argument for it - so it's a much less money-biased way for campaigns to be run. (Yes someone could hire lots of people to canvass, but they won't be effective.) A democracy works on the free exchange of ideas, and this doesn't only mean letting people say what they want - it also means citizens need to listen fairly to those they might disagree with. I know Davis is far too big for this, but i would feel sooo much more comfortable if this was decided in a town meeting where people would feel a small amount of shame about voting without having heard a good chunk of the debate, and maybe some attempts at compromise to be made, and the whole thing could be tabled for a few months for more discussions if there was a lot of disagreement. This comment should not be construed as an argument for or against the measure, but merely as an observation about how we think about our democracy. --["<span>Users/</span>AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-09 08:37:50'' [[nbsp]] Now that I've had time to look more deeply into this project my feelings have changed. The arguments which are being talked about aren't the important ones, just the knee-jerk emotional ones. Many things are beyond the developer's control, such as "affordability". No matter who does what, they're still going to be 'unaffordable' because they hit market rate which in Davis is 'unaffordable'. We all want something for nothing, but alas... So the real question is what's good for the community -and what are our options. 1. Leave it as farm land (but for how long?), 2. Split it into individual lots and sell individually for people to build homes on, 3. Have a planned development -and what type (Village Homes or Mace Ranch)? Davis is growing 1.8% (or such) per year, regardless. If that is the case, then the issue becomes what kind of growth -planned or unplanned (as a division). People don't buy lots and build their own houses like in the old days, so that is probably unrealistic. Looking at the plans and talking with Mike directly I've decided that it really is as good as one can get for a planned development. I was fascinated to hear that Village Homes had 'enormous' opposition to its creation too. Now I believe that if this fails, there will just be more 'stupid structures' instead and a great opportunity will have been lost. Mike said something like 'if this fails, I'm going somewhere people will actually appreciate my work'. Now I believe the choice isn't between growth or no-growth, but between a 'green' type division and a 'concrete' type division. "It's become about 'winning', not about what's best for Davis" --["<span>Users/</span>SteveDavison"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-09 21:21:42'' [[nbsp]] What is missing from the comments of opponents of Covell Village is a rational alternative. While many of the negatives that they point out -- such as traffic problems, pollution, etc -- have merit, they really don't offer a better choice. After all, Covell Village looks like an extremely nice neighborhood to live in. It has more open space and more ammenities than any other neighborhood in town. And Davis is going to grow over the next decade -- we have an agreement with [http://www.sacog.org/ SACOG] that we will grow by 250 houses a year, which is 70 more units a year than Covell Village adds. So the question that must be asked of opponents is this: if not in Covell Village, where do you propose adding the 1,864 units that will be built, plus the other 636 houses we have agreed to? And what will the development of the houses and neighborhoods you propose cause in terms of traffic and so on? It is mindless to just think that the rejection of Covell Village will mean that Davis will not grow any more. --["<span>Users/</span>RichRifkin"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 311: </td> <td> Line 313: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * I disagree. The people who I have talked to (and my wife was very involved with the "no on covell village" stuff earlier this year, are anti any sort of growth, except infill development, which they also oppose if it is near existing development. (i.e., they are opposed to development of any kind that is not one home at a time) -- ["rocksanddirt"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-10 09:25:12'' [[nbsp]] TCO of Solar Power is more than double that of coal or nuclear, and as such, it is in several ways worse to use solar than to pull power from the grid. --["KennethWaters"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-10 09:36:36'' [[nbsp]] Does anyone have a copy of the Eviromental Impact Report? --["KennethWaters"]<br> <span>-</span> http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/eir.cfm --["AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-10 12:09:01'' [[nbsp]] As a future neighbor of Covell Village (live across pole line from it), I would consider voting no if it were possible to build infill development in Davis without Lawsuits. People say Trader Joes will come, I disagree unless they are in a new devleopment. There is no exisiting space in Davis suitable for them. --["RocksandDirt"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-10 12:45:00'' [[nbsp]] "where do you propose adding the 1,864 units that will be built, plus the other 636 houses we have agreed to?" Knee-jerk response, without much thought except some calculation as to how to get to 2000 units: raise downtown (meaning say between C and H and 1st and 5th) to a uniform height of 7 stories, and a few neighboring blocks by a couple of stories (keeping the parks). Negate the traffic problems by putting a deed restriction against registering a car at the address. Put in better public transportation (which can come close to paying for itself from fares) around Davis and also to Sacramento and the Bay Area for these people to use. --["AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>-</span> * ''2005-10-10 23:36:58'' [[nbsp]] Alexander, your solution would do what I asked. However, there are a number of problems with it. First, the area of downtown that you suggest should be 7 stories is owned by (I'm guessing) hundreds of separate people. I can't imagine that there would be any public support for condemning those properties or taking them through eminent domain. And so you would just have to wait &amp;#8212; perhaps 30 years or more &amp;#8212; until they were for sale. And while most remained one-story buildings, the remaining residents would likely object to living next to a 7 story building. I think it might be possible to do what you say on a block that has only one owner, if you limit the new buildings to say 4 stories. But politically, I think your idea would be quite unpopular. And second, it might not provide the kind of housing that people in Davis really want to live in. If so, it would also be uneconomical. --["RichRifkin"]<br> <span>-</span> * I agree my idea is unlikely to work, even if I overestimated the current height of downtown and only 5 stories are needed. It really does have to be done something like all at once, because the public transportation won't work without having that many people living close to each other. If the zoning allowed for it, a developer could probably get it done by offering slightly above market prices to buy out most of a block, and threatening hold-outs with having a five story building next to them. This would be politically impossible and economically questionable though. Sadly, I think most Davis residents would prefer two new Covell Villages over a 5 or 7 story downtown, even though the 5 story downtown would be much better for maintaining town identity, not to mention how much it would help small local businesses. This doesn't mean Covell Village will pass - since people can always hope that neither will happen. --["AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-10 23:38:03'' [[nbsp]] By the way... I am new to this site. How do I make my comments appear as a response to a specific poster? --["RichRifkin"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * I disagree. The people who I have talked to (and my wife was very involved with the "no on covell village" stuff earlier this year, are anti any sort of growth, except infill development, which they also oppose if it is near existing development. (i.e., they are opposed to development of any kind that is not one home at a time) -- ["<span>Users/</span>rocksanddirt"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-10 09:25:12'' [[nbsp]] TCO of Solar Power is more than double that of coal or nuclear, and as such, it is in several ways worse to use solar than to pull power from the grid. --["<span>Users/</span>KennethWaters"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-10 09:36:36'' [[nbsp]] Does anyone have a copy of the Eviromental Impact Report? --["<span>Users/</span>KennethWaters"]<br> <span>+</span> http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/eir.cfm --["<span>Users/</span>AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-10 12:09:01'' [[nbsp]] As a future neighbor of Covell Village (live across pole line from it), I would consider voting no if it were possible to build infill development in Davis without Lawsuits. People say Trader Joes will come, I disagree unless they are in a new devleopment. There is no exisiting space in Davis suitable for them. --["<span>Users/</span>RocksandDirt"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-10 12:45:00'' [[nbsp]] "where do you propose adding the 1,864 units that will be built, plus the other 636 houses we have agreed to?" Knee-jerk response, without much thought except some calculation as to how to get to 2000 units: raise downtown (meaning say between C and H and 1st and 5th) to a uniform height of 7 stories, and a few neighboring blocks by a couple of stories (keeping the parks). Negate the traffic problems by putting a deed restriction against registering a car at the address. Put in better public transportation (which can come close to paying for itself from fares) around Davis and also to Sacramento and the Bay Area for these people to use. --["<span>Users/</span>AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>+</span> * ''2005-10-10 23:36:58'' [[nbsp]] Alexander, your solution would do what I asked. However, there are a number of problems with it. First, the area of downtown that you suggest should be 7 stories is owned by (I'm guessing) hundreds of separate people. I can't imagine that there would be any public support for condemning those properties or taking them through eminent domain. And so you would just have to wait &amp;#8212; perhaps 30 years or more &amp;#8212; until they were for sale. And while most remained one-story buildings, the remaining residents would likely object to living next to a 7 story building. I think it might be possible to do what you say on a block that has only one owner, if you limit the new buildings to say 4 stories. But politically, I think your idea would be quite unpopular. And second, it might not provide the kind of housing that people in Davis really want to live in. If so, it would also be uneconomical. --["<span>Users/</span>RichRifkin"]<br> <span>+</span> * I agree my idea is unlikely to work, even if I overestimated the current height of downtown and only 5 stories are needed. It really does have to be done something like all at once, because the public transportation won't work without having that many people living close to each other. If the zoning allowed for it, a developer could probably get it done by offering slightly above market prices to buy out most of a block, and threatening hold-outs with having a five story building next to them. This would be politically impossible and economically questionable though. Sadly, I think most Davis residents would prefer two new Covell Villages over a 5 or 7 story downtown, even though the 5 story downtown would be much better for maintaining town identity, not to mention how much it would help small local businesses. This doesn't mean Covell Village will pass - since people can always hope that neither will happen. --["<span>Users/</span>AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-10 23:38:03'' [[nbsp]] By the way... I am new to this site. How do I make my comments appear as a response to a specific poster? --["<span>Users/</span>RichRifkin"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 329: </td> <td> Line 331: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Thanks. I think I've got this figured out. --["RichRifkin"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-12 04:39:55'' [[nbsp]] There has been an ad circulating around this week that's clearly student-targeted. It states that "If you want to live in a cutting edge, solar-powered neighborhood with new entertainment options and affordable housing for students, then Covell Village is for you." The design of the advertisement is clearly geared toward students, as well. The back lists, among other items, "Affordable Housing" and under that it states that "Covell Village will be the only place in Davis where students can qualify for affordable housing." What is going on here? Covell Village is not intended to be student housing, as far as I know, and all debate on the project has centered around other topics. I think they are using the phrase "affordable housing" in a technical sense, in that you get tax breaks, etc? What do they mean it's the only place students can qualify? Do they mean it's the only place where students can get some slack if they want to purchase a home? Can someone please elaborate on what they mean by affordable housing for students? (Buying a house is never an affordable option for a student unless they have a parent willing to throw in and buy it then rent it out once they're gone, etc). --["PhilipNeustrom"]<br> <span>-</span> * Basically, students can't apply for section 8 housing (housing for people with low incomes). Covell Village includes houses as well as townhouses and apartments. So CV would pretty much just be offering section 8 rates to students that qualified without actually being official section 8 housing. --["JennySoares"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-12 12:28:59'' [[nbsp]] Covell Village is going to be built immediately adjacent to the old Yolo County landfill. When that thing lets off gas, it smells like death. --["NikolaiBraun"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> * That's not likely from the old landfill, but rather from the protected open space drainage area adjacent to the landfill and adjacent to the proposed development. --["RocksandDirt"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> * Are you suggesting that I&amp;#8217;m confusing swamp gas with the stench of death? The ponds up there dry out in the summer. There shouldn&amp;#8217;t be significant swamp gas production in season pools such as those if the bottom can oxidize on a yearly basis. Go hang out up there and chase bunnys around or count owls for an afternoon. You may experience the odor I&amp;#8217;m referring to. You may not. I don&amp;#8217;t smell it every time I&amp;#8217;m out there. When I do, I have to leave. --["NikolaiBraun"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Thanks. I think I've got this figured out. --["<span>Users/</span>RichRifkin"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-12 04:39:55'' [[nbsp]] There has been an ad circulating around this week that's clearly student-targeted. It states that "If you want to live in a cutting edge, solar-powered neighborhood with new entertainment options and affordable housing for students, then Covell Village is for you." The design of the advertisement is clearly geared toward students, as well. The back lists, among other items, "Affordable Housing" and under that it states that "Covell Village will be the only place in Davis where students can qualify for affordable housing." What is going on here? Covell Village is not intended to be student housing, as far as I know, and all debate on the project has centered around other topics. I think they are using the phrase "affordable housing" in a technical sense, in that you get tax breaks, etc? What do they mean it's the only place students can qualify? Do they mean it's the only place where students can get some slack if they want to purchase a home? Can someone please elaborate on what they mean by affordable housing for students? (Buying a house is never an affordable option for a student unless they have a parent willing to throw in and buy it then rent it out once they're gone, etc). --["<span>Users/</span>PhilipNeustrom"]<br> <span>+</span> * Basically, students can't apply for section 8 housing (housing for people with low incomes). Covell Village includes houses as well as townhouses and apartments. So CV would pretty much just be offering section 8 rates to students that qualified without actually being official section 8 housing. --["<span>Users/</span>JennySoares"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-12 12:28:59'' [[nbsp]] Covell Village is going to be built immediately adjacent to the old Yolo County landfill. When that thing lets off gas, it smells like death. --["<span>Users/</span>NikolaiBraun"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> * That's not likely from the old landfill, but rather from the protected open space drainage area adjacent to the landfill and adjacent to the proposed development. --["<span>Users/</span>RocksandDirt"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> * Are you suggesting that I&amp;#8217;m confusing swamp gas with the stench of death? The ponds up there dry out in the summer. There shouldn&amp;#8217;t be significant swamp gas production in season pools such as those if the bottom can oxidize on a yearly basis. Go hang out up there and chase bunnys around or count owls for an afternoon. You may experience the odor I&amp;#8217;m referring to. You may not. I don&amp;#8217;t smell it every time I&amp;#8217;m out there. When I do, I have to leave. --["<span>Users/</span>NikolaiBraun"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 346: </td> <td> Line 348: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village just went in an gave them a deal they could not refuse. Trader Joe's has said previously that the 8th street vacant space was too far from the freeway, yet Covell is even further. It just shows how desperate the Covell Village people are to entice votes. If they had confidence in their project they would not need to 'sweeten the pot' to buy more votes... --["BrianSolecki"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-13 21:22:59'' [[nbsp]] You know why I'm against Covell Village? I love Davis. I want to live here forever, but I doubt I'll ever be able to afford to buy a home here. I resent that the new homes always have to be rediculously expensive and I resent that the only people that will be able to afford them are people commuting to Sacramento. --["AnnaJones"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village just went in an gave them a deal they could not refuse. Trader Joe's has said previously that the 8th street vacant space was too far from the freeway, yet Covell is even further. It just shows how desperate the Covell Village people are to entice votes. If they had confidence in their project they would not need to 'sweeten the pot' to buy more votes... --["<span>Users/</span>BrianSolecki"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-13 21:22:59'' [[nbsp]] You know why I'm against Covell Village? I love Davis. I want to live here forever, but I doubt I'll ever be able to afford to buy a home here. I resent that the new homes always have to be rediculously expensive and I resent that the only people that will be able to afford them are people commuting to Sacramento. --["<span>Users/</span>AnnaJones"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 353: </td> <td> Line 355: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Affordable housing in Covell will start at $198K (144 townhomes for families, seniors and individuals starting at $198K and averaging about $267K) Only 52% of the housing in Covell Village has no restriction on price. I'm working on getting the chart above taken off this site, and there will probably be something in the Enterprise soon about this bc No on X is using it at their tables around town. --["DavidFisher"]<br> <span>-</span> Is the fact that these high-density townhomes are being "placed on wildlife habitat" supposed to make us feel better about this development? *boggle* --["AlexPomeranz"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Affordable housing in Covell will start at $198K (144 townhomes for families, seniors and individuals starting at $198K and averaging about $267K) Only 52% of the housing in Covell Village has no restriction on price. I'm working on getting the chart above taken off this site, and there will probably be something in the Enterprise soon about this bc No on X is using it at their tables around town. --["<span>Users/</span>DavidFisher"]<br> <span>+</span> Is the fact that these high-density townhomes are being "placed on wildlife habitat" supposed to make us feel better about this development? *boggle* --["<span>Users/</span>AlexPomeranz"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 366: </td> <td> Line 368: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-14 12:49:34'' [[nbsp]] The affordable/unaffordable debate is a red herring. No, they won't be affordable. But then NO HOMES there will be. If one instead thinks, "If I could design it, what would it be like?" Then you may conclude that it really is quite good as designed. What would make it better, really? --["SteveDavison"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-14 19:32:16'' [[nbsp]] Well, it's not the "Davis ideal", but I have to say that the plans for Covell Village are impressive. They are far more thoughful and interesting than what you see in the quickly-developing urban sprawl to the east and south of Sacramento. Is it ideal for Davis? Well, I think the debate about impact on resources is somewhat askew since infill housing will be built which would cause similar stresses on existing infrastructure. Some people are concerned about the traffic impact, but I think it might have an interesting effect of causing less of a traffic impact on Downtown as this housing would be convenient to new business developements near South Davis. (Most people are worried about downtown it seems.) Anyway, it's a close call, but I think Measure X is a winner in the long haul. --["JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-14 19:55:32'' [[nbsp]] A family living in Covell village needs a car, and that already makes it unaffordable to a lot of people. Let's face it - the only ways to make affordable housing around here are (a) build housing so crappy no one wants to live there or (b) add a million (i'm exaggerating less than you think) units between Sacramento and Santa Cruz. Anything else will either see (a) homes become unaffordable on resale or (b) corruption running the sale of below-market units or (c) homes and neighborhoods degrade as people decide not to invest in them. You have to make the market work for society, not fight it. FYI, i prefer the million units approach, with taxpayer subsidized construction if necessary. --["AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>-</span> * Why exactly would a family in Covell Village need a car? While the far side of the development would be beyond easy walking distance to central Davis, and not particularly near any existing bus service, this isn't the case for the low income areas - Unitrans and Yolobus run within a few blocks. Having lived carless a few blocks south of the proposed site and way out in South Davis, I fail to see how it would be a problem. --["JessicaLuedtke"]<br> <span>-</span> * Sorry - i meant (and should have written) a family with children. I could live there without a car pretty easily myself too, but knowing people with small children, i can see how extremely difficult it would be for them. --["AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>-</span> * I have a small child myself :) Only one child, and old enough to ride in a bike trailer, but given that there will be schools, shopping, and public transportation nearby, I really don't see how the situation would be worse than anywhere else in Davis. Heck, we live right downtown, and it's still a 5 block walk to yolobus and 10 blocks to the closest grocery store. --["JessicaLuedtke"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-15 10:35:43'' [[nbsp]] I think Covell Village is going to provide "upgrade housing" for small families -- normally with at least one professional, or perhaps dual-incomes. I have a suspicion that people will move--for example--from Central Davis, and into Covell Village. This will free up less expensive housing options for those who need it. Honestly, as unaffordable as houses are said to be in Davis, they're really spread across the spectrum. However, there's limited availability so there's not much room for movement. This should at least cause some of that to happen. --["JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-16 15:25:19'' [[nbsp]] Personally, i liked the [http://www.its.ucdavis.edu/news/enews/issue23/ light rail] option... --["ArlenAbraham"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-19 17:35:09'' [[nbsp]] Yeah, because i want MORE annoying yuppie families living in my town...GREAT! --["TheRadish"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-20 07:56:19'' [[nbsp]] My completely unofficial and insignifcant poll/observation of homes on my walk to work this morning yielded 12 "No-on-X" Lawn signs and two "Yes-on-X" lawn signs. --["BrianSolecki"]<br> <span>-</span> On Pole Line, from 8th street to Covell, the "No-on-X" signs way outnumber the "Yes-on-X" signs (probably by a margin of 5:1 or so). --["AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>-</span> I am a supporter of Measure X. I even wrote an Enterprise columnn in favor of it. However, by my count, having now seen and counted more than 200 lawn signs, the No side is winning that battle by better than 5:2. I think that differential is not a good barometer of how the vote will turn out. It will probably be very close to 50:50. But it does suggest that there is more passion on the No on X side of the debate. --["RichRifkin"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-20 11:51:10'' [[nbsp]] I know it sounds like pie in the sky, but light rail is an awesome idea. And if it could somehow connect with Sacramento's rail... --["JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-20 16:30:55'' [[nbsp]] I dunno, they cluster. In my view, the yes signs far outnumber the "no" signs. And there's been some commentary about these signs appearing in public spaces in apartment complexes. --["JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-22 15:07:22'' [[nbsp]] Survey of 153 houses: 94 No | 59 Yes. See Map. [[Image(cv2.jpg, "Survey of 153 houses in Central Davis", 100, thumbnail)]] --["DylanBeaudette"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-14 12:49:34'' [[nbsp]] The affordable/unaffordable debate is a red herring. No, they won't be affordable. But then NO HOMES there will be. If one instead thinks, "If I could design it, what would it be like?" Then you may conclude that it really is quite good as designed. What would make it better, really? --["<span>Users/</span>SteveDavison"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-14 19:32:16'' [[nbsp]] Well, it's not the "Davis ideal", but I have to say that the plans for Covell Village are impressive. They are far more thoughful and interesting than what you see in the quickly-developing urban sprawl to the east and south of Sacramento. Is it ideal for Davis? Well, I think the debate about impact on resources is somewhat askew since infill housing will be built which would cause similar stresses on existing infrastructure. Some people are concerned about the traffic impact, but I think it might have an interesting effect of causing less of a traffic impact on Downtown as this housing would be convenient to new business developements near South Davis. (Most people are worried about downtown it seems.) Anyway, it's a close call, but I think Measure X is a winner in the long haul. --["<span>Users/</span>JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-14 19:55:32'' [[nbsp]] A family living in Covell village needs a car, and that already makes it unaffordable to a lot of people. Let's face it - the only ways to make affordable housing around here are (a) build housing so crappy no one wants to live there or (b) add a million (i'm exaggerating less than you think) units between Sacramento and Santa Cruz. Anything else will either see (a) homes become unaffordable on resale or (b) corruption running the sale of below-market units or (c) homes and neighborhoods degrade as people decide not to invest in them. You have to make the market work for society, not fight it. FYI, i prefer the million units approach, with taxpayer subsidized construction if necessary. --["<span>Users/</span>AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>+</span> * Why exactly would a family in Covell Village need a car? While the far side of the development would be beyond easy walking distance to central Davis, and not particularly near any existing bus service, this isn't the case for the low income areas - Unitrans and Yolobus run within a few blocks. Having lived carless a few blocks south of the proposed site and way out in South Davis, I fail to see how it would be a problem. --["<span>Users/</span>JessicaLuedtke"]<br> <span>+</span> * Sorry - i meant (and should have written) a family with children. I could live there without a car pretty easily myself too, but knowing people with small children, i can see how extremely difficult it would be for them. --["<span>Users/</span>AlexanderWoo"]<br> <span>+</span> * I have a small child myself :) Only one child, and old enough to ride in a bike trailer, but given that there will be schools, shopping, and public transportation nearby, I really don't see how the situation would be worse than anywhere else in Davis. Heck, we live right downtown, and it's still a 5 block walk to yolobus and 10 blocks to the closest grocery store. --["<span>Users/</span>JessicaLuedtke"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-15 10:35:43'' [[nbsp]] I think Covell Village is going to provide "upgrade housing" for small families -- normally with at least one professional, or perhaps dual-incomes. I have a suspicion that people will move--for example--from Central Davis, and into Covell Village. This will free up less expensive housing options for those who need it. Honestly, as unaffordable as houses are said to be in Davis, they're really spread across the spectrum. However, there's limited availability so there's not much room for movement. This should at least cause some of that to happen. --["<span>Users/</span>JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-16 15:25:19'' [[nbsp]] Personally, i liked the [http://www.its.ucdavis.edu/news/enews/issue23/ light rail] option... --["<span>Users/</span>ArlenAbraham"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-19 17:35:09'' [[nbsp]] Yeah, because i want MORE annoying yuppie families living in my town...GREAT! --["<span>Users/</span>TheRadish"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-20 07:56:19'' [[nbsp]] My completely unofficial and insignifcant poll/observation of homes on my walk to work this morning yielded 12 "No-on-X" Lawn signs and two "Yes-on-X" lawn signs. --["<span>Users/</span>BrianSolecki"]<br> <span>+</span> On Pole Line, from 8th street to Covell, the "No-on-X" signs way outnumber the "Yes-on-X" signs (probably by a margin of 5:1 or so). --["<span>Users/</span>AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>+</span> I am a supporter of Measure X. I even wrote an Enterprise columnn in favor of it. However, by my count, having now seen and counted more than 200 lawn signs, the No side is winning that battle by better than 5:2. I think that differential is not a good barometer of how the vote will turn out. It will probably be very close to 50:50. But it does suggest that there is more passion on the No on X side of the debate. --["<span>Users/</span>RichRifkin"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-20 11:51:10'' [[nbsp]] I know it sounds like pie in the sky, but light rail is an awesome idea. And if it could somehow connect with Sacramento's rail... --["<span>Users/</span>JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-20 16:30:55'' [[nbsp]] I dunno, they cluster. In my view, the yes signs far outnumber the "no" signs. And there's been some commentary about these signs appearing in public spaces in apartment complexes. --["<span>Users/</span>JaimeRaba"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-22 15:07:22'' [[nbsp]] Survey of 153 houses: 94 No | 59 Yes. See Map. [[Image(cv2.jpg, "Survey of 153 houses in Central Davis", 100, thumbnail)]] --["<span>Users/</span>DylanBeaudette"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 392: </td> <td> Line 394: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Actually, I'm pretty sure that you're wrong on this one... The County CAN vote in development outside the borders. The County can unilaterally void the "Pass through Agreement" by giving up the million or so bucks it receives from the City- chump change compared to how much they'd get from development taxes. In order to receive grant money from larger government entities, Davis must grow at a .9% rate per year, something they wouldn't be doing without a development such as Covell Village or the other proposed Mace Curve. ["ThomasLloyd" TL] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Actually, I'm pretty sure that you're wrong on this one... The County CAN vote in development outside the borders. The County can unilaterally void the "Pass through Agreement" by giving up the million or so bucks it receives from the City- chump change compared to how much they'd get from development taxes. In order to receive grant money from larger government entities, Davis must grow at a .9% rate per year, something they wouldn't be doing without a development such as Covell Village or the other proposed Mace Curve. ["<span>Users/</span>ThomasLloyd" TL] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 398: </td> <td> Line 400: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-23 18:28:07'' [[nbsp]] The only people opposing this are the fatcats who don't want their already bloated bubble homes to lose value. Screw them. And screw the hippies who have been unwittingly recruited to their cause. --["ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-26 09:38:42'' [[nbsp]] Here is a link to Gerald Heffernon's column in the Davis Enterprise on Oct. 25: [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/25/columnists/gerald_heffernon/067heffernon.txt Jerry's column]. This is about as incisive and unemotional anti-Covell Village argument that I've heard. --["PaulThober"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-29 18:12:33'' [[nbsp]] Sort of an interesting article at http://www.californiaaggie.com/article/?id=11171 -it suggests that the battle isn't Covell Developers vs. Citizens, but rather, Covell Developers vs. Mace Ranch Developers. This suggests a corporate No-on-X motive. --["SteveDavison"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-29 19:19:07'' [[nbsp]] And gee, that's exactly what I was saying and then my comment got deleted. Oh, so has the Sierra Club given any good non kneejerk reasons to oppose X given that it meets its own guidelines? --["ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-30 10:15:50'' [[nbsp]] OK, so our Pro section says this: ''Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines.'' The Sierra Club site says: ''Covell Village, though touted to be smart growth, is anything but.'' So which is it? --["ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-30 10:34:06'' [[nbsp]] Sierra Club saying "This is Not Smart Growth" Per their ad in today's Enterprise "The site is not within the City of Davis, contains valuable agricultural land and open space, and with homes not affordable to most Davis workers and residents, will result in more commuter traffic and attendant impacts. Nearly half the project lies in the 100-year flood plain." I don't know exactly what the smart growth guidlines are that the pro- side is referring to and they don't really say what they are either. I just know what the Sierra Club states over and over again - on their website, in letters to the editor, ads in the newspaper, press releases, etc. Another thing their ad states is that they think that this site should be included in the next General Plan process after the impacts of Woodland's Spring Lake development and the UCD housing develpment are known. --["SharlaDaly"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-31 10:38:59'' [[nbsp]] Do people realize that one of the key people involved in the Sierra Club owns a big piece of land that he wants to develop on the border of West Davis. It probably won't happen for 17 years if Covell passes. In addition, the whole "flood plain" thing is manipulation. After grading, the project will be completely protected. Much of the City of Davis was on flood plain too. By the way, there is a letter going out from Sierra Club MEMBERS who do not agree with their board. --["SamToomey"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-23 18:28:07'' [[nbsp]] The only people opposing this are the fatcats who don't want their already bloated bubble homes to lose value. Screw them. And screw the hippies who have been unwittingly recruited to their cause. --["<span>Users/</span>ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-26 09:38:42'' [[nbsp]] Here is a link to Gerald Heffernon's column in the Davis Enterprise on Oct. 25: [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/25/columnists/gerald_heffernon/067heffernon.txt Jerry's column]. This is about as incisive and unemotional anti-Covell Village argument that I've heard. --["<span>Users/</span>PaulThober"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-29 18:12:33'' [[nbsp]] Sort of an interesting article at http://www.californiaaggie.com/article/?id=11171 -it suggests that the battle isn't Covell Developers vs. Citizens, but rather, Covell Developers vs. Mace Ranch Developers. This suggests a corporate No-on-X motive. --["<span>Users/</span>SteveDavison"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-29 19:19:07'' [[nbsp]] And gee, that's exactly what I was saying and then my comment got deleted. Oh, so has the Sierra Club given any good non kneejerk reasons to oppose X given that it meets its own guidelines? --["<span>Users/</span>ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-30 10:15:50'' [[nbsp]] OK, so our Pro section says this: ''Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines.'' The Sierra Club site says: ''Covell Village, though touted to be smart growth, is anything but.'' So which is it? --["<span>Users/</span>ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-30 10:34:06'' [[nbsp]] Sierra Club saying "This is Not Smart Growth" Per their ad in today's Enterprise "The site is not within the City of Davis, contains valuable agricultural land and open space, and with homes not affordable to most Davis workers and residents, will result in more commuter traffic and attendant impacts. Nearly half the project lies in the 100-year flood plain." I don't know exactly what the smart growth guidlines are that the pro- side is referring to and they don't really say what they are either. I just know what the Sierra Club states over and over again - on their website, in letters to the editor, ads in the newspaper, press releases, etc. Another thing their ad states is that they think that this site should be included in the next General Plan process after the impacts of Woodland's Spring Lake development and the UCD housing develpment are known. --["<span>Users/</span>SharlaDaly"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-31 10:38:59'' [[nbsp]] Do people realize that one of the key people involved in the Sierra Club owns a big piece of land that he wants to develop on the border of West Davis. It probably won't happen for 17 years if Covell passes. In addition, the whole "flood plain" thing is manipulation. After grading, the project will be completely protected. Much of the City of Davis was on flood plain too. By the way, there is a letter going out from Sierra Club MEMBERS who do not agree with their board. --["<span>Users/</span>SamToomey"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 411: </td> <td> Line 413: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Breaking news! The Yes on Measure X members were caught red-handed giving out "Free slice of Pizza for your vote!" at the UCD polling station on Thursday, Oct. 31. During the investigation following, it was determined that an active Yes on Measure X campaign team member had wormed his way in as a "judge" for the polling station. County Clerk, Freddie Oakley, shut the illegal activity down and removed the "judge." It's time to vote, folks. --["SharlaDaly"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Breaking news! The Yes on Measure X members were caught red-handed giving out "Free slice of Pizza for your vote!" at the UCD polling station on Thursday, Oct. 31. During the investigation following, it was determined that an active Yes on Measure X campaign team member had wormed his way in as a "judge" for the polling station. County Clerk, Freddie Oakley, shut the illegal activity down and removed the "judge." It's time to vote, folks. --["<span>Users/</span>SharlaDaly"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 413: </td> <td> Line 415: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> If I had known there'd be free pizza coupons, I would have definitly stood in line and nodded my head yes just for some lunch. People have been doing that since elementary school (candy, cupcakes, etc), but I'm never really sure if it actually bought votes back then, much less with college kids now. -["EdWins" ES]<br> <span>-</span> Woah there, cowboy. You didn't have to agree to vote "Yes" to get pizza, you just had to '''vote'''. Pizza for yes votes would be all kinds of illegal. - ["arlenabraham" arlen] </td> <td> <span>+</span> If I had known there'd be free pizza coupons, I would have definitly stood in line and nodded my head yes just for some lunch. People have been doing that since elementary school (candy, cupcakes, etc), but I'm never really sure if it actually bought votes back then, much less with college kids now. -["<span>Users/</span>EdWins" ES]<br> <span>+</span> Woah there, cowboy. You didn't have to agree to vote "Yes" to get pizza, you just had to '''vote'''. Pizza for yes votes would be all kinds of illegal. - ["<span>Users/</span>arlenabraham" arlen] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 418: </td> <td> Line 420: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-01 15:48:00'' [[nbsp]] Last afternoon, around 4:30pm there was a woman holding a sign at the intersection of Covell and Pole Line telling people to vote no on X due to traffic concerns (I think it mentioned something like 20 million cars). Another woman (or possibly the same one?) was there again this morning at 7:30ish holding the same sign. --["AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> People have been out on Pole Line and Covell with signs for almost a week. Several signs claim an additional 22,000 trips by car on Pole Line daily. While this may be true, it seems like an awful lot for the number of units that are going to be built in Covell Village. ["MattCzarnowski" MC]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> * The traffic figures used by the no on X people are the "worst case" put forth in the EIR prepared for the project. It assumes that there are multiple trips by multiple members of each household each day. The reality of course is that there will be less then the worst case, but that traffic will get worse thoroughout town as this project is implemented. ["rocksanddirt"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-01 15:48:00'' [[nbsp]] Last afternoon, around 4:30pm there was a woman holding a sign at the intersection of Covell and Pole Line telling people to vote no on X due to traffic concerns (I think it mentioned something like 20 million cars). Another woman (or possibly the same one?) was there again this morning at 7:30ish holding the same sign. --["<span>Users/</span>AlexPomeranz"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> People have been out on Pole Line and Covell with signs for almost a week. Several signs claim an additional 22,000 trips by car on Pole Line daily. While this may be true, it seems like an awful lot for the number of units that are going to be built in Covell Village. ["<span>Users/</span>MattCzarnowski" MC]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> * The traffic figures used by the no on X people are the "worst case" put forth in the EIR prepared for the project. It assumes that there are multiple trips by multiple members of each household each day. The reality of course is that there will be less then the worst case, but that traffic will get worse thoroughout town as this project is implemented. ["<span>Users/</span>rocksanddirt"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 425: </td> <td> Line 427: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> There are things I don't like about CV, and I certainly haven't decided to vote for it, but I wish the people who knock it for not including enough 'affordable' housing would be more specific about what they want. Housing in Davis is ridiculously priced already. Do you know how hard it is to find a stand-alone house for less than $400k? A halfplex under $350k? How do these people want the new housing to be made affordable? Should there be more condos? More apartments? Smaller houses? Rent control? Simply claiming that things aren't 'affordable' isn't a valid criticism when prices are already this high.--["MattCzarnowski"]<br> <span>-</span> * I agree. If you criticize Covell Village beging unaffordable, what alternatives do we have to provide more affordable housing than the proposed development? I make $70-90k/yr, my wife can't work, we don't qualify for affordable housing program that Davis offers, and the current market is way too expensive for our income range. CV at least offers some units that we can afford and that is certainly better than nothing. I also wonder how many people crying that CV is unaffordable actually are in the market to buy their first homes... --["WillamJones"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-01 17:13:35'' [[nbsp]] The Davis Community Network has campaign finance reports for Measure X at http://www2.dcn.org/dcn/vip/nov05/measurex/ --["SteveMcMahon"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-01 17:57:53'' [[nbsp]] I find the Yes on X campus advertising blitz the be a little repulsive. While I'm likely to vote yes, I don't need, nor want free pizza or sexual advertising. Campus is covered with attractive students who are being payed to promote the Covell project. The girls with the pink "["Divas for Covell Village"]" shirts really turn me off. --["JackHaskel"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-01 20:42:18'' [[nbsp]] I think the pro-X marketing to students is just insulting. Anybody who looks into the matter can see that Covell Village isn't "good for students" and isn't meant to be. In the first place, STUDENTS DON'T HAVE MONEY TO BUY HOUSES. So all the on-campus skullduggery and the flyers (two of which were left at my own front door in Casitas Apts.) are pretty much straigh up dishonesty. --["KenjiYamada"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-01 21:19:33'' [[nbsp]] Has anyone else taken the time to look at the campaign disclosures that Steve McMahon posted a link to? Covell Village Partners had spent $111,000 on the campaign. Today (11/1/2005) they disclosed that they have put another $100,000 in the campaign pot. Be prepared for an onslaught of advertising. Capital Campaigns has had job postings on craigslist for months looking for campaign workers in Davis and paying them $10 plus an hour. Their only current client in Davis is Covell Village Partners. Ask these girls who are wearing the shirts if they are registered to vote in Yolo County and how much they are being paid to be walking advertisements. --["SharlaDaly"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> There are things I don't like about CV, and I certainly haven't decided to vote for it, but I wish the people who knock it for not including enough 'affordable' housing would be more specific about what they want. Housing in Davis is ridiculously priced already. Do you know how hard it is to find a stand-alone house for less than $400k? A halfplex under $350k? How do these people want the new housing to be made affordable? Should there be more condos? More apartments? Smaller houses? Rent control? Simply claiming that things aren't 'affordable' isn't a valid criticism when prices are already this high.--["<span>Users/</span>MattCzarnowski"]<br> <span>+</span> * I agree. If you criticize Covell Village beging unaffordable, what alternatives do we have to provide more affordable housing than the proposed development? I make $70-90k/yr, my wife can't work, we don't qualify for affordable housing program that Davis offers, and the current market is way too expensive for our income range. CV at least offers some units that we can afford and that is certainly better than nothing. I also wonder how many people crying that CV is unaffordable actually are in the market to buy their first homes... --["<span>Users/</span>WillamJones"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-01 17:13:35'' [[nbsp]] The Davis Community Network has campaign finance reports for Measure X at http://www2.dcn.org/dcn/vip/nov05/measurex/ --["<span>Users/</span>SteveMcMahon"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-01 17:57:53'' [[nbsp]] I find the Yes on X campus advertising blitz the be a little repulsive. While I'm likely to vote yes, I don't need, nor want free pizza or sexual advertising. Campus is covered with attractive students who are being payed to promote the Covell project. The girls with the pink "["Divas for Covell Village"]" shirts really turn me off. --["<span>Users/</span>JackHaskel"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-01 20:42:18'' [[nbsp]] I think the pro-X marketing to students is just insulting. Anybody who looks into the matter can see that Covell Village isn't "good for students" and isn't meant to be. In the first place, STUDENTS DON'T HAVE MONEY TO BUY HOUSES. So all the on-campus skullduggery and the flyers (two of which were left at my own front door in Casitas Apts.) are pretty much straigh up dishonesty. --["<span>Users/</span>KenjiYamada"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-01 21:19:33'' [[nbsp]] Has anyone else taken the time to look at the campaign disclosures that Steve McMahon posted a link to? Covell Village Partners had spent $111,000 on the campaign. Today (11/1/2005) they disclosed that they have put another $100,000 in the campaign pot. Be prepared for an onslaught of advertising. Capital Campaigns has had job postings on craigslist for months looking for campaign workers in Davis and paying them $10 plus an hour. Their only current client in Davis is Covell Village Partners. Ask these girls who are wearing the shirts if they are registered to vote in Yolo County and how much they are being paid to be walking advertisements. --["<span>Users/</span>SharlaDaly"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 437: </td> <td> Line 439: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-01 21:28:32'' [[nbsp]] $20/hour...wow...that's more than most UCD administrative staff make. Isn't this the same as buying votes? I wonder how many more people $100,000 can "hire" for the next weeK? --["SharlaDaly"]<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-03 06:26:43'' [[nbsp]] I had a friend who got paid $50/hr to hawk Ax body spray at an event, so I don't think $20 is a big deal, since housing is more important than good smell (usually) --["ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-02 05:51:34'' [[nbsp]] Because I've been called up by the Yes-on-X folks, and I read they are virtually trading pizza for votes, I've decided to vote no, despite the two buck chuck that I will never get to enjoy because it won't be here in time to affect me. --["KarlMogel"]<br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-04 09:07:53'' [[nbsp]] Did anyone else receive this completely insulting "Are you a tool or what?" postcard from the No on X people? It implies that I would vote "yes" only because I was told to by "the same guys who own half the apartment complexes in Davis". Actually, I am an intellegent adult who has read up on the issue and formed my own opinion, thank you. And "half the apartment complexes in Davis"??? I was not aware that there were only 26 apartment complexes in all of Davis. Tandem only owns 13 complexes in Davis, hardly half. I also like that the message ends with "fyi-the Cal Aggie says Vote No on X". Does that make me the Aggie's "tool" if I vote no? Thanks No on X for calling me a tool. I really appreciate it! --["PeterMarleau"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-01 21:28:32'' [[nbsp]] $20/hour...wow...that's more than most UCD administrative staff make. Isn't this the same as buying votes? I wonder how many more people $100,000 can "hire" for the next weeK? --["<span>Users/</span>SharlaDaly"]<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-03 06:26:43'' [[nbsp]] I had a friend who got paid $50/hr to hawk Ax body spray at an event, so I don't think $20 is a big deal, since housing is more important than good smell (usually) --["<span>Users/</span>ApolloStumpy"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-02 05:51:34'' [[nbsp]] Because I've been called up by the Yes-on-X folks, and I read they are virtually trading pizza for votes, I've decided to vote no, despite the two buck chuck that I will never get to enjoy because it won't be here in time to affect me. --["<span>Users/</span>KarlMogel"]<br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-04 09:07:53'' [[nbsp]] Did anyone else receive this completely insulting "Are you a tool or what?" postcard from the No on X people? It implies that I would vote "yes" only because I was told to by "the same guys who own half the apartment complexes in Davis". Actually, I am an intellegent adult who has read up on the issue and formed my own opinion, thank you. And "half the apartment complexes in Davis"??? I was not aware that there were only 26 apartment complexes in all of Davis. Tandem only owns 13 complexes in Davis, hardly half. I also like that the message ends with "fyi-the Cal Aggie says Vote No on X". Does that make me the Aggie's "tool" if I vote no? Thanks No on X for calling me a tool. I really appreciate it! --["<span>Users/</span>PeterMarleau"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 450: </td> <td> Line 452: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> *Any idea where this sample of an alternative to Covell Village can be found? I'd like to see it, as most of the people opposed to X seem to be opposed to almost any annexation of new land. -["MattCzarnowski" MC] </td> <td> <span>+</span> *Any idea where this sample of an alternative to Covell Village can be found? I'd like to see it, as most of the people opposed to X seem to be opposed to almost any annexation of new land. -["<span>Users/</span>MattCzarnowski" MC] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 454: </td> <td> Line 456: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-12-12 18:47:25'' [[nbsp]] I don't think some of you understand what the supply and demand curve. As students worried about housing, you should be praising the creators of CV. And increase in housing supply leads to a decrease in demand. Thus, even though the housing in CV may be too expensive, the market will correct itself. The problem with Davis and the housing here is that the vacancy rate is so much smaller than any other city. Woodland has a higher rate, thus they cannot charge as much for housing, because they are desperate to get people into their apartments. If there was more housing in Davis (regardless of price) the vacancy rate would increase and apartment complexes would be desperate to have spots filled. That's why this year more than any other complexes were giving away free rent or an xbox or some incentive. Vacancy rates have been increasing; CV would have done a lot for housing in Davis. Regardless of whether you ended up there or not, the rates for every other complex would go down in order to compete. Also, those of you complaing about them advertising to students when students won't even be able to afford homes there, perhaps you should read the plans. They are also building many apartments and cooperative housing. That sounds like housing perfect for students if you ask me. And personally, I'd love to live within a few blocks of a Trader Joe's. --["JennySoares"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-12-12 18:47:25'' [[nbsp]] I don't think some of you understand what the supply and demand curve. As students worried about housing, you should be praising the creators of CV. And increase in housing supply leads to a decrease in demand. Thus, even though the housing in CV may be too expensive, the market will correct itself. The problem with Davis and the housing here is that the vacancy rate is so much smaller than any other city. Woodland has a higher rate, thus they cannot charge as much for housing, because they are desperate to get people into their apartments. If there was more housing in Davis (regardless of price) the vacancy rate would increase and apartment complexes would be desperate to have spots filled. That's why this year more than any other complexes were giving away free rent or an xbox or some incentive. Vacancy rates have been increasing; CV would have done a lot for housing in Davis. Regardless of whether you ended up there or not, the rates for every other complex would go down in order to compete. Also, those of you complaing about them advertising to students when students won't even be able to afford homes there, perhaps you should read the plans. They are also building many apartments and cooperative housing. That sounds like housing perfect for students if you ask me. And personally, I'd love to live within a few blocks of a Trader Joe's. --["<span>Users/</span>JennySoares"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2008-05-28 02:26:29MichaelAWoods(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 407: </td> <td> Line 407: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-30 10:34:06'' [[nbsp]] Sierra Club saying "This is Not Smart Growth" Per their ad in today's Enterprise "The site is not within the City of Davis, contains valuable agricultural land and open space, and with homes not affordable to most Davis workers and residents, will result in more commuter traffic and attendant impacts. Nearly half the project lies in the 100-year flood plain." I don't know exactly what the smart growth guidlines are that the pro- side is referring to and they don't really say what they are either. I just know what the Sierra Club states over and over again - on their website, in letters to the editor, ads in the newpaper, press releases, etc. Another thing their ad states is that they think that this site should be included in the next General Plan process after the impacts of Woodland's Spring Lake development and the UCD housing develpment are known. --["SharlaDaly"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-30 10:34:06'' [[nbsp]] Sierra Club saying "This is Not Smart Growth" Per their ad in today's Enterprise "The site is not within the City of Davis, contains valuable agricultural land and open space, and with homes not affordable to most Davis workers and residents, will result in more commuter traffic and attendant impacts. Nearly half the project lies in the 100-year flood plain." I don't know exactly what the smart growth guidlines are that the pro- side is referring to and they don't really say what they are either. I just know what the Sierra Club states over and over again - on their website, in letters to the editor, ads in the new<span>s</span>paper, press releases, etc. Another thing their ad states is that they think that this site should be included in the next General Plan process after the impacts of Woodland's Spring Lake development and the UCD housing develpment are known. --["SharlaDaly"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2007-12-28 23:04:57CovertProfessorlink to wiki sierra club page <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 79: </td> <td> Line 79: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Con-Covell Village endorsements: opposed by the [<span>http://motherlode.sierrac</span>lub<span>.org/yolano/ Sierra Club</span>] and others ([http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2005/10/25/Opinion/No.On.Measure.X-1321473.shtml Includes] ["The California Aggie"]) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Con-Covell Village endorsements: opposed by the [<span>"Sierra C</span>lub<span>"</span>] and others ([http://www.californiaaggie.com/media/storage/paper981/news/2005/10/25/Opinion/No.On.Measure.X-1321473.shtml Includes] ["The California Aggie"]) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 184: </td> <td> Line 184: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The [<span>http://motherlode.sierrac</span>lub<span>.org/yolano/ Sierra Club</span>] (both local and regional chapters) opposes Covell Village because it is "too big and it violates environmentally-friendly development guidelines." The Management Committee of the Sierra Club Yolano Group has voted to oppose the Covell Village proposal. In the past months the Yolano Group has hosted four publicly announced meetings to solicit input from membership and the community. There was overwhelming opposition to the project among members of the public who attended the meetings. After considering public input and relevant documents, the Management Committee determined that Covell Village would impose too many adverse impacts on our community and the environment. In approving the project, the City Council disregarded the recommendations of six of its commissions, including the Planning Commission and the Finance and Budget Commissions, which studied the issues and could not support the proposal. The Council ignored key environmental findings and serious financial risks for the city. City documents also show that the project would fail to provide promised affordable housing while generating serious traffic impacts and infrastructure and operational costs. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The [<span>"Sierra C</span>lub<span>"</span>] (both local and regional chapters) opposes Covell Village because it is "too big and it violates environmentally-friendly development guidelines." The Management Committee of the Sierra Club Yolano Group has voted to oppose the Covell Village proposal. In the past months the Yolano Group has hosted four publicly announced meetings to solicit input from membership and the community. There was overwhelming opposition to the project among members of the public who attended the meetings. After considering public input and relevant documents, the Management Committee determined that Covell Village would impose too many adverse impacts on our community and the environment. In approving the project, the City Council disregarded the recommendations of six of its commissions, including the Planning Commission and the Finance and Budget Commissions, which studied the issues and could not support the proposal. The Council ignored key environmental findings and serious financial risks for the city. City documents also show that the project would fail to provide promised affordable housing while generating serious traffic impacts and infrastructure and operational costs. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 225: </td> <td> Line 225: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The [<span>http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ </span>Sierra Club] (both local and regional chapters) opposes Covell Village because it is "too big and it violates environmentally-friendly development guidelines." </td> <td> <span>+</span> The [<span>"</span>Sierra Club<span>"</span>] (both local and regional chapters) opposes Covell Village because it is "too big and it violates environmentally-friendly development guidelines." </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2007-06-28 14:01:01EdWinslink change <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 302: </td> <td> Line 302: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-06 15:08:22'' [[nbsp]] It's not really ''less'' bikes. I don't think they'll start taking and hiding peoples bikes. It's not necessarily that horrible for the town though - I mean, there&amp;#8217;s more then just developers. Think of all the massive tax money that will be coming in, not just from the construction and possible new shops but from the influx in population - a whole lot could be done. It would also fare very well for most of the businesses in the town. I think I saw something about a school or two as well? It is growth and development yes, but there are positives in it too. It&amp;#8217;s inevitable that the city of Davis will change. Be it more students or more families moving here, you can&amp;#8217;t keep it as a small town with a farm school forevah. Some people think it&amp;#8217;s a little arrogant to spend four years here and then decide that is the best time and way to keep it. I work with people who graduated from UCD in the 60&amp;#8217;s, and they can&amp;#8217;t believe how much the town has changed. I don&amp;#8217;t think the term suburban wasteland need necessarily apply either. If it&amp;#8217;s well planned, it can work. You can keep it well spaced, keep parks and green space without being forcibly obvious and surrounded by roads. I think Danville in the east bay area is a good example of that. Or the newer parts of San Ramon in the hills. The problem for that stuff comes down to how most of core Davis wasn&amp;#8217;t well planned for much growth. Hence stuff like the crappy ["The Worst Intersection in Davis" intersection]. The point of it isn't affordable housing for college students either. I see a lot of houses being completely remodeled and rennovated around town. I'm sure that's also pretty expensive, but there are people who can/do shell out the money for a bigger or newer house (instead of one built anywhere from 10 to 50 years ago). Maybe some people just want a more "''respectable''" neighborhood away from places students can rent, something nice and new in a great place like Davis. Or people working in Sac who just love Davis, but can afford bigger/(potentially) nicer houses. I don't think the prices are absolutely crazy outrageous for Davis though. Especially for families wanting to come in from more expensive places. Likewise, I may not like the prices I have to pay for an apartment here, but I damn sure appreciate it once I visit friends at UCLA and see what they have to pay. But ever go out on Mace to the Country Club? Driven through it? There are tons of homes in the millions. Really nice ones too. I saw just a single one of them on a listing downtown for 1.75 million. 1.75 ''million''. And it wasn't even for the biggest and newest of those. I don&amp;#8217;t know enough about the entire issue, but just wanted to throw out way too many quick observations/comments from glancing at everyone elses. -["Ed<span>winSaada</span>" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-06 15:08:22'' [[nbsp]] It's not really ''less'' bikes. I don't think they'll start taking and hiding peoples bikes. It's not necessarily that horrible for the town though - I mean, there&amp;#8217;s more then just developers. Think of all the massive tax money that will be coming in, not just from the construction and possible new shops but from the influx in population - a whole lot could be done. It would also fare very well for most of the businesses in the town. I think I saw something about a school or two as well? It is growth and development yes, but there are positives in it too. It&amp;#8217;s inevitable that the city of Davis will change. Be it more students or more families moving here, you can&amp;#8217;t keep it as a small town with a farm school forevah. Some people think it&amp;#8217;s a little arrogant to spend four years here and then decide that is the best time and way to keep it. I work with people who graduated from UCD in the 60&amp;#8217;s, and they can&amp;#8217;t believe how much the town has changed. I don&amp;#8217;t think the term suburban wasteland need necessarily apply either. If it&amp;#8217;s well planned, it can work. You can keep it well spaced, keep parks and green space without being forcibly obvious and surrounded by roads. I think Danville in the east bay area is a good example of that. Or the newer parts of San Ramon in the hills. The problem for that stuff comes down to how most of core Davis wasn&amp;#8217;t well planned for much growth. Hence stuff like the crappy ["The Worst Intersection in Davis" intersection]. The point of it isn't affordable housing for college students either. I see a lot of houses being completely remodeled and rennovated around town. I'm sure that's also pretty expensive, but there are people who can/do shell out the money for a bigger or newer house (instead of one built anywhere from 10 to 50 years ago). Maybe some people just want a more "''respectable''" neighborhood away from places students can rent, something nice and new in a great place like Davis. Or people working in Sac who just love Davis, but can afford bigger/(potentially) nicer houses. I don't think the prices are absolutely crazy outrageous for Davis though. Especially for families wanting to come in from more expensive places. Likewise, I may not like the prices I have to pay for an apartment here, but I damn sure appreciate it once I visit friends at UCLA and see what they have to pay. But ever go out on Mace to the Country Club? Driven through it? There are tons of homes in the millions. Really nice ones too. I saw just a single one of them on a listing downtown for 1.75 million. 1.75 ''million''. And it wasn't even for the biggest and newest of those. I don&amp;#8217;t know enough about the entire issue, but just wanted to throw out way too many quick observations/comments from glancing at everyone elses. -["Ed<span>Wins</span>" ES] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 413: </td> <td> Line 413: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> If I had known there'd be free pizza coupons, I would have definitly stood in line and nodded my head yes just for some lunch. People have been doing that since elementary school (candy, cupcakes, etc), but I'm never really sure if it actually bought votes back then, much less with college kids now. -["Ed<span>winSaada</span>" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> If I had known there'd be free pizza coupons, I would have definitly stood in line and nodded my head yes just for some lunch. People have been doing that since elementary school (candy, cupcakes, etc), but I'm never really sure if it actually bought votes back then, much less with college kids now. -["Ed<span>Wins</span>" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-12-14 13:56:52KateWaterman <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 444: </td> <td> Line 444: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-07 13:31:52'' [[nbsp]] Well, now that both sides have engaged in rather <span>["Shadiness Factor" </span>questionable advertising practices<span>]</span>, I guess I can make a value judgement. The "No on X" campaign listed ["CalPIRG"] as an opponent of Prop 73, which, personal opinions aside, is just not true. <span>We</span> never took a position on this. It's just not <span>ou</span>r bag of bananas.<span>&nbsp;--["KateWaterman"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-07 13:31:52'' [[nbsp]] Well, now that both sides have engaged in rather questionable advertising practices, I guess I can make a value judgement. The "No on X" campaign listed ["CalPIRG"] as an opponent of Prop 73, which, personal opinions aside, is just not true. <span>They</span> never took a position on this. It's just not <span>thei</span>r bag of bananas. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 448: </td> <td> Line 448: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * No on X put out a circular listing organizations that shared their views on various propositions. It was questionable because they listed, without permission, an organization that has never and will never take a stance on said proposition. Sorry if this wasn't clear.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;BTW, I voted no. --["KateWaterman"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> * No on X put out a circular listing organizations that shared their views on various propositions. It was questionable because they listed, without permission, an organization that has never and will never take a stance on said proposition. Sorry if this wasn't clear. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-12-05 21:10:53BrianChensmart quotes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 35: </td> <td> Line 35: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The Commissions studied the analyses. The contrast between their advice and the Council<span>’</span>s push to develop is troubling<span>—</span>and underscores the Council<span>’</span>s failure to respect the citizens<span>’</span> vision for Davis. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The Commissions studied the analyses. The contrast between their advice and the Council<span>’</span>s push to develop is troubling<span>—</span>and underscores the Council<span>’</span>s failure to respect the citizens<span>’</span> vision for Davis. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 39: </td> <td> Line 39: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village would cost the City money. The Finance and Budget Commission rejected the project, citing the <span>“</span>magnitude of the risk that this project poses to the City Council<span>’</span>s goal of fiscal stability.<span>”</span> Because Covell Village would require annexation, the City would get 30% less property tax than if it developed parcels within the city limits like Hunt -Wesson. Recently, the County has made it clear it wants an even greater share of the project<span>’</span>s property tax, and won<span>’</span>t approve the annexation unless the new arrangement is to its liking. Each 1% increase in the County<span>’</span>s share will cost the City an extra $3 million annually<span>—</span>making Covell Village an even greater tax burden.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> In addition, the City<span>’</span>s fiscal analysis assumes home prices will double over the next 15 years. If housing prices level off or decline as many economists predict, Covell Village would generate huge deficits for the City. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village would cost the City money. The Finance and Budget Commission rejected the project, citing the <span>“</span>magnitude of the risk that this project poses to the City Council<span>’</span>s goal of fiscal stability.<span>”</span> Because Covell Village would require annexation, the City would get 30% less property tax than if it developed parcels within the city limits like Hunt -Wesson. Recently, the County has made it clear it wants an even greater share of the project<span>’</span>s property tax, and won<span>’</span>t approve the annexation unless the new arrangement is to its liking. Each 1% increase in the County<span>’</span>s share will cost the City an extra $3 million annually<span>—</span>making Covell Village an even greater tax burden.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In addition, the City<span>’</span>s fiscal analysis assumes home prices will double over the next 15 years. If housing prices level off or decline as many economists predict, Covell Village would generate huge deficits for the City. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 49: </td> <td> Line 49: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The developers<span>’</span> illusory promise of affordable housing is equally disturbing. The original rationale for Covell Village was to provide <span>“</span>workforce<span>”</span> housing for our teachers, firefighters, new UCD faculty and staff, Davis renters wishing to buy<span>—</span>and our children. Instead, housing will be largely unaffordable to these and similar target groups. Although the developers claim that 2/3 of the subdivision will be affordable, city projections indicate the average for-sale house will cost $683,945.<br> -<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- The City’s analysis indicates that “middle-income”</span> families (those making less than $96,000 a year) cannot afford housing costing more than $387,000. Yet 92% of the for-sale houses in the subdivision will cost more than $400,000. The least expensive single-family detached house will cost $538,000. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The developers<span>’</span> illusory promise of affordable housing is equally disturbing. The original rationale for Covell Village was to provide <span>“</span>workforce<span>”</span> housing for our teachers, firefighters, new UCD faculty and staff, Davis renters wishing to buy<span>—</span>and our children. Instead, housing will be largely unaffordable to these and similar target groups. Although the developers claim that 2/3 of the subdivision will be affordable, city projections indicate the average for-sale house will cost $683,945.<br> <span>+ <br> + The City’s analysis indicates that “middle</span>-<span>income”</span> families (those making less than $96,000 a year) cannot afford housing costing more than $387,000. Yet 92% of the for-sale houses in the subdivision will cost more than $400,000. The least expensive single-family detached house will cost $538,000. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 57: </td> <td> Line 57: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The negative impacts of Covell Village go well beyond dollar calculations; according to the City<span>’</span>s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we will all be spending a lot more time in traffic. The subdivision will double traffic on Covell to 39,440 cars /day and on Pole Line to 26,900 cars/day, and use up 97% of the capacity on the Mace Overcrossing. The analysis finds that Level of Service <span>“</span>F<span>” results, triggering “</span>high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing<span>”</span> on many streets and intersections including L Street, Moore and the Pole Line Overcrossing to South Davis. According to the EIR, <span>“</span>Conditions are intolerable for most drivers,<span>”</span> with traffic backing up on neighborhood streets, causing all the associated safety and pollution issues for children, seniors and those with respiratory conditions. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The negative impacts of Covell Village go well beyond dollar calculations; according to the City<span>’</span>s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we will all be spending a lot more time in traffic. The subdivision will double traffic on Covell to 39,440 cars /day and on Pole Line to 26,900 cars/day, and use up 97% of the capacity on the Mace Overcrossing. The analysis finds that Level of Service <span>“</span>F<span>” results, triggering “</span>high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing<span>”</span> on many streets and intersections including L Street, Moore and the Pole Line Overcrossing to South Davis. According to the EIR, <span>“</span>Conditions are intolerable for most drivers,<span>”</span> with traffic backing up on neighborhood streets, causing all the associated safety and pollution issues for children, seniors and those with respiratory conditions. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 63: </td> <td> Line 63: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Opposition to the Covell Village subdivision does not equate with a <span>“no change” or “no growth”</span> philosophy. Covell Village is not inevitable; we have alternatives.<br> -<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through”</span> agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues.<br> -<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- Second</span>, <span>to be feasible</span>, <span>urban-scale development in the County would require use of the City’s sewer system, wastewater treatment facility, and other city utilities—</span>we would have to agree.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Instead of Covell Village, Davis can choose change on a more manageable scale<span>—</span>change that will allow us to augment our diversity by building truly affordable housing without undermining city finances and services or our quality of life. The 100-acre site of the old Hunt-Wesson Cannery and the 27-acre PG&amp;E site at 5th and L are prime candidates for redevelopment. The PG&amp;E site, for example, is within walking distance of the downtown and the S.P. Depot.<br> -<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- Rather than respect the legacy created by citizens and councils over the last three decades and reflected in our General Plan—of Davis as a small, safe, neighborhood-oriented community—</span>this Council majority has chosen sprawl instead.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> By saying <span>“no”</span> to a large peripheral subdivision at this time, voters will be affirming the Davis they love and envision. They will be reminding the Council of the value of sustainable city financing, affordable housing, farmland preservation, and sensible traffic and infrastructure planning. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Opposition to the Covell Village subdivision does not equate with a <span>“no change” or “no growth”</span> philosophy. Covell Village is not inevitable; we have alternatives.<br> <span>+ <br> + Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass</span>-<span>through”</span> agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues.<br> <span>+ <br> + Second, to be feasible, urban</span>-<span>scale development in the County would require use of the City’s sewer system</span>, <span>wastewater treatment facility</span>, <span>and other city utilities—</span>we would have to agree.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Instead of Covell Village, Davis can choose change on a more manageable scale<span>—</span>change that will allow us to augment our diversity by building truly affordable housing without undermining city finances and services or our quality of life. The 100-acre site of the old Hunt-Wesson Cannery and the 27-acre PG&amp;E site at 5th and L are prime candidates for redevelopment. The PG&amp;E site, for example, is within walking distance of the downtown and the S.P. Depot.<br> <span>+ <br> + Rather than respect the legacy created by citizens and councils over the last three decades and reflected in our General Plan—of Davis as a small, safe, neighborhood</span>-<span>oriented community—</span>this Council majority has chosen sprawl instead.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> By saying <span>“no”</span> to a large peripheral subdivision at this time, voters will be affirming the Davis they love and envision. They will be reminding the Council of the value of sustainable city financing, affordable housing, farmland preservation, and sensible traffic and infrastructure planning. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 86: </td> <td> Line 86: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson<span>’</span>s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million plus it receives from the City. However, no subdivision can be built without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson<span>’</span>s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million plus it receives from the City. However, no subdivision can be built without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 114: </td> <td> Line 114: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Maximum amount a <span>“</span>middle income<span>”</span> family can afford to pay for a house: $387,000. </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Maximum amount a <span>“</span>middle income<span>”</span> family can afford to pay for a house: $387,000. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 117: </td> <td> Line 117: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Percent of all project housing <span>“</span>affordable<span>”</span> to families that make $109,000 a year: 38%. </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Percent of all project housing <span>“</span>affordable<span>”</span> to families that make $109,000 a year: 38%. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 135: </td> <td> Line 135: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Response: Here are the directly quoted facts from the actual Covell Village EIR Report: http://www.cityofdavis.org/covell/pdfs/eir/appendix_A.pdf GRADE F ROADWAYS AT COVELL VILLAGE COMPLETION: <span>•</span> Covell Boulevard, F Street to J Street <span>•</span> Covell Boulevard, J Street to L Street <span>•</span> Covell Boulevard, L Street to Pole Line Road <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, north of Covell Boulevard <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, I-80 Overcrossing <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, Loyola to Eighth Street <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, Covell Boulevard to Loyola Drive </td> <td> <span>+</span> Response: Here are the directly quoted facts from the actual Covell Village EIR Report: http://www.cityofdavis.org/covell/pdfs/eir/appendix_A.pdf GRADE F ROADWAYS AT COVELL VILLAGE COMPLETION: <span>•</span> Covell Boulevard, F Street to J Street <span>•</span> Covell Boulevard, J Street to L Street <span>•</span> Covell Boulevard, L Street to Pole Line Road <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, north of Covell Boulevard <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, I-80 Overcrossing <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, Loyola to Eighth Street <span>•</span> Pole Line Road, Covell Boulevard to Loyola Drive </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 143: </td> <td> Line 143: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''Level <span>“</span>F<span>”</span> Traffic''' </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''Level <span>“</span>F<span>”</span> Traffic''' </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 181: </td> <td> Line 181: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''Sierra club said The Environmental Council of Sacramento called project <span>“</span>Sprawl<span>”</span> Not True''' '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were <span>“</span>Unfounded.<span>”</span>''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines. </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''Sierra club said The Environmental Council of Sacramento called project <span>“</span>Sprawl<span>”</span> Not True''' '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were <span>“</span>Unfounded.<span>”</span>''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-07-30 21:05:24DylanBeaudetteremoved broken link <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 229: </td> <td> Line 229: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The conversion of the farmland to residential at this specific site is special in that it involves paving over some of the most productive soils in the nation. The [http://ortho.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/osd/dat/Y/YOLO.html Yolo] and [http://ortho.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/osd/dat/B/BRENTWOOD.html Brentwood] soils are ranked as [http://soils.usda.gov/technical/handbook/contents/part622p2.html#cap_cls class 1] in the [http://soils.usda.gov/technical/handbook/contents/part622p2.html#intro Land Capability Class system] for irrigated agriculture. These soils are highly regarded by land users for an ideal high water holding capacity, nutrient supply, and good [wiki:WikiPedia:Tilth tilth]. The soils map illustrates the areal extent of class one soils (red polygons) at the proposed location of Covell Village. While not nearly as productive, the other soils within the proposed development may be of interest to any potential home gardeners, as they can have high salt levels and clay pans at depth (See map symbols Pb and Rg).<span>&nbsp;Further exploration of the soils in and around the proposed site can be found [http://169.237.35.250/~dylan/mapserver/dhtml/mapunit_dhtml.php?map=/home/dylan/public_html/mapserver/dhtml/mapunit.map&amp;mapsize=large&amp;zoomsize=2&amp;mapext=-2091272.691020569+115053.8982936691+-2085854.0272799807+119117.89609911037&amp;layers=&amp;county_id=ca_113&amp;map_inlinefeatures_feature=new&amp;map_inlinefeatures_feature_points=-2088563.359150275%20117085.89719638973&amp;map_inlinefeatures_feature_text=Covell%20Village%20Site here].</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The conversion of the farmland to residential at this specific site is special in that it involves paving over some of the most productive soils in the nation. The [http://ortho.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/osd/dat/Y/YOLO.html Yolo] and [http://ortho.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/osd/dat/B/BRENTWOOD.html Brentwood] soils are ranked as [http://soils.usda.gov/technical/handbook/contents/part622p2.html#cap_cls class 1] in the [http://soils.usda.gov/technical/handbook/contents/part622p2.html#intro Land Capability Class system] for irrigated agriculture. These soils are highly regarded by land users for an ideal high water holding capacity, nutrient supply, and good [wiki:WikiPedia:Tilth tilth]. The soils map illustrates the areal extent of class one soils (red polygons) at the proposed location of Covell Village. While not nearly as productive, the other soils within the proposed development may be of interest to any potential home gardeners, as they can have high salt levels and clay pans at depth (See map symbols Pb and Rg). </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-06-28 23:02:02TomNelsonAggie link fixes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 79: </td> <td> Line 79: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Con-Covell Village endorsements: opposed by the [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] and others ([http://californiaaggie.com/<span>article/?id=11</span>00<span>8</span> Includes] ["The California Aggie"]) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Con-Covell Village endorsements: opposed by the [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] and others ([http://<span>www.</span>californiaaggie.com/<span>media/storage/paper981/news/2</span>00<span>5/10/25/Opinion/No.On.Measure.X-1321473.shtml</span> Includes] ["The California Aggie"]) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 241: </td> <td> Line 241: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * [http://www.californiaaggie.com/article<span>/?</span>i<span>d=</span>6<span>3</span>5<span>2</span> California Aggie] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * [http://www.californiaaggie.com/<span>medi</span>a<span>/sto</span>r<span>age/paper981/news/2004/11/16/Fron</span>t<span>Page/City-Commissions.Publ</span>ic<span>.Eva</span>l<span>uat</span>e<span>.Covell.V</span>i<span>llage.Proposal-13187</span>65<span>.shtml</span> California Aggie] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-05-08 21:07:49PhilipNeustromtried to phrase some material in the past tense <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[<span>Thumbnail</span>(field.jpg, 260, <span>"Some of the farmland where Covell Village is slated to go."</span>)]]<br> <span>-</span> [[Th<span>umbnail</span>(<span>covell_site_plan.png, right</span>, 260, <span>"The revised Covell Village site plan (photo © ["City of Davis"])."</span>)]]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> In July of 2004, the city council voted to approve the Covell Village development proposal, to annex a ~400 acre plot north of Covell Blvd., between ["Pole Line Road"] and ["F Street"], into the City and rezone it from agricultural land into residential and commercial sites. The development <span>will</span> add 1884 living units to Davis in phases through 2017 or later.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> The development require<span>s</span> a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land <span>is currently</span> outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline c<span>an</span>not change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"].<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> For specifics of the project, see <span>the</span> City of Davis [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf Summary of Baseline] as well as the [http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf actual baseline] that will be on the ballot.<span><br> - <br> - Citizens of Davis should look forward to a very lively campaign and will need to carefully take the time to sort out the information. The positives and negatives of the project should be evaluated. You may read the pro and con arguments below.</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[<span>Image</span>(field.jpg<span>, "Some of the farmland where Covell Village is slated to go."</span>, 260, <span>thumbnail</span>)]]<br> <span>+</span> [[<span>Image(covell_site_plan.png, "</span>Th<span>e revised Covell Village site plan </span>(<span>photo © ["City of Davis"])."</span>, 260, <span>right, thumbnail</span>)]]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In July of 2004, the city council voted to approve the Covell Village development proposal, to annex a ~400 acre plot north of Covell Blvd., between ["Pole Line Road"] and ["F Street"], into the City and rezone it from agricultural land into residential and commercial sites. The development <span>planned to</span> add 1884 living units to Davis in phases through 2017 or later.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The development require<span>d</span> a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land <span>was</span> outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline c<span>ould </span>not change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"].<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;Measure X failed "No" 59.9% to 40.0% "Yes."</span><br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> For specifics of the project, see <span>also</span> City of Davis [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf Summary of Baseline] as well as the [http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf actual baseline] that will be on the ballot. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 13: </td> <td> Line 11: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[<span>Thu</span>m<span>bn</span>a<span>il</span>(yes_on_x_poster.jpg<span>, 200, right</span>, "A pro-Covell Village yard poster.")]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[<span>I</span>ma<span>ge</span>(yes_on_x_poster.jpg, "A pro-Covell Village yard poster."<span>, 200, right, thumbnail</span>)]] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 27: </td> <td> Line 25: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[<span>Thu</span>m<span>bn</span>a<span>il</span>(no_on_x_poster.jpg<span>, 200, right</span>, "An anti-Covell Village yard poster.")]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[<span>I</span>ma<span>ge</span>(no_on_x_poster.jpg, "An anti-Covell Village yard poster."<span>, 200, right, thumbnail</span>)]] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 47: </td> <td> Line 45: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[<span>Thu</span>m<span>bn</span>a<span>il</span>(covellprices.jpg<span>, 500</span>, "Prices and build-out schedule from City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf fiscal analysis].")]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[<span>I</span>ma<span>ge</span>(covellprices.jpg, "Prices and build-out schedule from City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf fiscal analysis]."<span>, 500, thumbnail</span>)]] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 112: </td> <td> Line 110: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village meets all smart growth principles.<span><br> -</span> o Mixed use<span><br> -</span> o Design discourages automobile use and promotes walking, cycling<span><br> -</span> o Community design encourages more physical activity, community socialization thus overall better health.<span><br> -</span> o Distinct and aesthetic design, manifests a desired sense of place and purpose<span><br> -</span> o Preservation of open space and agricultural land as well as wildlife habitat<span><br> -</span> o Provides a variety of transportation choices<span><br> -</span> o Usability and aesthetics are mutually compatible </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village meets all smart growth principles. o Mixed use o Design discourages automobile use and promotes walking, cycling o Community design encourages more physical activity, community socialization thus overall better health. o Distinct and aesthetic design, manifests a desired sense of place and purpose o Preservation of open space and agricultural land as well as wildlife habitat o Provides a variety of transportation choices o Usability and aesthetics are mutually compatible </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 144: </td> <td> Line 135: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Response: Here are the directly quoted facts from the actual Covell Village EIR Report: http://www.cityofdavis.org/covell/pdfs/eir/appendix_A.pdf<span><br> -</span> GRADE F ROADWAYS AT COVELL VILLAGE COMPLETION:<span><br> -</span> • Covell Boulevard, F Street to J Street<span><br> -</span> • Covell Boulevard, J Street to L Street<span><br> -</span> • Covell Boulevard, L Street to Pole Line Road<span><br> -</span> • Pole Line Road, north of Covell Boulevard<span><br> -</span> • Pole Line Road, I-80 Overcrossing<span><br> -</span> • Pole Line Road, Loyola to Eighth Street<span><br> -</span> • Pole Line Road, Covell Boulevard to Loyola Drive </td> <td> <span>+</span> Response: Here are the directly quoted facts from the actual Covell Village EIR Report: http://www.cityofdavis.org/covell/pdfs/eir/appendix_A.pdf GRADE F ROADWAYS AT COVELL VILLAGE COMPLETION: • Covell Boulevard, F Street to J Street • Covell Boulevard, J Street to L Street • Covell Boulevard, L Street to Pole Line Road • Pole Line Road, north of Covell Boulevard • Pole Line Road, I-80 Overcrossing • Pole Line Road, Loyola to Eighth Street • Pole Line Road, Covell Boulevard to Loyola Drive </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 198: </td> <td> Line 181: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''Sierra club said The Environmental Council of Sacramento called project “Sprawl” Not True'''<span><br> -</span> '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were “Unfounded.”''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines. </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''Sierra club said The Environmental Council of Sacramento called project “Sprawl” Not True''' '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were “Unfounded.”''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 220: </td> <td> Line 202: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''Will Covell Village overburden our sewage system?'''<span><br> -</span> No. According to City Engineer Pat Fitzsimmons, Davis' wastewater treatment plant has the capacity to accommodate Covell Village. Fitzsimmons estimates that even after Covell Village is completely occupied, the plant will still have capacity for the wastewater generated by an additional 8,000 people. </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''Will Covell Village overburden our sewage system?''' No. According to City Engineer Pat Fitzsimmons, Davis' wastewater treatment plant has the capacity to accommodate Covell Village. Fitzsimmons estimates that even after Covell Village is completely occupied, the plant will still have capacity for the wastewater generated by an additional 8,000 people. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 231: </td> <td> Line 212: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Mike Corbett is not a financial partner in Covell Village. He is an employee hired in a planning capacity. The Covell Village investors are building Covell Village. However well meaning his intentions, the actually implementation of the subdivisions features ultimately rest with the full partners of Covell Village Company not Mike Corbett.<span><br> -</span> There is no assurance that Covell Village will look like Village Homes if Mike Corbett is involved. In addition to Village Homes Mike Corbett helped plan a few other neighborhoods in Davis. These neighborhoods look nothing like Village Homes. The "buck stops" with a handful of Covell Village investors not Mr. Corbett. Davis voters should beware that Covell Village represents another compromise on the original Village Homes concept. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Mike Corbett is not a financial partner in Covell Village. He is an employee hired in a planning capacity. The Covell Village investors are building Covell Village. However well meaning his intentions, the actually implementation of the subdivisions features ultimately rest with the full partners of Covell Village Company not Mike Corbett. There is no assurance that Covell Village will look like Village Homes if Mike Corbett is involved. In addition to Village Homes Mike Corbett helped plan a few other neighborhoods in Davis. These neighborhoods look nothing like Village Homes. The "buck stops" with a handful of Covell Village investors not Mr. Corbett. Davis voters should beware that Covell Village represents another compromise on the original Village Homes concept. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 247: </td> <td> Line 227: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[<span>Thu</span>m<span>bn</span>a<span>il</span>(soilmap1.jpg<span>, 260, right</span>, "Soil map of the prospective site. Soils with an Irrigated Land Capability Class of 1 are highlighted in red.")]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[<span>I</span>ma<span>ge</span>(soilmap1.jpg, "Soil map of the prospective site. Soils with an Irrigated Land Capability Class of 1 are highlighted in red."<span>, 260, right, thumbnail</span>)]] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 279: </td> <td> Line 259: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[Comments]]<span><br> -</span> ''2005-06-08 19:23:59'' [[nbsp]] homes in davis are overpriced as it is. --["RohiniJasavala"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[Comments]] ''2005-06-08 19:23:59'' [[nbsp]] homes in davis are overpriced as it is. --["RohiniJasavala"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 367: </td> <td> Line 346: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village just went in an gave them a deal they could not refuse. Trader Joe's has said previously that the 8th street vacant space was too far from the freeway, yet Covell is even further. It just shows how desperate the Covell Village people are to entice votes. If they had confidence in their project they would not need to 'sweeten the pot' to buy more votes...<span><br> -</span> --["BrianSolecki"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> ------<br> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-13 21:22:59'' [[nbsp]] You know why I'm against Covell Village? I love Davis. I want to live here forever, but I doubt I'll ever be able to afford to buy a home here. I resent that the new homes always have to be rediculously expensive and I resent that the only people that will be able to afford them are people commuting to Sacramento.<span><br> -</span> --["AnnaJones"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village just went in an gave them a deal they could not refuse. Trader Joe's has said previously that the 8th street vacant space was too far from the freeway, yet Covell is even further. It just shows how desperate the Covell Village people are to entice votes. If they had confidence in their project they would not need to 'sweeten the pot' to buy more votes... --["BrianSolecki"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> ------<br> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-13 21:22:59'' [[nbsp]] You know why I'm against Covell Village? I love Davis. I want to live here forever, but I doubt I'll ever be able to afford to buy a home here. I resent that the new homes always have to be rediculously expensive and I resent that the only people that will be able to afford them are people commuting to Sacramento. --["AnnaJones"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 384: </td> <td> Line 361: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[<span>Thu</span>m<span>bn</span>a<span>il</span>(covellprices.jpg<span>, 500</span>, "Prices and build-out schedule from City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf fiscal analysis].")]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[<span>I</span>ma<span>ge</span>(covellprices.jpg, "Prices and build-out schedule from City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf fiscal analysis]."<span>, 500, thumbnail</span>)]] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 412: </td> <td> Line 389: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-22 15:07:22'' [[nbsp]] Survey of 153 houses: 94 No | 59 Yes. See Map. [[<span>Thu</span>m<span>bn</span>a<span>il</span>(cv2.jpg<span>, 100</span>, "Survey of 153 houses in Central Davis")]] --["DylanBeaudette"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-22 15:07:22'' [[nbsp]] Survey of 153 houses: 94 No | 59 Yes. See Map. [[<span>I</span>ma<span>ge</span>(cv2.jpg, "Survey of 153 houses in Central Davis"<span>, 100, thumbnail</span>)]] --["DylanBeaudette"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-05-08 20:58:07PhilipNeustromformatting rehaul. used headings to divide content into logical sections. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 33: </td> <td> Line 33: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Opponents of the Covell Village development wrote the following op-ed for the Davis Enterprise in July:<br> - <br> - '''DAVIS CAN'T AFFORD COVELL VILLAGE'''<br> - <br> - </span> Covell Village is not another ["Village Homes"]; it is neither slow growth nor smart growth. Six times larger and twice as dense as Village Homes, Covell Village would be a massive concentration of very big, expensive homes on tiny lots. If approved by voters in November, it would be the largest subdivision ever built in Davis, consisting of 1,864 units on over 420 acres of prime farmland, almost half of which is in the 100-year floodplain.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> In approving the project for the November ballot, the Council majority disregarded the concerns of its advisory commissions. The Finance and Budget, Planning, and Open Space Commissions could not support the project. In making its decision, the Council ignored key environmental findings and contradictions in the fiscal analysis that identified serious financial risks for the city, a failure to provide promised affordable housing, and traffic and other infrastructure impacts.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> The Commissions studied the analyses. The contrast between their advice and the Council’s push to develop is troubling—and underscores the Council’s failure to respect the citizens’ vision for Davis.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- '''</span>Costs<span>'''</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> Covell Village would cost the City money. The Finance and Budget Commission rejected the project, citing the “magnitude of the risk that this project poses to the City Council’s goal of fiscal stability.” Because Covell Village would require annexation, the City would get 30% less property tax than if it developed parcels within the city limits like Hunt -Wesson. Recently, the County has made it clear it wants an even greater share of the project’s property tax, and won’t approve the annexation unless the new arrangement is to its liking. Each 1% increase in the County’s share will cost the City an extra $3 million annually—making Covell Village an even greater tax burden.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> In addition, the City’s fiscal analysis assumes home prices will double over the next 15 years. If housing prices level off or decline as many economists predict, Covell Village would generate huge deficits for the City.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> Finally, the impact fees charged to the developers do not address infrastructure needs likely to be triggered by Covell Village, such as the widening of roads or that the subdivision would contribute significantly to the premature exhaustion of the capacity of our wastewater treatment plant. Public Works has stated that expansion of the plant would cost at least $100 million over and above water quality improvement costs. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village is not another ["Village Homes"]; it is neither slow growth nor smart growth. Six times larger and twice as dense as Village Homes, Covell Village would be a massive concentration of very big, expensive homes on tiny lots. If approved by voters in November, it would be the largest subdivision ever built in Davis, consisting of 1,864 units on over 420 acres of prime farmland, almost half of which is in the 100-year floodplain.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In approving the project for the November ballot, the Council majority disregarded the concerns of its advisory commissions. The Finance and Budget, Planning, and Open Space Commissions could not support the project. In making its decision, the Council ignored key environmental findings and contradictions in the fiscal analysis that identified serious financial risks for the city, a failure to provide promised affordable housing, and traffic and other infrastructure impacts.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The Commissions studied the analyses. The contrast between their advice and the Council’s push to develop is troubling—and underscores the Council’s failure to respect the citizens’ vision for Davis.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+ == </span>Costs<span>&nbsp;==</span><br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Covell Village would cost the City money. The Finance and Budget Commission rejected the project, citing the “magnitude of the risk that this project poses to the City Council’s goal of fiscal stability.” Because Covell Village would require annexation, the City would get 30% less property tax than if it developed parcels within the city limits like Hunt -Wesson. Recently, the County has made it clear it wants an even greater share of the project’s property tax, and won’t approve the annexation unless the new arrangement is to its liking. Each 1% increase in the County’s share will cost the City an extra $3 million annually—making Covell Village an even greater tax burden.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In addition, the City’s fiscal analysis assumes home prices will double over the next 15 years. If housing prices level off or decline as many economists predict, Covell Village would generate huge deficits for the City.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Finally, the impact fees charged to the developers do not address infrastructure needs likely to be triggered by Covell Village, such as the widening of roads or that the subdivision would contribute significantly to the premature exhaustion of the capacity of our wastewater treatment plant. Public Works has stated that expansion of the plant would cost at least $100 million over and above water quality improvement costs. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 53: </td> <td> Line 49: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''</span>Unaffordable Housing<span>'''</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> The developers’ illusory promise of affordable housing is equally disturbing. The original rationale for Covell Village was to provide “workforce” housing for our teachers, firefighters, new UCD faculty and staff, Davis renters wishing to buy—and our children. Instead, housing will be largely unaffordable to these and similar target groups. Although the developers claim that 2/3 of the subdivision will be affordable, city projections indicate the average for-sale house will cost $683,945.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> The City’s analysis indicates that “middle-income” families (those making less than $96,000 a year) cannot afford housing costing more than $387,000. Yet 92% of the for-sale houses in the subdivision will cost more than $400,000. The least expensive single-family detached house will cost $538,000.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> In other words, of the 1,294 for-sale units proposed only 99 are affordable, according to City criteria. This means only 10 affordable for-sale units per year, primarily townhouses, versus 120 upper-end units constructed annually.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- '''</span>Traffic, safety and health<span>'''</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> The negative impacts of Covell Village go well beyond dollar calculations; according to the City’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we will all be spending a lot more time in traffic. The subdivision will double traffic on Covell to 39,440 cars /day and on Pole Line to 26,900 cars/day, and use up 97% of the capacity on the Mace Overcrossing. The analysis finds that Level of Service “F” results, triggering “high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing” on many streets and intersections including L Street, Moore and the Pole Line Overcrossing to South Davis. According to the EIR, “Conditions are intolerable for most drivers,” with traffic backing up on neighborhood streets, causing all the associated safety and pollution issues for children, seniors and those with respiratory conditions.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> In addition, Woodland is building the 4,000 unit Spring Lake subdivision, just 5 minutes north on Pole Line Road. Spring Lake by itself will have a serious negative impact on traffic along Pole Line and Covell.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- '''</span>Alternatives<span>'''</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> Opposition to the Covell Village subdivision does not equate with a “no change” or “no growth” philosophy. Covell Village is not inevitable; we have alternatives.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through” agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> Second, to be feasible, urban-scale development in the County would require use of the City’s sewer system, wastewater treatment facility, and other city utilities—we would have to agree.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> Instead of Covell Village, Davis can choose change on a more manageable scale—change that will allow us to augment our diversity by building truly affordable housing without undermining city finances and services or our quality of life. The 100-acre site of the old Hunt-Wesson Cannery and the 27-acre PG&amp;E site at 5th and L are prime candidates for redevelopment. The PG&amp;E site, for example, is within walking distance of the downtown and the S.P. Depot.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> Rather than respect the legacy created by citizens and councils over the last three decades and reflected in our General Plan—of Davis as a small, safe, neighborhood-oriented community—this Council majority has chosen sprawl instead.<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>- </span> By saying “no” to a large peripheral subdivision at this time, voters will be affirming the Davis they love and envision. They will be reminding the Council of the value of sustainable city financing, affordable housing, farmland preservation, and sensible traffic and infrastructure planning.<span><br> - <br> - '''Signed by:'''<br> - <br> - 1) Ken Wagstaff – former Mayor of Davis<br> - 2) James Fowler – UCD Assistant Professor of Political Science<br> - 3) Eric Gelber – Housing and Disability Rights Attorney<br> - 4) Stan Forbes – Former Council member<br> - 5) Nora Oldwin – former Birch Lane PTA President<br> - 6) Till Angermann – Hydrogeologist<br> - 7) Mark Spencer – former Planning Commissioner and Open Space Commissioner<br> - 8) Dapo Okupe – CALTRANS Senior Traffic Engineer<br> - 9) Kyaw Tha Paw U – UCD Professor of Atmospheric Sciences<br> - 10) David Balgobin - WasteWater Treatment Engineer<br> - </span> </td> <td> <span>+ == </span>Unaffordable Housing<span>&nbsp;==</span><br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The developers’ illusory promise of affordable housing is equally disturbing. The original rationale for Covell Village was to provide “workforce” housing for our teachers, firefighters, new UCD faculty and staff, Davis renters wishing to buy—and our children. Instead, housing will be largely unaffordable to these and similar target groups. Although the developers claim that 2/3 of the subdivision will be affordable, city projections indicate the average for-sale house will cost $683,945.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The City’s analysis indicates that “middle-income” families (those making less than $96,000 a year) cannot afford housing costing more than $387,000. Yet 92% of the for-sale houses in the subdivision will cost more than $400,000. The least expensive single-family detached house will cost $538,000.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In other words, of the 1,294 for-sale units proposed only 99 are affordable, according to City criteria. This means only 10 affordable for-sale units per year, primarily townhouses, versus 120 upper-end units constructed annually.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+ == </span>Traffic, safety and health<span>&nbsp;==</span><br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The negative impacts of Covell Village go well beyond dollar calculations; according to the City’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we will all be spending a lot more time in traffic. The subdivision will double traffic on Covell to 39,440 cars /day and on Pole Line to 26,900 cars/day, and use up 97% of the capacity on the Mace Overcrossing. The analysis finds that Level of Service “F” results, triggering “high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing” on many streets and intersections including L Street, Moore and the Pole Line Overcrossing to South Davis. According to the EIR, “Conditions are intolerable for most drivers,” with traffic backing up on neighborhood streets, causing all the associated safety and pollution issues for children, seniors and those with respiratory conditions.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In addition, Woodland is building the 4,000 unit Spring Lake subdivision, just 5 minutes north on Pole Line Road. Spring Lake by itself will have a serious negative impact on traffic along Pole Line and Covell.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+ == </span>Alternatives<span>&nbsp;==</span><br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Opposition to the Covell Village subdivision does not equate with a “no change” or “no growth” philosophy. Covell Village is not inevitable; we have alternatives.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through” agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Second, to be feasible, urban-scale development in the County would require use of the City’s sewer system, wastewater treatment facility, and other city utilities—we would have to agree.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Instead of Covell Village, Davis can choose change on a more manageable scale—change that will allow us to augment our diversity by building truly affordable housing without undermining city finances and services or our quality of life. The 100-acre site of the old Hunt-Wesson Cannery and the 27-acre PG&amp;E site at 5th and L are prime candidates for redevelopment. The PG&amp;E site, for example, is within walking distance of the downtown and the S.P. Depot.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Rather than respect the legacy created by citizens and councils over the last three decades and reflected in our General Plan—of Davis as a small, safe, neighborhood-oriented community—this Council majority has chosen sprawl instead.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> By saying “no” to a large peripheral subdivision at this time, voters will be affirming the Davis they love and envision. They will be reminding the Council of the value of sustainable city financing, affordable housing, farmland preservation, and sensible traffic and infrastructure planning. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 96: </td> <td> Line 78: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> -<span>&nbsp;'''E</span>ndorsements:<span>'''<br> - <br> - "Pro Argument"<br> - Measure X</span> [http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm endorsement list] (Includes the ["Davis Enterprise"] and ["The Sacramento Bee"])<br> -<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- "</span>Co<span>n Argument"<br> - Measure X is</span> opposed by the [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] and others ([http://californiaaggie.com/article/?id=11008 Includes] ["The California Aggie"])<br> -<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- '''Pro </span>Argument <span>- Threat of future development'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Endorsements ==<br> + Pro</span>-<span>Covell Village e</span>ndorsements: [http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm endorsement list] (Includes the ["Davis Enterprise"] and ["The Sacramento Bee"])<br> <span>+ <br> + Con</span>-Co<span>vell Village endorsements:</span> opposed by the [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] and others ([http://californiaaggie.com/article/?id=11008 Includes] ["The California Aggie"])<br> <span>+ <br> + == Threat of future development ==<br> + === Pro</span>-Argument <span>===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 107: </td> <td> Line 87: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con Argument - Threat of future development'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 110: </td> <td> Line 90: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''</span>10/30/2005 - Yolo County Supervisors, Duane Chamberlain and Mariko Yamada ran a full page ad in the Davis Enterprise. In an open letter to Davis citizens, they assured the Davis Community the senario that Helen Thompson describes is unlikely. The County cannot afford to forfeit the millions of dollars that the City pays to the County per the "Pass Through Agreement", Guidaro's project has received a "Level C" ranking and has been halted and won't even be considered for years, and the longstanding commitment and track record that Yolo County Supervisors for farmland preservation. They went on to urge citizens to vote "based on facts, not fear.<span>"'''</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span>10/30/2005 - Yolo County Supervisors, Duane Chamberlain and Mariko Yamada ran a full page ad in the Davis Enterprise. In an open letter to Davis citizens, they assured the Davis Community the senario that Helen Thompson describes is unlikely. The County cannot afford to forfeit the millions of dollars that the City pays to the County per the "Pass Through Agreement", Guidaro's project has received a "Level C" ranking and has been halted and won't even be considered for years, and the longstanding commitment and track record that Yolo County Supervisors for farmland preservation. They went on to urge citizens to vote "based on facts, not fear. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 114: </td> <td> Line 94: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ""Pro=Argument - Future Development""</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Future Development ==<br> + === Pro Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 117: </td> <td> Line 98: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con-Argument - Future Development'''</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 120: </td> <td> Line 101: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro-Argument - Solar Housing'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Solar Housing ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 123: </td> <td> Line 105: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con-Argument - Solar Housing'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 126: </td> <td> Line 108: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro-Argument - Affordable Housing'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Affordable Housing ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 138: </td> <td> Line 121: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con Argument - Affordable Housing'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 157: </td> <td> Line 140: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Traffic''' [[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Traffic ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 175: </td> <td> Line 159: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con Argument - Traffic''' [[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 183: </td> <td> Line 167: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Infrastructure Costs''' [[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Infrastructure Costs ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 186: </td> <td> Line 171: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Flooding''' [[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Flooding ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 189: </td> <td> Line 175: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Finance'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Finance ==<br> + === Pro Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 194: </td> <td> Line 181: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro-Argument - Schools'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Schools ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 201: </td> <td> Line 189: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con-Argument - Schools'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 204: </td> <td> Line 192: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Growth Alternatives'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Growth Alternatives ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 207: </td> <td> Line 196: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Sierra Club'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Sierra Club ==<br> + ==== Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 211: </td> <td> Line 201: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con Argument - Sierra Club'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 214: </td> <td> Line 204: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Trader Joes'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Trader Joes ==<br> + === Pro-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 217: </td> <td> Line 208: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con Argument - Trader Joes'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con-Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 220: </td> <td> Line 211: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - City Commissions'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == City Commissions ==<br> + === Pro Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 223: </td> <td> Line 215: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Con Argument - City Commissions'''[[BR]]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ === Con Argument ===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 226: </td> <td> Line 218: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> <span>'''Pro Argument -</span> Infrastructure<span>'''[[BR]]</span><br> - '''<span><br> - </span>Will Covell Village overburden our sewage system?''' </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>==</span> Infrastructure<span>&nbsp;==</span><br> <span>+ === Pro</span>-<span>Argument ===<br> +</span> '''Will Covell Village overburden our sewage system?''' </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 233: </td> <td> Line 225: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 236: </td> <td> Line 227: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- The ["Davis Enterprise"] has endorsed ["Measure X"].<br> - <br> - <br> - '''Other Con - Arguments:'''</span> </td> <td> <span>+ == Other Con - Arguments ==</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 246: </td> <td> Line 234: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> <span>'''</span>Bad for the Environment<span>'''</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>=== </span>Bad for the Environment<span>&nbsp;===</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 252: </td> <td> Line 240: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> <span>'''</span>Higher Crime<span>'''</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>=== </span>Higher Crime<span>&nbsp;===</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-01-28 17:12:34JasonAller <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 369: </td> <td> Line 369: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * That's not likely from the old landfill, but rather from the protected open space drainage area adjacent to the landfill and adjacent to the proposed development. --["<span>r</span>ocksandirt"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * That's not likely from the old landfill, but rather from the protected open space drainage area adjacent to the landfill and adjacent to the proposed development. --["<span>R</span>ocksand<span>D</span>irt"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2006-01-17 12:45:44PhilipNeustromcombined a couple comments and cut a couple ones that were too time sensitive <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 440: </td> <td> Line 440: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - ------<br> - ''2005-10-30 00:10:16'' [[nbsp]] The Sierra Club has voted to oppose Covell Village. See their website for details on why. --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 445: </td> <td> Line 442: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ------<br> - ''2005-10-30 10:34:06'' [[nbsp]] Re: Sierra Club saying "This is Not Smart Growth" Per their ad in today's Enterprise "The site is not within the City of Davis, contains valuable agricultural land and open space, and with homes not affordable to most Davis workers and residents, will result in more commuter traffic and attendant impacts. Nearly half the project lies in the 100-year flood plain." --["SharlaDaly"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2005-10-30 10:37:25'' [[nbsp]] didnt' quite answer the question --["ApolloStumpy"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2005-10-30 10:45:06'' [[nbsp]] I know, but its the only information that I have. I don't know exactly what the smart growth guidlines are that the pro- side is referring to and they don't really say what they are either. I just know what the Sierra Club states over and over again - on their website, in letters to the editor, ads in the newpaper, press releases, etc. Another thing their ad states is that they think that this site should be included in the next General Plan process after the impacts of Woodland's Spring Lake development and the UCD housing develpment are known. --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ ''2005-10-30 10:34:06'' [[nbsp]] Sierra Club saying "This is Not Smart Growth" Per their ad in today's Enterprise "The site is not within the City of Davis, contains valuable agricultural land and open space, and with homes not affordable to most Davis workers and residents, will result in more commuter traffic and attendant impacts. Nearly half the project lies in the 100-year flood plain." I don't know exactly what the smart growth guidlines are that the pro- side is referring to and they don't really say what they are either. I just know what the Sierra Club states over and over again - on their website, in letters to the editor, ads in the newpaper, press releases, etc. Another thing their ad states is that they think that this site should be included in the next General Plan process after the impacts of Woodland's Spring Lake development and the UCD housing develpment are known. --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 470: </td> <td> Line 462: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- -------</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 481: </td> <td> Line 472: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ''2005-11-01 21:27:06'' [[nbsp]] Sharla, why did you delete that list? --["KenjiYamada"]<br> - - Kenji - I deleted it because it was already posted in the endorsement section. Sam Toomey kept adding and adding to the main description section. I can move the link for the endorsements up, but they have their own section. The con people have their own list too but I don't want to take up the room. - [SharlaDaly]<br> - ------</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 485: </td> <td> Line 473: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ''2005-11-03 06:26:43'' [[nbsp]] I had a friend who got paid $50/hr to hawk Ax body spray at an event, so I don't think $20 is a big deal, since housing is more important than good smell (usually) --["ApolloStumpy"]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 488: </td> <td> Line 477: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ''2005-11-03 06:26:43'' [[nbsp]] I had a friend who got paid $50/hr to hawk Ax body spray at an event, so I don't think $20 is a big deal, since housing is more important than good smell (usually) --["ApolloStumpy"]<br> - ------</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-12-12 18:21:03JennySoares <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 502: </td> <td> Line 502: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-12-12 18:47:25'' [[nbsp]] I don't think some of you understand what the supply and demand curve. As students worried about housing, you should be praising the creators of CV. And increase in housing supply leads to a decrease in demand. Thus, even though the housing in CV may be too expensive, the market will correct itself. The problem with Davis and the housing here is that the vacancy rate is so much smaller than any other city. Woodland has a higher rate, thus they cannot charge as much for housing, because they are desperate to get people into their apartments. If there was more housing in Davis (regardless of price) the vacancy rate would increase and apartment complexes would be desperate to have spots filled. That's why this year more than any other complexes were giving away free rent or an xbox or some incentive. Vacancy rates have been increasing; CV would have done a lot for housing in Davis. Regardless of whether you ended up there or not, the rates for every other complex would go down in order to compete. --["JennySoares"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-12-12 18:47:25'' [[nbsp]] I don't think some of you understand what the supply and demand curve. As students worried about housing, you should be praising the creators of CV. And increase in housing supply leads to a decrease in demand. Thus, even though the housing in CV may be too expensive, the market will correct itself. The problem with Davis and the housing here is that the vacancy rate is so much smaller than any other city. Woodland has a higher rate, thus they cannot charge as much for housing, because they are desperate to get people into their apartments. If there was more housing in Davis (regardless of price) the vacancy rate would increase and apartment complexes would be desperate to have spots filled. That's why this year more than any other complexes were giving away free rent or an xbox or some incentive. Vacancy rates have been increasing; CV would have done a lot for housing in Davis. Regardless of whether you ended up there or not, the rates for every other complex would go down in order to compete. <span>Also, those of you complaing about them advertising to students when students won't even be able to afford homes there, perhaps you should read the plans. They are also building many apartments and cooperative housing. That sounds like housing perfect for students if you ask me. And personally, I'd love to live within a few blocks of a Trader Joe's. </span>--["JennySoares"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-12-12 18:03:25JennySoares <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 365: </td> <td> Line 365: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Basically, students can't apply for section 8 housing (housing for people with low incomes). Covell Village includes houses as well as townhouses and apartments. So CV would pretty much just be offering section 8 rates to students that qualified without actually being official section 8 housing. --["JennySoares"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-12-12 17:47:25JennySoaresComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 500: </td> <td> Line 500: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-12-12 18:47:25'' [[nbsp]] I don't think some of you understand what the supply and demand curve. As students worried about housing, you should be praising the creators of CV. And increase in housing supply leads to a decrease in demand. Thus, even though the housing in CV may be too expensive, the market will correct itself. The problem with Davis and the housing here is that the vacancy rate is so much smaller than any other city. Woodland has a higher rate, thus they cannot charge as much for housing, because they are desperate to get people into their apartments. If there was more housing in Davis (regardless of price) the vacancy rate would increase and apartment complexes would be desperate to have spots filled. That's why this year more than any other complexes were giving away free rent or an xbox or some incentive. Vacancy rates have been increasing; CV would have done a lot for housing in Davis. Regardless of whether you ended up there or not, the rates for every other complex would go down in order to compete. --["JennySoares"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-19 13:26:30JasonAller <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 4: </td> <td> Line 4: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> In July of 2004, the city council voted to approve the Covell Village development proposal, to annex a ~400 acre plot north of Covell Blvd., between ["Pole Line Road"] and ["F Street"], into the City and rezone it from agricultural land into residential and commercial sites. The development will add 1884 living units to Davis in phases through 2017 or later.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> The development requires a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"].<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> In July of 2004, the city council voted to approve the Covell Village development proposal, to annex a ~400 acre plot north of Covell Blvd., between ["Pole Line Road"] and ["F Street"], into the City and rezone it from agricultural land into residential and commercial sites. The development will add 1884 living units to Davis in phases through 2017 or later.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The development requires a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, with approval from the City of Davis Planning Department or City Council. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"]. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 10: </td> <td> Line 10: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Citizens of Davis should look forward to a very lively campaign and will need to carefully take the time to sort out the information. The positives and negatives of the project should be evaluated. You may read the pro and con arguments below.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Citizens of Davis should look forward to a very lively campaign and will need to carefully take the time to sort out the information. The positives and negatives of the project should be evaluated. You may read the pro and con arguments below. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 17: </td> <td> Line 17: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Supporters of Covell Village say that the project will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. The partners and planners are respected long-time Davis locals, including Citizens of the year. It is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf)<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Covell Village is in line with Davis culture, and it adds a tremendous amount to the community. The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly."<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Supporters of Covell Village say that the project will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. The partners and planners are respected long-time Davis locals, including Citizens of the year. It is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf)<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Covell Village is in line with Davis culture, and it adds a tremendous amount to the community. The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * [http://yesonxsmartplanning.com YesOnXSmartPlanning.com] as well as their ["Pro-Covell Village FAQ"]<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> * [http://yesonxsmartplanning.com YesOnXSmartPlanning.com] as well as their ["Pro-Covell Village FAQ"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 37: </td> <td> Line 37: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village is not another ["Village Homes"]; it is neither slow growth nor smart growth. Six times larger and twice as dense as Village Homes, Covell Village would be a massive concentration of very big, expensive homes on tiny lots. If approved by voters in November, it would be the largest subdivision ever built in Davis, consisting of 1,864 units on over 420 acres of prime farmland, almost half of which is in the 100-year floodplain.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> In approving the project for the November ballot, the Council majority disregarded the concerns of its advisory commissions. The Finance and Budget, Planning, and Open Space Commissions could not support the project. In making its decision, the Council ignored key environmental findings and contradictions in the fiscal analysis that identified serious financial risks for the city, a failure to provide promised affordable housing, and traffic and other infrastructure impacts.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village is not another ["Village Homes"]; it is neither slow growth nor smart growth. Six times larger and twice as dense as Village Homes, Covell Village would be a massive concentration of very big, expensive homes on tiny lots. If approved by voters in November, it would be the largest subdivision ever built in Davis, consisting of 1,864 units on over 420 acres of prime farmland, almost half of which is in the 100-year floodplain.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In approving the project for the November ballot, the Council majority disregarded the concerns of its advisory commissions. The Finance and Budget, Planning, and Open Space Commissions could not support the project. In making its decision, the Council ignored key environmental findings and contradictions in the fiscal analysis that identified serious financial risks for the city, a failure to provide promised affordable housing, and traffic and other infrastructure impacts. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 44: </td> <td> Line 44: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> <br> <span>-</span> Covell Village would cost the City money. The Finance and Budget Commission rejected the project, citing the “magnitude of the risk that this project poses to the City Council’s goal of fiscal stability.” Because Covell Village would require annexation, the City would get 30% less property tax than if it developed parcels within the city limits like Hunt -Wesson. Recently, the County has made it clear it wants an even greater share of the project’s property tax, and won’t approve the annexation unless the new arrangement is to its liking. Each 1% increase in the County’s share will cost the City an extra $3 million annually—making Covell Village an even greater tax burden.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> In addition, the City’s fiscal analysis assumes home prices will double over the next 15 years. If housing prices level off or decline as many economists predict, Covell Village would generate huge deficits for the City.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Covell Village would cost the City money. The Finance and Budget Commission rejected the project, citing the “magnitude of the risk that this project poses to the City Council’s goal of fiscal stability.” Because Covell Village would require annexation, the City would get 30% less property tax than if it developed parcels within the city limits like Hunt -Wesson. Recently, the County has made it clear it wants an even greater share of the project’s property tax, and won’t approve the annexation unless the new arrangement is to its liking. Each 1% increase in the County’s share will cost the City an extra $3 million annually—making Covell Village an even greater tax burden.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In addition, the City’s fiscal analysis assumes home prices will double over the next 15 years. If housing prices level off or decline as many economists predict, Covell Village would generate huge deficits for the City. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 55: </td> <td> Line 55: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The developers’ illusory promise of affordable housing is equally disturbing. The original rationale for Covell Village was to provide “workforce” housing for our teachers, firefighters, new UCD faculty and staff, Davis renters wishing to buy—and our children. Instead, housing will be largely unaffordable to these and similar target groups. Although the developers claim that 2/3 of the subdivision will be affordable, city projections indicate the average for-sale house will cost $683,945.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> The City’s analysis indicates that “middle-income” families (those making less than $96,000 a year) cannot afford housing costing more than $387,000. Yet 92% of the for-sale houses in the subdivision will cost more than $400,000. The least expensive single-family detached house will cost $538,000.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> In other words, of the 1,294 for-sale units proposed only 99 are affordable, according to City criteria. This means only 10 affordable for-sale units per year, primarily townhouses, versus 120 upper-end units constructed annually.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The developers’ illusory promise of affordable housing is equally disturbing. The original rationale for Covell Village was to provide “workforce” housing for our teachers, firefighters, new UCD faculty and staff, Davis renters wishing to buy—and our children. Instead, housing will be largely unaffordable to these and similar target groups. Although the developers claim that 2/3 of the subdivision will be affordable, city projections indicate the average for-sale house will cost $683,945.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The City’s analysis indicates that “middle-income” families (those making less than $96,000 a year) cannot afford housing costing more than $387,000. Yet 92% of the for-sale houses in the subdivision will cost more than $400,000. The least expensive single-family detached house will cost $538,000.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In other words, of the 1,294 for-sale units proposed only 99 are affordable, according to City criteria. This means only 10 affordable for-sale units per year, primarily townhouses, versus 120 upper-end units constructed annually. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 63: </td> <td> Line 63: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The negative impacts of Covell Village go well beyond dollar calculations; according to the City’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we will all be spending a lot more time in traffic. The subdivision will double traffic on Covell to 39,440 cars /day and on Pole Line to 26,900 cars/day, and use up 97% of the capacity on the Mace Overcrossing. The analysis finds that Level of Service “F” results, triggering “high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing” on many streets and intersections including L Street, Moore and the Pole Line Overcrossing to South Davis. According to the EIR, “Conditions are intolerable for most drivers,” with traffic backing up on neighborhood streets, causing all the associated safety and pollution issues for children, seniors and those with respiratory conditions.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> In addition, Woodland is building the 4,000 unit Spring Lake subdivision, just 5 minutes north on Pole Line Road. Spring Lake by itself will have a serious negative impact on traffic along Pole Line and Covell.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The negative impacts of Covell Village go well beyond dollar calculations; according to the City’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we will all be spending a lot more time in traffic. The subdivision will double traffic on Covell to 39,440 cars /day and on Pole Line to 26,900 cars/day, and use up 97% of the capacity on the Mace Overcrossing. The analysis finds that Level of Service “F” results, triggering “high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing” on many streets and intersections including L Street, Moore and the Pole Line Overcrossing to South Davis. According to the EIR, “Conditions are intolerable for most drivers,” with traffic backing up on neighborhood streets, causing all the associated safety and pollution issues for children, seniors and those with respiratory conditions.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> In addition, Woodland is building the 4,000 unit Spring Lake subdivision, just 5 minutes north on Pole Line Road. Spring Lake by itself will have a serious negative impact on traffic along Pole Line and Covell. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 71: </td> <td> Line 71: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through” agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through” agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 75: </td> <td> Line 75: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Instead of Covell Village, Davis can choose change on a more manageable scale—change that will allow us to augment our diversity by building truly affordable housing without undermining city finances and services or our quality of life. The 100-acre site of the old Hunt-Wesson Cannery and the 27-acre PG&amp;E site at 5th and L are prime candidates for redevelopment. The PG&amp;E site, for example, is within walking distance of the downtown and the S.P. Depot. <br> - <br> - Rather than respect the legacy created by citizens and councils over the last three decades and reflected in our General Plan—of Davis as a small, safe, neighborhood-oriented community—this Council majority has chosen sprawl instead. <br> - <br> - By saying “no” to a large peripheral subdivision at this time, voters will be affirming the Davis they love and envision. They will be reminding the Council of the value of sustainable city financing, affordable housing, farmland preservation, and sensible traffic and infrastructure planning. </span> </td> <td> <span>+ Instead of Covell Village, Davis can choose change on a more manageable scale—change that will allow us to augment our diversity by building truly affordable housing without undermining city finances and services or our quality of life. The 100-acre site of the old Hunt-Wesson Cannery and the 27-acre PG&amp;E site at 5th and L are prime candidates for redevelopment. The PG&amp;E site, for example, is within walking distance of the downtown and the S.P. Depot.<br> + <br> + Rather than respect the legacy created by citizens and councils over the last three decades and reflected in our General Plan—of Davis as a small, safe, neighborhood-oriented community—this Council majority has chosen sprawl instead.<br> + <br> + By saying “no” to a large peripheral subdivision at this time, voters will be affirming the Davis they love and envision. They will be reminding the Council of the value of sustainable city financing, affordable housing, farmland preservation, and sensible traffic and infrastructure planning.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 87: </td> <td> Line 87: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> 5) Nora Oldwin – former Birch Lane PTA President<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> 5) Nora Oldwin – former Birch Lane PTA President </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 89: </td> <td> Line 89: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> 7) Mark Spencer – former Planning Commissioner and Open Space Commissioner<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> 7) Mark Spencer – former Planning Commissioner and Open Space Commissioner </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 93: </td> <td> Line 93: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 101: </td> <td> Line 101: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> "Con Argument"<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> "Con Argument" </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 104: </td> <td> Line 104: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''Pro Argument - Threat of future development'''[[BR]]<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> A letter from Helen Thompson, Davis's Yolo County Supervisor, warns that if Davis does not meet the growth requirements from the State, 3 votes from the County Board of Supervisors could approve a development on our borders. Currently, a development this is much larger than Covell Village has been proposed, that would jet out on the border of Davis, called Mace Curve. In this case, the citizens of Davis would not be able to vote on its future, and would give up all of the additional benefits and innovative planning that Covell Village would bring to the city. Helen claims that a "no on X" vote would allow "Sacramento developers to decide how Davis grows."<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''Pro Argument - Threat of future development'''[[BR]]<br> <span>+</span> A letter from Helen Thompson, Davis's Yolo County Supervisor, warns that if Davis does not meet the growth requirements from the State, 3 votes from the County Board of Supervisors could approve a development on our borders. Currently, a development this is much larger than Covell Village has been proposed, that would jet out on the border of Davis, called Mace Curve. In this case, the citizens of Davis would not be able to vote on its future, and would give up all of the additional benefits and innovative planning that Covell Village would bring to the city. Helen claims that a "no on X" vote would allow "Sacramento developers to decide how Davis grows." </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 108: </td> <td> Line 108: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million plus it receives from the City. However, no subdivision can be built without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> '''10/30/2005 - Yolo County Supervisors, Duane Chamberlain and Mariko Yamada ran a full page ad in the Davis Enterprise. In an open letter to Davis citizens, they assured the Davis Community the senario that Helen Thompson describes is unlikely. The County cannot afford to forfeit the millions of dollars that the City pays to the County per the "Pass Through Agreement", Guidaro's project has received a "Level C" ranking and has been halted and won't even be considered for years, and the longstanding commitment and track record that Yolo County Supervisors for farmland preservation. They went on to urge citizens to vote "based on facts, not fear."'''<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million plus it receives from the City. However, no subdivision can be built without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> '''10/30/2005 - Yolo County Supervisors, Duane Chamberlain and Mariko Yamada ran a full page ad in the Davis Enterprise. In an open letter to Davis citizens, they assured the Davis Community the senario that Helen Thompson describes is unlikely. The County cannot afford to forfeit the millions of dollars that the City pays to the County per the "Pass Through Agreement", Guidaro's project has received a "Level C" ranking and has been halted and won't even be considered for years, and the longstanding commitment and track record that Yolo County Supervisors for farmland preservation. They went on to urge citizens to vote "based on facts, not fear."'''<br> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 118: </td> <td> Line 118: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The pass-through agreement between the County and the City is not a bribe. I think that Council members and County Supervisors who created the agreement would find this statement defametory. Covell Village, Guidero and others can offer double, triple or more, but then these would be a true bribes, wouldn't it? If this is truely an issue, don't you know that with the next County Supervisor election the citizens will be questioning candidates closely about their committment to preserving ag land in Yolo County and allowing cities to choose their own destiny in terms of growth. Davis has been a slow-growth community for many decades. This is nothing new.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The pass-through agreement between the County and the City is not a bribe. I think that Council members and County Supervisors who created the agreement would find this statement defametory. Covell Village, Guidero and others can offer double, triple or more, but then these would be a true bribes, wouldn't it? If this is truely an issue, don't you know that with the next County Supervisor election the citizens will be questioning candidates closely about their committment to preserving ag land in Yolo County and allowing cities to choose their own destiny in terms of growth. Davis has been a slow-growth community for many decades. This is nothing new. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 129: </td> <td> Line 129: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Covell Village meets all smart growth principles. </span> </td> <td> <span>+ Covell Village meets all smart growth principles.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 162: </td> <td> Line 162: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> • Covell Boulevard, F Street to J Street<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;-</span> • Covell Boulevard, J Street to L Street<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- • Covell Boulevard, L Street to Pole Line Road <br> -</span> • Pole Line Road, north of Covell Boulevard<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;-</span> • Pole Line Road, I-80 Overcrossing<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;-</span> • Pole Line Road, Loyola to Eighth Street<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> • Covell Boulevard, F Street to J Street<span><br> +</span> • Covell Boulevard, J Street to L Street<span><br> + • Covell Boulevard, L Street to Pole Line Road<br> +</span> • Pole Line Road, north of Covell Boulevard<span><br> +</span> • Pole Line Road, I-80 Overcrossing<span><br> +</span> • Pole Line Road, Loyola to Eighth Street </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 170: </td> <td> Line 170: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Traffic count for Covell and Pole Line is currently: 19,700, it will grow to 39,440. (According to the EIR - Page 17 of the above Link) <br> <span>- <br> -</span> The above stats about 1 more car are simply false.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Traffic count for Covell and Pole Line is currently: 19,700, it will grow to 39,440. (According to the EIR - Page 17 of the above Link)<span><br> +</span> <br> <span>+</span> The above stats about 1 more car are simply false. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 181: </td> <td> Line 181: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Cost to Davis taxpayers: $15 million. <span><br> - </span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Cost to Davis taxpayers: $15 million.<span><br> +</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 202: </td> <td> Line 202: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> "$60 million for schools" is clearly designed to give the impression the developers are making a gift to the schools. In truth, the money would come from taxes levied on Covell Village homes. Not one dime is for existing students, teachers or programs.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> "$60 million for schools" is clearly designed to give the impression the developers are making a gift to the schools. In truth, the money would come from taxes levied on Covell Village homes. Not one dime is for existing students, teachers or programs. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 209: </td> <td> Line 209: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were “Unfounded.”''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were “Unfounded.”''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 215: </td> <td> Line 215: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Trader Joes has inked an agreement with Covell Village. If measure X passes, a Trader Joes will be built, probably across the street from Nugget. See Davis Enterprise [http://davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/07/news/086new1.txt],<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Trader Joes has inked an agreement with Covell Village. If measure X passes, a Trader Joes will be built, probably across the street from Nugget. See Davis Enterprise [http://davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/07/news/086new1.txt], </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 218: </td> <td> Line 218: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Trader Joes was already in negotions with two locations in Davis. Alhambra Center at Mace &amp; Alhambra which has not yet been approved and with the Interland/South Davis Center which has been approved and is nearing construction. To state that the only way Davis will get a Trader Joe's is to approve CV is simply false.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Trader Joes was already in negotions with two locations in Davis. Alhambra Center at Mace &amp; Alhambra which has not yet been approved and with the Interland/South Davis Center which has been approved and is nearing construction. To state that the only way Davis will get a Trader Joe's is to approve CV is simply false. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 229: </td> <td> Line 229: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> No. According to City Engineer Pat Fitzsimmons, Davis' wastewater treatment plant has the capacity to accommodate Covell Village. Fitzsimmons estimates that even after Covell Village is completely occupied, the plant will still have capacity for the wastewater generated by an additional 8,000 people.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> "The long and short of it is there is the capacity for Covell Village and there is capacity for the General Plan build-out, and then some," said Fitzsimmons. Davis' plant capacity is 7.5 million gallons per day, and today the city generates 6.25 million gallons per day. Covell Village will add only .46 million gallons per day upon completion, leaving capacity for .79 million gallons per day.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> '''["The Jagged Tree"]''' will be saved and located in a park within Covell Village. If you look at the map of Covell Village the jagged tree will remain in it's same location and a circular park will be built around it just north of the town center. Many other oak trees on the site will be saved as well.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> No. According to City Engineer Pat Fitzsimmons, Davis' wastewater treatment plant has the capacity to accommodate Covell Village. Fitzsimmons estimates that even after Covell Village is completely occupied, the plant will still have capacity for the wastewater generated by an additional 8,000 people.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> "The long and short of it is there is the capacity for Covell Village and there is capacity for the General Plan build-out, and then some," said Fitzsimmons. Davis' plant capacity is 7.5 million gallons per day, and today the city generates 6.25 million gallons per day. Covell Village will add only .46 million gallons per day upon completion, leaving capacity for .79 million gallons per day.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> '''["The Jagged Tree"]''' will be saved and located in a park within Covell Village. If you look at the map of Covell Village the jagged tree will remain in it's same location and a circular park will be built around it just north of the town center. Many other oak trees on the site will be saved as well. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 243: </td> <td> Line 243: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Mike Corbett is not a financial partner in Covell Village. He is an employee hired in a planning capacity. The Covell Village investors are building Covell Village. However well meaning his intentions, the actually implementation of the subdivisions features ultimately rest with the full partners of Covell Village Company not Mike Corbett.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Mike Corbett is not a financial partner in Covell Village. He is an employee hired in a planning capacity. The Covell Village investors are building Covell Village. However well meaning his intentions, the actually implementation of the subdivisions features ultimately rest with the full partners of Covell Village Company not Mike Corbett. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 277: </td> <td> Line 277: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 284: </td> <td> Line 284: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * ["Trader Joe's"] - Covell Village and Trader Joe's<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> * ["Trader Joe's"] - Covell Village and Trader Joe's </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 335: </td> <td> Line 335: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-06 15:08:22'' [[nbsp]] It's not really ''less'' bikes. I don't think they'll start taking and hiding peoples bikes. It's not necessarily that horrible for the town though - I mean, there&amp;#8217;s more then just developers. Think of all the massive tax money that will be coming in, not just from the construction and possible new shops but from the influx in population - a whole lot could be done. It would also fare very well for most of the businesses in the town. I think I saw something about a school or two as well? It is growth and development yes, but there are positives in it too. It&amp;#8217;s inevitable that the city of Davis will change. Be it more students or more families moving here, you can&amp;#8217;t keep it as a small town with a farm school forevah. Some people think it&amp;#8217;s a little arrogant to spend four years here and then decide that is the best time and way to keep it. I work with people who graduated from UCD in the 60&amp;#8217;s, and they can&amp;#8217;t believe how much the town has changed. I don&amp;#8217;t think the term suburban wasteland need necessarily apply either. If it&amp;#8217;s well planned, it can work. You can keep it well spaced, keep parks and green space without being forcibly obvious and surrounded by roads. I think Danville in the east bay area is a good example of that. Or the newer parts of San Ramon in the hills. The problem for that stuff comes down to how most of core Davis wasn&amp;#8217;t well planned for much growth. Hence stuff like the crappy ["The Worst Intersection in Davis" intersection]. The point of it isn't affordable housing for college students either. I see a lot of houses being completely remodeled and rennovated around town. I'm sure that's also pretty expensive, but there are people who can/do shell out the money for a bigger or newer house (instead of one built anywhere from 10 to 50 years ago). Maybe some people just want a more "''respectable''" neighborhood away from places students can rent, something nice and new in a great place like Davis. Or people working in Sac who just love Davis, but can afford bigger/(potentially) nicer houses. I don't think the prices are absolutely crazy outrageous for Davis though. Especially for families wanting to come in from more expensive places. Likewise, I may not like the prices I have to pay for an apartment here, but I damn sure appreciate it once I visit friends at UCLA and see what they have to pay. But ever go out on Mace to the Country Club? Driven through it? There are tons of homes in the millions. Really nice ones too. I saw just a single one of them on a listing downtown for 1.75 million. 1.75 ''million''. And it wasn't even for the biggest and newest of those. I don&amp;#8217;t know enough about the entire issue, but just wanted to throw out way too many quick observations/comments from glancing at everyone elses. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-06 15:08:22'' [[nbsp]] It's not really ''less'' bikes. I don't think they'll start taking and hiding peoples bikes. It's not necessarily that horrible for the town though - I mean, there&amp;#8217;s more then just developers. Think of all the massive tax money that will be coming in, not just from the construction and possible new shops but from the influx in population - a whole lot could be done. It would also fare very well for most of the businesses in the town. I think I saw something about a school or two as well? It is growth and development yes, but there are positives in it too. It&amp;#8217;s inevitable that the city of Davis will change. Be it more students or more families moving here, you can&amp;#8217;t keep it as a small town with a farm school forevah. Some people think it&amp;#8217;s a little arrogant to spend four years here and then decide that is the best time and way to keep it. I work with people who graduated from UCD in the 60&amp;#8217;s, and they can&amp;#8217;t believe how much the town has changed. I don&amp;#8217;t think the term suburban wasteland need necessarily apply either. If it&amp;#8217;s well planned, it can work. You can keep it well spaced, keep parks and green space without being forcibly obvious and surrounded by roads. I think Danville in the east bay area is a good example of that. Or the newer parts of San Ramon in the hills. The problem for that stuff comes down to how most of core Davis wasn&amp;#8217;t well planned for much growth. Hence stuff like the crappy ["The Worst Intersection in Davis" intersection]. The point of it isn't affordable housing for college students either. I see a lot of houses being completely remodeled and rennovated around town. I'm sure that's also pretty expensive, but there are people who can/do shell out the money for a bigger or newer house (instead of one built anywhere from 10 to 50 years ago). Maybe some people just want a more "''respectable''" neighborhood away from places students can rent, something nice and new in a great place like Davis. Or people working in Sac who just love Davis, but can afford bigger/(potentially) nicer houses. I don't think the prices are absolutely crazy outrageous for Davis though. Especially for families wanting to come in from more expensive places. Likewise, I may not like the prices I have to pay for an apartment here, but I damn sure appreciate it once I visit friends at UCLA and see what they have to pay. But ever go out on Mace to the Country Club? Driven through it? There are tons of homes in the millions. Really nice ones too. I saw just a single one of them on a listing downtown for 1.75 million. 1.75 ''million''. And it wasn't even for the biggest and newest of those. I don&amp;#8217;t know enough about the entire issue, but just wanted to throw out way too many quick observations/comments from glancing at everyone elses. -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 372: </td> <td> Line 372: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-13 10:28:59'' [[nbsp]] Trader Joe's has made it clear that they did not want to move in to any of Davis' vacant spaces, but they were already in discussions with two new shopping areas about coming.<span>&nbsp;</span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Alhambra Center which has not been approved yet: http://www.cityofdavis.org/ed/projects/view.cfm?project=7D77E894-E2C9-4AD3-B7C71236AA56771F<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-13 10:28:59'' [[nbsp]] Trader Joe's has made it clear that they did not want to move in to any of Davis' vacant spaces, but they were already in discussions with two new shopping areas about coming.<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Alhambra Center which has not been approved yet: http://www.cityofdavis.org/ed/projects/view.cfm?project=7D77E894-E2C9-4AD3-B7C71236AA56771F </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 382: </td> <td> Line 382: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-13 21:22:59'' [[nbsp]] You know why I'm against Covell Village? I love Davis. I want to live here forever, but I doubt I'll ever be able to afford to buy a home here. I resent that the new homes always have to be rediculously expensive and I resent that the only people that will be able to afford them are people commuting to Sacramento.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-13 21:22:59'' [[nbsp]] You know why I'm against Covell Village? I love Davis. I want to live here forever, but I doubt I'll ever be able to afford to buy a home here. I resent that the new homes always have to be rediculously expensive and I resent that the only people that will be able to afford them are people commuting to Sacramento. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 389: </td> <td> Line 389: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 455: </td> <td> Line 455: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> If I had known there'd be free pizza coupons, I would have definitly stood in line and nodded my head yes just for some lunch. People have been doing that since elementary school (candy, cupcakes, etc), but I'm never really sure if it actually bought votes back then, much less with college kids now. -["EdwinSaada" ES]<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> If I had known there'd be free pizza coupons, I would have definitly stood in line and nodded my head yes just for some lunch. People have been doing that since elementary school (candy, cupcakes, etc), but I'm never really sure if it actually bought votes back then, much less with college kids now. -["EdwinSaada" ES] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 473: </td> <td> Line 473: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-01 17:57:53'' [[nbsp]] I find the Yes on X campus advertising blitz the be a little repulsive. While I'm likely to vote yes, I don't need, nor want free pizza or sexual advertising. Campus is covered with attractive students who are being payed to promote the Covell project. The girls with the pink "Divas for Covell Village" shirts really turn me off. --["JackHaskel"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-01 17:57:53'' [[nbsp]] I find the Yes on X campus advertising blitz the be a little repulsive. While I'm likely to vote yes, I don't need, nor want free pizza or sexual advertising. Campus is covered with attractive students who are being payed to promote the Covell project. The girls with the pink "<span>["</span>Divas for Covell Village<span>"]</span>" shirts really turn me off. --["JackHaskel"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 500: </td> <td> Line 500: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-08 10:55:00BrianSoleckiadded link <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 498: </td> <td> Line 498: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + *Here is a link to the comparison of Livermore Trails vs. Covell Village: http://www.citizenplanning.org/documents/something_better.pdf<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-08 10:22:02MattCzarnowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 496: </td> <td> Line 496: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + *Any idea where this sample of an alternative to Covell Village can be found? I'd like to see it, as most of the people opposed to X seem to be opposed to almost any annexation of new land. -["MattCzarnowski" MC]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-07 16:34:44KateWatermanmore <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 495: </td> <td> Line 495: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * No on X put out a circular listing organizations that shared their views on various propositions. It was questionable because they listed, without permission, an organization that has never and will never take a stance on said proposition. --["KateWaterman"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * No on X put out a circular listing organizations that shared their views on various propositions. It was questionable because they listed, without permission, an organization that has never and will never take a stance on said proposition. <span>&nbsp;Sorry if this wasn't clear. BTW, I voted no.</span> --["KateWaterman"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-07 16:29:37KateWatermanresponse <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 493: </td> <td> Line 493: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> I don't get that both sides have engaged in questionable advertising practices. One side, Yes on X, ran an ad for two days in the Davis Enterprise personally attacking and defaming Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington. This was soundly and widely condemned by many, many people in the community, including the Editor of the Davis Enterprise (see Sunday's paper). Yes on X had automated phone calls going to people's cell phone which is illegal. Yes on X ran an ad that implied that County Supervisor, Mariko Yamada was endorsing Measure X. She had to spend time and money to send out a correction. Yes on X folks manned the UCD polling station with not one, but two campaign workers and distributed gift certificates at the polling before Freddie Oakley shut it all down and removed the campaign workers. The No on X campaign has run clean ads that has focused on the issues. In response to complaints that an alternative to Covell Village was not being offered by the opposition, Sue Greenwald fundraised and ran her own ad presenting a sample of what another community was doing and suggested that we could do better. Now the Yes on X campaign is saying that she is promoting getting a Los Angeles developer to come to town. There is lots of twisting and spinning going on. Lastly, I don't know what Prop 73 has to do with Measure X. Can you elaborate? </td> <td> <span>+ *</span> I don't get that both sides have engaged in questionable advertising practices. One side, Yes on X, ran an ad for two days in the Davis Enterprise personally attacking and defaming Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington. This was soundly and widely condemned by many, many people in the community, including the Editor of the Davis Enterprise (see Sunday's paper). Yes on X had automated phone calls going to people's cell phone which is illegal. Yes on X ran an ad that implied that County Supervisor, Mariko Yamada was endorsing Measure X. She had to spend time and money to send out a correction. Yes on X folks manned the UCD polling station with not one, but two campaign workers and distributed gift certificates at the polling before Freddie Oakley shut it all down and removed the campaign workers. The No on X campaign has run clean ads that has focused on the issues. In response to complaints that an alternative to Covell Village was not being offered by the opposition, Sue Greenwald fundraised and ran her own ad presenting a sample of what another community was doing and suggested that we could do better. Now the Yes on X campaign is saying that she is promoting getting a Los Angeles developer to come to town. There is lots of twisting and spinning going on. Lastly, I don't know what Prop 73 has to do with Measure X. Can you elaborate?<span><br> + <br> + * No on X put out a circular listing organizations that shared their views on various propositions. It was questionable because they listed, without permission, an organization that has never and will never take a stance on said proposition. --["KateWaterman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-07 16:02:21SharlaDalyJust had to vent <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 492: </td> <td> Line 492: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + I don't get that both sides have engaged in questionable advertising practices. One side, Yes on X, ran an ad for two days in the Davis Enterprise personally attacking and defaming Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington. This was soundly and widely condemned by many, many people in the community, including the Editor of the Davis Enterprise (see Sunday's paper). Yes on X had automated phone calls going to people's cell phone which is illegal. Yes on X ran an ad that implied that County Supervisor, Mariko Yamada was endorsing Measure X. She had to spend time and money to send out a correction. Yes on X folks manned the UCD polling station with not one, but two campaign workers and distributed gift certificates at the polling before Freddie Oakley shut it all down and removed the campaign workers. The No on X campaign has run clean ads that has focused on the issues. In response to complaints that an alternative to Covell Village was not being offered by the opposition, Sue Greenwald fundraised and ran her own ad presenting a sample of what another community was doing and suggested that we could do better. Now the Yes on X campaign is saying that she is promoting getting a Los Angeles developer to come to town. There is lots of twisting and spinning going on. Lastly, I don't know what Prop 73 has to do with Measure X. Can you elaborate?</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-07 12:35:55KateWatermanoops <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 491: </td> <td> Line 491: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-11-07 13:31:52'' [[nbsp]] Well, now that both sides have engaged in rather questionable advertising practices, I guess I can make a value judgement. The "No on X" campaign listed Cal --["KateWaterman"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-11-07 13:31:52'' [[nbsp]] Well, now that both sides have engaged in rather <span>["Shadiness Factor" </span>questionable advertising practices<span>]</span>, I guess I can make a value judgement. The "No on X" campaign listed <span>["</span>Cal<span>PIRG"] as an opponent of Prop 73, which, personal opinions aside, is just not true. We never took a position on this. It's just not our bag of bananas.</span> --["KateWaterman"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-07 12:31:52KateWatermanComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 490: </td> <td> Line 490: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-07 13:31:52'' [[nbsp]] Well, now that both sides have engaged in rather questionable advertising practices, I guess I can make a value judgement. The "No on X" campaign listed Cal --["KateWaterman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-06 07:26:54BrianSoleckiadded link to Livermore Trails <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 240: </td> <td> Line 240: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + People have claimed that there could never be a better project proposed. Please look at the contributions made to the city of Livermore by a a development called Livermore Trails: http://livermoretrails.com/about_livermoretrails_questions.htm It dwarfs the bonuses that Covell Village is offering.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-06 07:20:43BrianSoleckiAdded traffic stats from the EIR <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 159: </td> <td> Line 159: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + Response: Here are the directly quoted facts from the actual Covell Village EIR Report: http://www.cityofdavis.org/covell/pdfs/eir/appendix_A.pdf<br> + GRADE F ROADWAYS AT COVELL VILLAGE COMPLETION:<br> + • Covell Boulevard, F Street to J Street <br> + • Covell Boulevard, J Street to L Street <br> + • Covell Boulevard, L Street to Pole Line Road <br> + • Pole Line Road, north of Covell Boulevard <br> + • Pole Line Road, I-80 Overcrossing <br> + • Pole Line Road, Loyola to Eighth Street <br> + • Pole Line Road, Covell Boulevard to Loyola Drive<br> + <br> + Traffic count for Covell and Pole Line is currently: 19,700, it will grow to 39,440. (According to the EIR - Page 17 of the above Link) <br> + <br> + The above stats about 1 more car are simply false. <br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-04 22:00:21RichRifkin <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 400: </td> <td> Line 400: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ I am a supporter of Measure X. I even wrote an Enterprise columnn in favor of it. However, by my count, having now seen and counted more than 200 lawn signs, the No side is winning that battle by better than 5:2. I think that differential is not a good barometer of how the vote will turn out. It will probably be very close to 50:50. But it does suggest that there is more passion on the No on X side of the debate. --["RichRifkin"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-04 08:23:45SharlaDalyMoved links up. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Community leaders believe that this project will acheive worldwide acclaim for its new-urbanist plan and its environmental aspects. They also warn that this may be the last time a project of this immense value is offered to the city. One observer asked, "Who in their right mind would try to go through this process, considering the millions of dollars necessary, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County, which can approve a project on our borders with 3 votes. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/)<span>&nbsp;</span><br> -<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Community leaders believe that this project will acheive worldwide acclaim for its new-urbanist plan and its environmental aspects. They also warn that this may be the last time a project of this immense value is offered to the city. One observer asked, "Who in their right mind would try to go through this process, considering the millions of dollars necessary, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County, which can approve a project on our borders with 3 votes. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/)<br> <span>+ <br> + * [http://covellvillage.com CovellVillage.com] </span>-<span>- Pro-Covell Village site.<br> + * [http://yesonxsmartplanning.com YesOnXSmartPlanning.com] as well as their ["Pro-Covell Village FAQ"] </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 26: </td> <td> Line 28: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + <br> + * [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] information about Covell Village<br> + * ["Citizens for Responsible Planning"] -- Opposition to Measure X Site</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 240: </td> <td> Line 246: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- == More pro-information ==<br> - * [http://covellvillage.com CovellVillage.com] -- Pro-Covell Village site.<br> - * [http://yesonxsmartplanning.com YesOnXSmartPlanning.com] as well as their ["Pro-Covell Village FAQ"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-04 08:07:53PeterMarleauComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 466: </td> <td> Line 466: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-04 09:07:53'' [[nbsp]] Did anyone else receive this completely insulting "Are you a tool or what?" postcard from the No on X people? It implies that I would vote "yes" only because I was told to by "the same guys who own half the apartment complexes in Davis". Actually, I am an intellegent adult who has read up on the issue and formed my own opinion, thank you. And "half the apartment complexes in Davis"??? I was not aware that there were only 26 apartment complexes in all of Davis. Tandem only owns 13 complexes in Davis, hardly half. I also like that the message ends with "fyi-the Cal Aggie says Vote No on X". Does that make me the Aggie's "tool" if I vote no? Thanks No on X for calling me a tool. I really appreciate it! --["PeterMarleau"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-03 20:02:38WilliamJones <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 446: </td> <td> Line 446: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * I agree. If you criticize Covell Village beging unaffordable, what alternatives do we have to provide more affordable housing than the proposed development? I make $70-90k/yr, my wife can't work, we don't qualify for affordable housing program that Davis offers, and the current market is way too expensive for our income range. CV at least offers some units that we can afford and that is certainly better than nothing. I also wonder how many people crying that CV is unaffordable actually are in the market to buy their first homes... --["WillamJones"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-03 05:26:43ApolloStumpyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 463: </td> <td> Line 463: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-03 06:26:43'' [[nbsp]] I had a friend who got paid $50/hr to hawk Ax body spray at an event, so I don't think $20 is a big deal, since housing is more important than good smell (usually) --["ApolloStumpy"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-02 21:19:28SharlaDalyCon-future development <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 109: </td> <td> Line 109: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The passthrough agreement is money that the City of Davis pays the county on a yearly basis, basically to bribe them not to approve another Sacramento-type project on our borders -- BUT an out of town developer can easily offer the county double, triple, or more. If Davis is considered to be too elitest to accept a great plan with an extremely slow rate of grown (less than 1%), the county will be much more likely to take the better offer. In addition, there is an election for new Board of Supervisors next year; nobody can guarantee that future Supervisors whose own communitites are taking all the growth won't vote for Davis to take a bit of its share. The Covell Village land will probably be sold to an out of town developer if this does not pass. A project as special as Covell Village will never be offered to Davis again.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The passthrough agreement is money that the City of Davis pays the county on a yearly basis, basically to bribe them not to approve another Sacramento-type project on our borders -- BUT an out of town developer can easily offer the county double, triple, or more. If Davis is considered to be too elitest to accept a great plan with an extremely slow rate of grown (less than 1%), the county will be much more likely to take the better offer. In addition, there is an election for new Board of Supervisors next year; nobody can guarantee that future Supervisors whose own communitites are taking all the growth won't vote for Davis to take a bit of its share. The Covell Village land will probably be sold to an out of town developer if this does not pass. A project as special as Covell Village will never be offered to Davis again.<span><br> + <br> + '''Con-Argument - Future Development'''<br> + The pass-through agreement between the County and the City is not a bribe. I think that Council members and County Supervisors who created the agreement would find this statement defametory. Covell Village, Guidero and others can offer double, triple or more, but then these would be a true bribes, wouldn't it? If this is truely an issue, don't you know that with the next County Supervisor election the citizens will be questioning candidates closely about their committment to preserving ag land in Yolo County and allowing cities to choose their own destiny in terms of growth. Davis has been a slow-growth community for many decades. This is nothing new. </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-02 19:18:59PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 429: </td> <td> Line 429: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ Couldn't the kids just take the coupon, say they were going to vote yes and vote whatever way? I think to much is being made of the pizza coupons. It sounds like the free hotdogs at used car dealers, just a way to get someone to listen to your views. That said, there seems to be other shadiness going on from both the yes's and the no's. ["rocksanddirt" r&amp;d]<br> + If I had known there'd be free pizza coupons, I would have definitly stood in line and nodded my head yes just for some lunch. People have been doing that since elementary school (candy, cupcakes, etc), but I'm never really sure if it actually bought votes back then, much less with college kids now. -["EdwinSaada" ES] <br> + Woah there, cowboy. You didn't have to agree to vote "Yes" to get pizza, you just had to '''vote'''. Pizza for yes votes would be all kinds of illegal. - ["arlenabraham" arlen]<br> + Actually, it's somewhat gray, as they were promoting "Yes" votes while giving people coupons "to vote." It's not like registering people to vote even matters at this point. [http://www.yoloelections.org/ Freddie Oakley] said she would take them to court if they didn't stop.<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-02 18:45:56SamToomey <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 107: </td> <td> Line 107: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + ""Pro=Argument - Future Development""<br> + The passthrough agreement is money that the City of Davis pays the county on a yearly basis, basically to bribe them not to approve another Sacramento-type project on our borders -- BUT an out of town developer can easily offer the county double, triple, or more. If Davis is considered to be too elitest to accept a great plan with an extremely slow rate of grown (less than 1%), the county will be much more likely to take the better offer. In addition, there is an election for new Board of Supervisors next year; nobody can guarantee that future Supervisors whose own communitites are taking all the growth won't vote for Davis to take a bit of its share. The Covell Village land will probably be sold to an out of town developer if this does not pass. A project as special as Covell Village will never be offered to Davis again. </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-02 15:48:27RocksandDirt <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 431: </td> <td> Line 431: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * The traffic figures used by the no on X people are the "worst case" put forth in the EIR prepared for the project. It assumes that there are multiple trips by multiple members of each household each day. The reality of course is that there will be less then the worst case, but that traffic will get worse thoroughout town as this project is implemented. ["rocksanddirt"]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-02 15:33:50SteveMcMahonAdded link to DCN's campaign finance reports in the "Related Pages" section <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 258: </td> <td> Line 258: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * [http://www2.dcn.org/dcn/vip/nov05/measurex/ Measure X Campaign Finance Filings]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-02 15:25:09PhilipNeustromobviously anti-x event removed from top, will put on events board <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 3: </td> <td> Line 3: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - <br> - '''Upcoming event: Myths, False Promises and the Bogeyman: Town Meeting on Measure X - "Ask the Experts," Thursday, Nov. 3, 2005, 7:00-8:30 pm, Davis Public Library, 14th Street.'''</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-02 04:51:34KarlMogelComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 450: </td> <td> Line 450: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-02 05:51:34'' [[nbsp]] Because I've been called up by the Yes-on-X folks, and I read they are virtually trading pizza for votes, I've decided to vote no, despite the two buck chuck that I will never get to enjoy because it won't be here in time to affect me. --["KarlMogel"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 20:32:25SharlaDalyExplanation for removing the endorsement list. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 447: </td> <td> Line 447: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ - Kenji - I deleted it because it was already posted in the endorsement section. Sam Toomey kept adding and adding to the main description section. I can move the link for the endorsements up, but they have their own section. The con people have their own list too but I don't want to take up the room. - [SharlaDaly]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 20:28:32SharlaDalyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 447: </td> <td> Line 447: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-01 21:28:32'' [[nbsp]] $20/hour...wow...that's more than most UCD administrative staff make. Isn't this the same as buying votes? I wonder how many more people $100,000 can "hire" for the next weeK? --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 20:27:06KenjiYamadaComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 445: </td> <td> Line 445: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-01 21:27:06'' [[nbsp]] Sharla, why did you delete that list? --["KenjiYamada"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 20:25:03PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 444: </td> <td> Line 444: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ $20/hour is the figure I heard for the people on ["campus"].</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 20:19:33SharlaDalyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 442: </td> <td> Line 442: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-01 21:19:33'' [[nbsp]] Has anyone else taken the time to look at the campaign disclosures that Steve McMahon posted a link to? Covell Village Partners had spent $111,000 on the campaign. Today (11/1/2005) they disclosed that they have put another $100,000 in the campaign pot. Be prepared for an onslaught of advertising. Capital Campaigns has had job postings on craigslist for months looking for campaign workers in Davis and paying them $10 plus an hour. Their only current client in Davis is Covell Village Partners. Ask these girls who are wearing the shirts if they are registered to vote in Yolo County and how much they are being paid to be walking advertisements. --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 20:08:16SharlaDaly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 25: </td> <td> Line 25: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - The roster of community leaders that have endorsed Covell Village include:<br> - <br> - Helen Thomson, Yolo County Supervisor, 2nd District<br> - Ed Prieto, Yolo County Sheriff-Coroner<br> - Cass Sylvia, Yolo County Public Guardian<br> - Ruth Asmundson, Mayor of Davis<br> - Don Saylor, Davis City Council<br> - Stephen Souza, Davis City Council<br> - Ted Puntillo, Davis City Council<br> - Betsy A. Marchand, former County Supervisor, District 4 (1973-1997)<br> - BJ Kline, President, DJUSD School Board<br> - Keltie Jones, Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> - Marty West, Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> - Jennie Baker, Planning Commissioner<br> - Sheryl Patterson, Planning Commissioner<br> - Greg Clumpner, Planning Commissioner (Alternate)<br> - Elinor Moloney, Finance and Budget Commission / Business and Econ. Development Commission <br> - Odene Mitchell, Open Space Commission / Finance and Budget Commission<br> - Jerry Adler, former Mayor<br> - Bob Black, former Mayor<br> - Suzie Boyd, former Mayor<br> - Mike Corbett, former Mayor<br> - Joan Poulos, former Mayor<br> - Maynard Skinner, former Mayor<br> - Jan Bridge, former Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> - Ann Romani, former Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> - Sara Henry, former President, Associated Students of UC Davis<br> - John Mott-Smith, former Planning Commissioner<br> - Jo Clare Peterman, former Planning Commissioner<br> - Sandra Spelliscy, former Planning Commissioner <br> - Brian Sway, former Planning Commissioner<br> - Luke Watkins, former Planning Commissioner<br> - Kevin Wolf, environmental activist<br> - Jim Sochor, former football coach UC Davis<br> - Sherry Ritcher-Puntillo, CEO, Davis Chamber of Commerce<br> - Ruth Shumway, President, All Things Right and Relevant<br> - Charlie Russell, member, Davis Sports Foundation <br> - Kate Hutchinson, Executive Director, Yolo Community Care Continuum<br> - E. Kim Coontz, Executive Director, Yolo Mutual Housing Association<br> - Rick Mockler, Co-Housing Advocate<br> - David Thompson, Affordable Housing Advocate<br> - Lucas Frerichs, member, Davis Food CO-OP Board<br> - Davis Professional Fire Fighters<br> - Davis Police Officer’s Association<br> - Davis Chamber of Commerce<br> - The Davis Enterprise<br> - <br> - Peggy Epstein, Citizen of the Year, 1981<br> - Joyce Wisner, Citizen of the Year, 1982<br> - Tom Frankel, Citizen of the Year, 1984<br> - Judy Wydick, Citizen of the Year, 1985<br> - Bill and Nancy Roe, Citizens of the Year, 1987<br> - Nancy Keltner, Citizen of the Year, 1991<br> - Doug Arnold, Citizen of the Year, 1994<br> - Jay Gerber, Citizen of the Year, 1998<br> - Donna Lott, Citizen of the Year, 2001<br> - Renee Liston, Citizen of the Year, 2003 </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 178: </td> <td> Line 120: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village meets all smart growth principles.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;-</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village meets all smart growth principles. <span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 181: </td> <td> Line 122: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 183: </td> <td> Line 123: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 185: </td> <td> Line 124: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 187: </td> <td> Line 125: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 189: </td> <td> Line 126: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 191: </td> <td> Line 127: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 19:42:18KenjiYamadaComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 505: </td> <td> Line 505: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-01 20:42:18'' [[nbsp]] I think the pro-X marketing to students is just insulting. Anybody who looks into the matter can see that Covell Village isn't "good for students" and isn't meant to be. In the first place, STUDENTS DON'T HAVE MONEY TO BUY HOUSES. So all the on-campus skullduggery and the flyers (two of which were left at my own front door in Casitas Apts.) are pretty much straigh up dishonesty. --["KenjiYamada"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 16:57:53JackHaskelComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 503: </td> <td> Line 503: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-01 17:57:53'' [[nbsp]] I find the Yes on X campus advertising blitz the be a little repulsive. While I'm likely to vote yes, I don't need, nor want free pizza or sexual advertising. Campus is covered with attractive students who are being payed to promote the Covell project. The girls with the pink "Divas for Covell Village" shirts really turn me off. --["JackHaskel"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 16:13:35SteveMcMahonComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 501: </td> <td> Line 501: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-11-01 17:13:35'' [[nbsp]] The Davis Community Network has campaign finance reports for Measure X at http://www2.dcn.org/dcn/vip/nov05/measurex/ --["SteveMcMahon"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 16:11:38MattCzarnowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 495: </td> <td> Line 495: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + People have been out on Pole Line and Covell with signs for almost a week. Several signs claim an additional 22,000 trips by car on Pole Line daily. While this may be true, it seems like an awful lot for the number of units that are going to be built in Covell Village. ["MattCzarnowski" MC]<br> + <br> + --------<br> + There are things I don't like about CV, and I certainly haven't decided to vote for it, but I wish the people who knock it for not including enough 'affordable' housing would be more specific about what they want. Housing in Davis is ridiculously priced already. Do you know how hard it is to find a stand-alone house for less than $400k? A halfplex under $350k? How do these people want the new housing to be made affordable? Should there be more condos? More apartments? Smaller houses? Rent control? Simply claiming that things aren't 'affordable' isn't a valid criticism when prices are already this high.--["MattCzarnowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 15:53:56AlexPomeranzComment and link fix for comment above mine <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 492: </td> <td> Line 492: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Breaking news! The Yes on Measure X members were caught red-handed giving out "Free slice of Pizza for your vote!" at the UCD polling station on Thursday, Oct. 31. During the investigation following, it was determined that an active Yes on Measure X campaign team member had wormed his way in as a "judge" for the polling station. County Clerk, Freddie Oakley, shut the illegal activity down and removed the "judge." It's time to vote, folks. -<span>&nbsp;</span>[SharlaDaly] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Breaking news! The Yes on Measure X members were caught red-handed giving out "Free slice of Pizza for your vote!" at the UCD polling station on Thursday, Oct. 31. During the investigation following, it was determined that an active Yes on Measure X campaign team member had wormed his way in as a "judge" for the polling station. County Clerk, Freddie Oakley, shut the illegal activity down and removed the "judge." It's time to vote, folks. -<span>-</span>[<span>"</span>SharlaDaly<span>"</span>]<span><br> + -------<br> + ''2005-11-01 15:48:00'' [[nbsp]] Last afternoon, around 4:30pm there was a woman holding a sign at the intersection of Covell and Pole Line telling people to vote no on X due to traffic concerns (I think it mentioned something like 20 million cars). Another woman (or possibly the same one?) was there again this morning at 7:30ish holding the same sign. --["AlexPomeranz"]<br> + -------</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 12:14:38SharlaDalyneed to identify myself <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 492: </td> <td> Line 492: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Breaking news! The Yes on Measure X members were caught red-handed giving out "Free slice of Pizza for your vote!" at the UCD polling station on Thursday, Oct. 31. During the investigation following, it was determined that an active Yes on Measure X campaign team member had wormed his way in as a "judge" for the polling station. County Clerk, Freddie Oakley, shut the illegal activity down and removed the "judge." </td> <td> <span>+</span> Breaking news! The Yes on Measure X members were caught red-handed giving out "Free slice of Pizza for your vote!" at the UCD polling station on Thursday, Oct. 31. During the investigation following, it was determined that an active Yes on Measure X campaign team member had wormed his way in as a "judge" for the polling station. County Clerk, Freddie Oakley, shut the illegal activity down and removed the "judge." <span>It's time to vote, folks. - [SharlaDaly]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-11-01 12:12:42SharlaDalyBreaking news! <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 491: </td> <td> Line 491: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ -------<br> + Breaking news! The Yes on Measure X members were caught red-handed giving out "Free slice of Pizza for your vote!" at the UCD polling station on Thursday, Oct. 31. During the investigation following, it was determined that an active Yes on Measure X campaign team member had wormed his way in as a "judge" for the polling station. County Clerk, Freddie Oakley, shut the illegal activity down and removed the "judge." </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-31 09:38:59SamToomeyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 489: </td> <td> Line 489: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-31 10:38:59'' [[nbsp]] Do people realize that one of the key people involved in the Sierra Club owns a big piece of land that he wants to develop on the border of West Davis. It probably won't happen for 17 years if Covell passes. In addition, the whole "flood plain" thing is manipulation. After grading, the project will be completely protected. Much of the City of Davis was on flood plain too. By the way, there is a letter going out from Sierra Club MEMBERS who do not agree with their board. --["SamToomey"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-30 09:45:06SharlaDalyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 487: </td> <td> Line 487: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-30 10:45:06'' [[nbsp]] I know, but its the only information that I have. I don't know exactly what the smart growth guidlines are that the pro- side is referring to and they don't really say what they are either. I just know what the Sierra Club states over and over again - on their website, in letters to the editor, ads in the newpaper, press releases, etc. Another thing their ad states is that they think that this site should be included in the next General Plan process after the impacts of Woodland's Spring Lake development and the UCD housing develpment are known. --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-30 09:37:25ApolloStumpyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 485: </td> <td> Line 485: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-30 10:37:25'' [[nbsp]] didnt' quite answer the question --["ApolloStumpy"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-30 09:34:06SharlaDalyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 483: </td> <td> Line 483: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-30 10:34:06'' [[nbsp]] Re: Sierra Club saying "This is Not Smart Growth" Per their ad in today's Enterprise "The site is not within the City of Davis, contains valuable agricultural land and open space, and with homes not affordable to most Davis workers and residents, will result in more commuter traffic and attendant impacts. Nearly half the project lies in the 100-year flood plain." --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-30 09:15:50ApolloStumpyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 481: </td> <td> Line 481: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-30 10:15:50'' [[nbsp]] OK, so our Pro section says this: ''Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines.'' The Sierra Club site says: ''Covell Village, though touted to be smart growth, is anything but.'' So which is it? --["ApolloStumpy"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-30 08:55:16SharlaDalyUpdate from Sunday's Davis Enterprise. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 3: </td> <td> Line 3: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + <br> + '''Upcoming event: Myths, False Promises and the Bogeyman: Town Meeting on Measure X - "Ask the Experts," Thursday, Nov. 3, 2005, 7:00-8:30 pm, Davis Public Library, 14th Street.'''</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 160: </td> <td> Line 163: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million plus it receives from the City. However, no subdivision can be built without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis. <span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million plus it receives from the City. However, no subdivision can be built without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis. <span><br> + <br> + '''10/30/2005 - Yolo County Supervisors, Duane Chamberlain and Mariko Yamada ran a full page ad in the Davis Enterprise. In an open letter to Davis citizens, they assured the Davis Community the senario that Helen Thompson describes is unlikely. The County cannot afford to forfeit the millions of dollars that the City pays to the County per the "Pass Through Agreement", Guidaro's project has received a "Level C" ranking and has been halted and won't even be considered for years, and the longstanding commitment and track record that Yolo County Supervisors for farmland preservation. They went on to urge citizens to vote "based on facts, not fear."''' </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 162: </td> <td> Line 167: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village partners, Guidaro and other developers can always try to go to the County for approval of their projects on the edge of Davis over the protests of the Davis community. They need three votes in their favor along with the Counties commitment to provide utilities and public safety services. The City needs to support its representatives (Helen Thompson &amp; Mariko Yamada) to stave off these threats and hold the line. Most likely other Supervisors will not want a precident set that will affect planning issues for their own regions and cities. Eventually, these developments may happen and will be the subject of much debate when the City develops its General Plan for the years after 2010. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village partners, Guidaro and other developers can always try to go to the County for approval of their projects on the edge of Davis over the protests of the Davis community. They need three votes in their favor along with the Counties commitment to provide utilities and public safety services. The City needs to support its representatives (Helen Thompson &amp; Mariko Yamada) to stave off these threats and hold the line. Most likely other Supervisors will not want a precident set that will affect planning issues for their own regions and cities. <span>'''</span>Eventually, these developments may happen and will be the subject of much debate when the City develops its General Plan for the years after 2010<span>&nbsp;and the County completes its General Plan update</span>. <span>Each of these steps will take years (Go to www.yolocounty.org Board Agendas and Minutes for April 5 and 26, 2005 to see for yourself.)'''</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 23:10:16SharlaDalyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 474: </td> <td> Line 474: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-30 00:10:16'' [[nbsp]] The Sierra Club has voted to oppose Covell Village. See their website for details on why. --["SharlaDaly"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 23:07:00SharlaDaly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 160: </td> <td> Line 160: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million b<span>ucks it receives from</span> the City. <span>However</span>, <span>no subdivision can be built without</span> the C<span>ity</span> of Davis<span>' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water</span>. <span>Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis. </span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million <span>plus it receives from the City. However, no su</span>b<span>division can be built without</span> the City<span>&nbsp;of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water</span>. <span>Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services</span>, <span>which</span> the C<span>ounty cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes</span> of Davis. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 162: </td> <td> Line 162: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Covell Village partners, Guidaro and other developers can always try to go to the County for approval of their projects on the edge of Davis over the protests of the Davis community. They need three votes in their favor along with the Counties commitment to provide utilities and public safety services. The City needs to support its representatives (Helen Thompson &amp; Mariko Yamada) to stave off these threats and hold the line. Most likely other Supervisors will not want a precident set that will affect planning issues for their own regions and cities. Eventually, these developments may happen and will be the subject of much debate when the City develops its General Plan for the years after 2010.<br> - <br> - '''Factual Response to the Con Argument'''<br> - To state that developments 'will not be built on our borders" ignores Davis history and common practice. Mace Ranch exists today precisely because a No Growth Council would not negotiate exactions from the developers. The developer went to the County and got the go-ahead. Then the City was forced to deal with the developer or forego all the taxes and get all the impacts. By that time though, the City had no bargaining power and was stuck with the ticky-tacky project seen in the ground there today. <br> - Development outside of city limits is common. According to the State Department of Finance, fully 40% of the population of Sacramento County lives in unincorporated communities.<br> - The City did get the County to grant it veto rights over peripheral development in the future. This is referred to as the "Pass-Through" agreement [City Agreement 01-396]. The City pays the County an extra $1.7 million per year from redevelopment funds for this privilege. In Section 500 of that agreement, it plainly states that: ''"the City shall approve sufficient new development .... in an average annual rate of ...at least 1.78%."''. <br> - An agreement is only as strong as the willingness of the parties to continue with it. If the County did not allow the City veto rights over nearby development, the County would lose the $1.7 million. But wait! The taxes generated by a project the size of Covell Village which the County could recieve if it stayed in the County are $5.7 million at build-out [source: Covell Village Joint City/County Fiscal Analysis dated September 23, 2005 and available from the City Finance Department].<br> - <br> - Every election changes the complextion of the Board of Supervisors. At current growth rates, the apportionment, due in a few years, will give West Sacramento the privilege of two Supervisor seats. After rejecting a high quality project like Covell Village and making no plausible effort to accomodate growth, how long will the non-Davis Supervisors be willing to buttress Davis' no growth attitude while the County is in the red each year?<br> - <br> - And what about the initiative process? By simply getting 10% of Yolo County citizens to sign a petition, a developer can obtain his General Plan Amendment and Zoning by simply placing a project on the County ballot. Then every County voter – read that as West Sacramento, Woodland, as well as Davis – could vote on a project. After seeing Davis voters reject a project like Covell Village, will enough West Sacramento voters support Davis elitism? Maybe. Maybe not. <br> - <br> - Worse, believe it or not, a project approved by initiative bypasses the detailed, discretionary EIR analysis that is otherwise required. Instead, later environmental analysis of tentative maps examines not ''whether'' a project should move forward, but simply ''how.''<br> - </span> </td> <td> <span>+ Covell Village partners, Guidaro and other developers can always try to go to the County for approval of their projects on the edge of Davis over the protests of the Davis community. They need three votes in their favor along with the Counties commitment to provide utilities and public safety services. The City needs to support its representatives (Helen Thompson &amp; Mariko Yamada) to stave off these threats and hold the line. Most likely other Supervisors will not want a precident set that will affect planning issues for their own regions and cities. Eventually, these developments may happen and will be the subject of much debate when the City develops its General Plan for the years after 2010. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 261: </td> <td> Line 248: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- The [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] (both local and regional chapters) opposes Covell Village because it is "too big and it violates environmentally-friendly development guidelines."</span> </td> <td> <span>+ The [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] (both local and regional chapters) opposes Covell Village because it is "too big and it violates environmentally-friendly development guidelines." The Management Committee of the Sierra Club Yolano Group has voted to oppose the Covell Village proposal. In the past months the Yolano Group has hosted four publicly announced meetings to solicit input from membership and the community. There was overwhelming opposition to the project among members of the public who attended the meetings. After considering public input and relevant documents, the Management Committee determined that Covell Village would impose too many adverse impacts on our community and the environment. In approving the project, the City Council disregarded the recommendations of six of its commissions, including the Planning Commission and the Finance and Budget Commissions, which studied the issues and could not support the proposal. The Council ignored key environmental findings and serious financial risks for the city. City documents also show that the project would fail to provide promised affordable housing while generating serious traffic impacts and infrastructure and operational costs.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 289: </td> <td> Line 276: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + Mike Corbett is not a financial partner in Covell Village. He is an employee hired in a planning capacity. The Covell Village investors are building Covell Village. However well meaning his intentions, the actually implementation of the subdivisions features ultimately rest with the full partners of Covell Village Company not Mike Corbett. <br> + There is no assurance that Covell Village will look like Village Homes if Mike Corbett is involved. In addition to Village Homes Mike Corbett helped plan a few other neighborhoods in Davis. These neighborhoods look nothing like Village Homes. The "buck stops" with a handful of Covell Village investors not Mr. Corbett. Davis voters should beware that Covell Village represents another compromise on the original Village Homes concept.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 483: </td> <td> Line 473: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 18:19:07ApolloStumpyComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 481: </td> <td> Line 481: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-29 19:19:07'' [[nbsp]] And gee, that's exactly what I was saying and then my comment got deleted. Oh, so has the Sierra Club given any good non kneejerk reasons to oppose X given that it meets its own guidelines? --["ApolloStumpy"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 17:27:48PaulThobershortened link <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 478: </td> <td> Line 478: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2005-10-26 09:38:42'' [[nbsp]] Here is a link to Gerald Heffernon's column in the Davis Enterprise on Oct. 25: [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/25/columnists/gerald_heffernon/067heffernon.txt]. This is about as incisive and unemotional anti-Covell Village argument that I've heard. --["PaulThober"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2005-10-26 09:38:42'' [[nbsp]] Here is a link to Gerald Heffernon's column in the Davis Enterprise on Oct. 25: [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/25/columnists/gerald_heffernon/067heffernon.txt<span>&nbsp;Jerry's column</span>]. This is about as incisive and unemotional anti-Covell Village argument that I've heard. --["PaulThober"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 17:16:06PhilipNeustromcollapsed links <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 8: </td> <td> Line 8: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- See City of Davis Summary of Baseline at http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf <br> - Or, see the actual baseline that will be on the ballot at http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf)</span> </td> <td> <span>+ For specifics of the project, see the City of Davis [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf Summary of Baseline] as well as the [http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf actual baseline] that will be on the ballot.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 17:12:33SteveDavisonComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 480: </td> <td> Line 480: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-29 18:12:33'' [[nbsp]] Sort of an interesting article at http://www.californiaaggie.com/article/?id=11171 -it suggests that the battle isn't Covell Developers vs. Citizens, but rather, Covell Developers vs. Mace Ranch Developers. This suggests a corporate No-on-X motive. --["SteveDavison"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 08:09:44JasonAllerspelling <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 152: </td> <td> Line 152: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Measure X [http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm endorsement list] (Includes the ["Davis Enterprise"] ad<span>n</span> ["The Sacramento Bee"]) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Measure X [http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm endorsement list] (Includes the ["Davis Enterprise"] a<span>n</span>d ["The Sacramento Bee"]) </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-29 07:53:27SamToomeyadded Sac Bee endorsmt <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 152: </td> <td> Line 152: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Measure X [http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm endorsement list] (Includes the ["Davis Enterprise"]) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Measure X [http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm endorsement list] (Includes the ["Davis Enterprise"]<span>&nbsp;adn ["The Sacramento Bee"]</span>) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 259: </td> <td> Line 259: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were “Unfounded.”''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines. </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''"The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations were “Unfounded.”''' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines.<span>&nbsp;</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 263: </td> <td> Line 263: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-28 11:32:04AaronCharles <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 165: </td> <td> Line 165: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> '''Factual Response to the Con Argu<span>e</span>ment''' </td> <td> <span>+</span> '''Factual Response to the Con Argument''' </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 170: </td> <td> Line 170: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 171: </td> <td> Line 172: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + And what about the initiative process? By simply getting 10% of Yolo County citizens to sign a petition, a developer can obtain his General Plan Amendment and Zoning by simply placing a project on the County ballot. Then every County voter – read that as West Sacramento, Woodland, as well as Davis – could vote on a project. After seeing Davis voters reject a project like Covell Village, will enough West Sacramento voters support Davis elitism? Maybe. Maybe not. <br> + <br> + Worse, believe it or not, a project approved by initiative bypasses the detailed, discretionary EIR analysis that is otherwise required. Instead, later environmental analysis of tentative maps examines not ''whether'' a project should move forward, but simply ''how.''<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-26 10:29:31AaronCharles <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 165: </td> <td> Line 165: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ '''Factual Response to the Con Arguement'''<br> + To state that developments 'will not be built on our borders" ignores Davis history and common practice. Mace Ranch exists today precisely because a No Growth Council would not negotiate exactions from the developers. The developer went to the County and got the go-ahead. Then the City was forced to deal with the developer or forego all the taxes and get all the impacts. By that time though, the City had no bargaining power and was stuck with the ticky-tacky project seen in the ground there today. <br> + Development outside of city limits is common. According to the State Department of Finance, fully 40% of the population of Sacramento County lives in unincorporated communities.<br> + The City did get the County to grant it veto rights over peripheral development in the future. This is referred to as the "Pass-Through" agreement [City Agreement 01-396]. The City pays the County an extra $1.7 million per year from redevelopment funds for this privilege. In Section 500 of that agreement, it plainly states that: ''"the City shall approve sufficient new development .... in an average annual rate of ...at least 1.78%."''. <br> + An agreement is only as strong as the willingness of the parties to continue with it. If the County did not allow the City veto rights over nearby development, the County would lose the $1.7 million. But wait! The taxes generated by a project the size of Covell Village which the County could recieve if it stayed in the County are $5.7 million at build-out [source: Covell Village Joint City/County Fiscal Analysis dated September 23, 2005 and available from the City Finance Department].<br> + Every election changes the complextion of the Board of Supervisors. At current growth rates, the apportionment, due in a few years, will give West Sacramento the privilege of two Supervisor seats. After rejecting a high quality project like Covell Village and making no plausible effort to accomodate growth, how long will the non-Davis Supervisors be willing to buttress Davis' no growth attitude while the County is in the red each year?<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-26 08:38:42PaulThoberComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 466: </td> <td> Line 466: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2005-10-26 09:38:42'' [[nbsp]] Here is a link to Gerald Heffernon's column in the Davis Enterprise on Oct. 25: [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/25/columnists/gerald_heffernon/067heffernon.txt]. This is about as incisive and unemotional anti-Covell Village argument that I've heard. --["PaulThober"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-26 06:57:55SharlaDaly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 161: </td> <td> Line 161: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. <span>&nbsp;Furthermore no su</span>b<span>division can </span>b<span>e</span> built without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis. <span>&nbsp;</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Contrary to Helen Thompson’s assertion, if Covell Village is not approved, other developments will not built on our borders. This is a myth and simply untrue. Measure J prohibits peripheral growth without a vote of the public. Additionally, the "Pass through Agreement" between Yolo County and the City of Davis prevents this scenario. In summary the agreement states that Yolo County has agreed not to unilaterally approve growth on the borders of Davis. <span>The County can choose to vote to void the agreement and give up the million </span>b<span>ucks it receives from the City. However, no su</span>b<span>division can</span> b<span>e b</span>uilt without the City of Davis' cooperation to provide utilities and city services such as sewage treatment and water. Davis can refuse to allow access to city water and sewer services, which the County cannot afford to provide alone. In addition, three Yolo County Supervisors have given their assurances that they will not vote for development on the fringes of Davis. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 163: </td> <td> Line 163: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Pro Argument - Threat of future development'''<br> - The County CAN vote in development outside the borders. The County can unilaterally void the "Pass through Agreement" by giving up the million or so bucks it receives from the City- chump change compared to how much they'd get from development taxes. In order to receive grant money from larger government entities, Davis must grow at a .9% rate per year, something they wouldn't be doing without a development such as Covell Village or the other proposed Mace Curve. Three votes are all that is needed, and Steve Gidaro will most-likely eventually get his way. His proposed development is plenty large enough to justify a sewage plant, etc.</span> </td> <td> <span>+ Covell Village partners, Guidaro and other developers can always try to go to the County for approval of their projects on the edge of Davis over the protests of the Davis community. They need three votes in their favor along with the Counties commitment to provide utilities and public safety services. The City needs to support its representatives (Helen Thompson &amp; Mariko Yamada) to stave off these threats and hold the line. Most likely other Supervisors will not want a precident set that will affect planning issues for their own regions and cities. Eventually, these developments may happen and will be the subject of much debate when the City develops its General Plan for the years after 2010.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-26 06:46:44SharlaDaly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 6: </td> <td> Line 6: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The development requires a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, <span>but must have a</span>g<span>reement by the</span> City. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"]. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The development requires a ["Measure J"] vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, <span>with approval from the City of Davis Plannin</span>g<span>&nbsp;Department or</span> City<span>&nbsp;Council</span>. The Covell Village measure is called ["Measure X"]. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-26 06:43:31SharlaDaly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 6: </td> <td> Line 6: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Covell Village was designed by ["Michael Corbett"], who also designed the ["Village Homes"]<br> - </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 17: </td> <td> Line 15: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + Covell Village was designed by ["Michael Corbett"], who also designed the ["Village Homes"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 21:17:12PhilipNeustrommoved rel. links to bottom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 3: </td> <td> Line 3: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - Related pages you may be interested in:<br> - * ["Covell Village/Talk"] - A discussion about improving this page<br> - * ["Pro-Covell Village FAQ"] - There is no Con-Covell Village FAQ<br> - * ["Measure X"] - Passage required for Covell Village to happen<br> - * ["Predict the Measure X Vote"] - Show off by winning the Challenge!<br> - * ["The Jagged Tree"] - lore<br> - * ["Trader Joe's"] - Covell Village and Trader Joe's </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 321: </td> <td> Line 313: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + = Related pages =<br> + * ["Covell Village/Talk"] - A discussion about improving this page<br> + * ["Pro-Covell Village FAQ"] - There is no Con-Covell Village FAQ<br> + * ["Measure X"] - Passage required for Covell Village to happen<br> + * ["Predict the Measure X Vote"] - Show off by winning the Challenge!<br> + * ["The Jagged Tree"] - lore<br> + * ["Trader Joe's"] - Covell Village and Trader Joe's <br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 21:12:01SteveDavisonAdded several links <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 12: </td> <td> Line 12: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> In July of 2004, the city council voted approve the Covell Village development proposal, to annex a ~400 acre plot north of Covell Blvd., between Pole Line R<span>d</span>.<span>&nbsp;and F Street, into the City and rezone it from agricultural land into residential and commercial sites. </span> The development will add 1884 living units to Davis in phases through 2017 or later. <br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Covell Village was designed by Michael Corbett, who also designed the ["Village Homes"]<br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, but must have agreement by the City. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. </td> <td> <span>+</span> In July of 2004, the city council voted <span>to </span>approve the Covell Village development proposal, to annex a ~400 acre plot north of Covell Blvd., between <span>["</span>Pole Line R<span>oad"] and ["F Street"], into the City and rezone it from agricultural land into residential and commercial sites</span>. The development will add 1884 living units to Davis in phases through 2017 or later. <br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Covell Village was designed by <span>["</span>Michael Corbett<span>"]</span>, who also designed the ["Village Homes"]<br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> The development requires a <span>[</span>"Measure J"<span>]</span> vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, but must have agreement by the City. The Covell Village measure is called <span>["</span>Measure X<span>"]</span>. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Citizens of Davis should look forward to a very lively campaign and will need to carefully take the time to sort out the information. <span>&nbsp;</span>The positives and negatives of the project should be evaluated.<span>&nbsp;</span> You may read the pro and con arguments below. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Citizens of Davis should look forward to a very lively campaign and will need to carefully take the time to sort out the information. The positives and negatives of the project should be evaluated. You may read the pro and con arguments below. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 26: </td> <td> Line 26: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Supporters of Covell Village say that the project will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in<span>&nbsp;</span> slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. The partners and planners are respected long-time Davis locals, including Citizens of the year. <span>&nbsp;</span>It is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning.<span>&nbsp;</span> The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) <br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Covell Village is in line with Davis culture, and it adds a tremendous amount to the community.<span>&nbsp;</span> The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." </td> <td> <span>+</span> Supporters of Covell Village say that the project will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. The partners and planners are respected long-time Davis locals, including Citizens of the year. It is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) <br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Covell Village is in line with Davis culture, and it adds a tremendous amount to the community. The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 98: </td> <td> Line 98: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Covell Village is not another Village Homes; it is neither slow growth nor smart growth. Six times larger and twice as dense as Village Homes, Covell Village would be a massive concentration of very big, expensive homes on tiny lots. If approved by voters in November, it would be the largest subdivision ever built in Davis, consisting of 1,864 units on over 420 acres of prime farmland, almost half of which is in the 100-year floodplain. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Covell Village is not another <span>["</span>Village Homes<span>"]</span>; it is neither slow growth nor smart growth. Six times larger and twice as dense as Village Homes, Covell Village would be a massive concentration of very big, expensive homes on tiny lots. If approved by voters in November, it would be the largest subdivision ever built in Davis, consisting of 1,864 units on over 420 acres of prime farmland, almost half of which is in the 100-year floodplain. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 132: </td> <td> Line 132: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse.<span>&nbsp;</span> However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through” agreement runs for another 20 years. <span>&nbsp;</span>Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through” agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 165: </td> <td> Line 165: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 179: </td> <td> Line 178: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- The proposed solar units are only a fraction of the average-sized units already in Davis and are not to be included on commercial or apartments. Advocates for solar power, such as Covell Village is slated to have, ignore the price of solar panels, solar panel replacement schedules, and the effect on property values that the liens associated with the panels may have. <br> - </span> </td> <td> <span>+ The proposed solar units are only a fraction of the average-sized units already in Davis and are not to be included on commercial or apartments. Advocates for solar power, such as Covell Village is slated to have, ignore the price of solar panels, solar panel replacement schedules, and the effect on property values that the liens associated with the panels may have.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 218: </td> <td> Line 216: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/story/?story=middleincome middle income housing report] suggests that a "middle-income" family can afford no more than $387,000 for a home.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;- </span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/story/?story=middleincome middle income housing report] suggests that a "middle-income" family can afford no more than $387,000 for a home. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 302: </td> <td> Line 299: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 306: </td> <td> Line 301: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 470: </td> <td> Line 464: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 20:35:10SharlaDaly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 10: </td> <td> Line 10: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * ["Trader Joe's"] - Covell Village <span>will bri</span>n<span>g a</span> Trader Joe's <span>to Davis</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> * ["Trader Joe's"] - Covell Village <span>a</span>n<span>d</span> Trader Joe's </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 20:33:49SharlaDalyRemoved Pro argument sierra club as it already appears in its own pro vs. com <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 165: </td> <td> Line 165: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- "Pro Argument"<br> - The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations in a letter to its members were “Unfounded.”' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines.<br> - </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 20:31:20SteveDavisonNow at least one can all the relevant pages <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 4: </td> <td> Line 4: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - ''A discussion about improving this page is taking place ["/Talk" here].'' <br> - <br> - Show off by winning the ["Predict the Measure X Vote"] Challenge!</span> </td> <td> <span>+ Related pages you may be interested in:<br> + * ["Covell Village/Talk"] - A discussion about improving this page<br> + * ["Pro-Covell Village FAQ"] - There is no Con-Covell Village FAQ<br> + * ["Measure X"] - Passage required for Covell Village to happen<br> + * ["Predict the Measure X Vote"] - Show off by winning the Challenge!<br> + * ["The Jagged Tree"] - lore<br> + * ["Trader Joe's"] - Covell Village will bring a Trader Joe's to Davis</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 16:53:12PaulThoberAdded link to Gerald Heffernon's column <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 326: </td> <td> Line 326: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * [http://www.davisenterprise.com/articles/2005/10/25/columnists/gerald_heffernon/067heffernon.txt Gerald Heffernon's column of 10/25/2005]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 14:57:41PhilipNeustromdont have complete 'no'-endorsement list, but aggie says no <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 157: </td> <td> Line 157: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Measure X is endorsed by a much wider variety of community leaders than No on X. (see http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm)</span> </td> <td> <span>+ Measure X [http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm endorsement list] (Includes the ["Davis Enterprise"])</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 160: </td> <td> Line 160: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Measure X is opposed by the [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] and a<span>&nbsp;w</span>i<span>de v</span>a<span>r</span>ie<span>ty of </span>com<span>m</span>uni<span>ty</span> <span>l</span>e<span>aders. </span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Measure X is opposed by the [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] and <span>others ([http://c</span>a<span>l</span>i<span>forni</span>a<span>agg</span>ie<span>.</span>com<span>/article/?id=11008 Incl</span>u<span>des] ["The Califor</span>ni<span>a</span> <span>Aggi</span>e<span>"])</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 12:28:07SamToomey <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 29: </td> <td> Line 29: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> <span>M</span>ost community leaders <span>w</span>h<span>o</span> have <span>i</span>n<span>ve</span>s<span>t</span>ed<span>&nbsp;the time necessary to learn about</span> Covell Village <span>support the project, </span>includ<span>ing</span>: </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>The r</span>ost<span>er of</span> community leaders <span>t</span>h<span>at</span> have <span>e</span>n<span>dor</span>sed Covell Village includ<span>e</span>: </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 12:25:56SamToomey <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 2: </td> <td> Line 2: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ [[Thumbnail(covell_site_plan.png, right, 260, "The revised Covell Village site plan (photo © ["City of Davis"]).")]]<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 17: </td> <td> Line 19: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - [[Thumbnail(covell_site_plan.png, right, 260, "The revised Covell Village site plan (photo © ["City of Davis"]).")]]</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 12:24:32SamToomey <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 11: </td> <td> Line 11: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline <span>(se</span>e City of Davis <span>s</span>ummary of <span>b</span>aseline at http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf <span>or full description of the</span> baseline that will be on the ballot at http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf)<span>, cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. </span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline <span>cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote, but must have agreement by th</span>e City<span>. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. <br> + <br> + See City</span> of Davis <span>S</span>ummary of <span>B</span>aseline at http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf <span><br> + Or, see the actual</span> baseline that will be on the ballot at http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf) </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 12:22:32SamToomeymoved photo so it wouldn't interrupt paragraph <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 11: </td> <td> Line 11: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline (see City of Davis summary of baseline at http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf or full description of the baseline that will be on the ballot at http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf), cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. <br> + <br> + Citizens of Davis should look forward to a very lively campaign and will need to carefully take the time to sort out the information. The positives and negatives of the project should be evaluated. You may read the pro and con arguments below. <br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 12: </td> <td> Line 16: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline (see City of Davis summary of baseline at http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf or full description of the baseline that will be on the ballot at http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X.pdf), cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. <br> - <br> - Citizens of Davis should look forward to a very lively campaign and will need to carefully take the time to sort out the information. The positives and negatives of the project should be evaluated. You may read the pro and con arguments below. <br> - </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 12:21:09SamToomeyadded sample ballot <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 13: </td> <td> Line 13: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline<span>, as outlined</span> (http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne.pdf), cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline (<span>see City of Davis summary of baseline at </span>http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/DirApplicantsProjectBaselinne<span>.pdf or full description of the baseline that will be on the ballot at http://www.yoloelections.org/election_central/voter_guide/20041102/AL1129841148/Measure%20X</span>.pdf), cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 12:17:48SamToomeyadded link to final baseline <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 13: </td> <td> Line 13: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline, as outlined (http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Baselin<span>e-features-13-May</span>.pdf), cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The development requires a "Measure J" vote by the community as the land is currently outside the Davis city limits. Measure J requires a citizen vote on any project that requires annexation of agricultural land into the City. The baseline, as outlined (http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/<span>DirApplicantsProject</span>Baselin<span>ne</span>.pdf), cannot change without another vote by the people. However, changes outside of the scope of the baseline may occur without a vote. The Covell Village measure is called Measure X. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 12:10:35SamToomey <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Supporters of the projec<span>t say that i</span>t will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. It is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) <br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Covell Village is in line with Davis culture, and it adds <span>so much</span> to the community. The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." <br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Community leaders believe that this project will acheive worldwide acclaim for its new-urbanist plan and its environmental aspects. They also warn that this may be the last time a project of this immense value is offered to the city. One observer asked, "Who in their right mind would try to go through this process, considering the <span>costs involved</span>, if Davis votes such a great project down?<span>&nbsp;The EIR alone costs about half a million dollars.</span>" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County, which can approve a project on our borders with 3 votes. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Supporters of <span>Covell Village say that </span>the project will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis.<span>&nbsp;The partners and planners are respected long-time Davis locals, including Citizens of the year. </span> It is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) <br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Covell Village is in line with Davis culture, and it adds <span>a tremendous amount</span> to the community. The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." <br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Community leaders believe that this project will acheive worldwide acclaim for its new-urbanist plan and its environmental aspects. They also warn that this may be the last time a project of this immense value is offered to the city. One observer asked, "Who in their right mind would try to go through this process, considering the <span>millions of dollars necessary</span>, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County, which can approve a project on our borders with 3 votes. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/) </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 11:51:32SamToomeyspelling <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Supporters of the project say that it will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. It is <span>desin</span>g<span>ed innovatively</span> to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Supporters of the project say that it will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. It is <span>innovatively desi</span>g<span>ned</span> to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-25 11:50:39SamToomeyTook CON info that was added to INTRO and put it in the CON area <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 16: </td> <td> Line 16: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- <br> - The City posts different expected prices for houses in different places. A chart of costs is here:<br> - <br> - [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/CV_Chart_of_housing_types_and_costs.pdf]<br> - <br> - But much higher numbers were used to determine how much revenue the project would generate -- see page 7 of the fiscal analysis:<br> - <br> - [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf]<br> - <br> - According to the fiscal analysis, if house prices in Covell Village are not at least twice as high as current 2005 levels by the end of the project, the City will lose money.<br> - <br> - The City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/story/?story=middleincome middle income housing report] suggests that a "middle-income" family can afford no more than $387,000 for a home. </span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 33: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Supporters of the project say that it will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis<span>, and is innovatively designed</span> to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." <br> -<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;- Supporters</span> also warn that <span>if Davis does not em</span>b<span>race this</span> project<span>, we will not have the chance to vote on something like this again</span>. One observer asked, "Wh<span>at developer</span> in their right mind would try to go through this process<span>&nbsp;again</span>, considering the costs involved, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Supporters of the project say that it will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis<span>. It is desinged innovatively</span> to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) <span><br> + <br> + Covell Village is in line with Davis culture, and it adds so much to the community. </span>The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." <br> <span>+ <br> + Community leaders believe that this project will acheive worldwide acclaim for its new</span>-<span>urbanist plan and its environmental aspects. They</span> also warn that <span>this may </span>b<span>e the last time a</span> project<span>&nbsp;of this immense value is offered to the city</span>. One observer asked, "Wh<span>o</span> in their right mind would try to go through this process, considering the costs involved, if Davis votes such a great project down?<span>&nbsp;The EIR alone costs about half a million dollars.</span>" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County<span>, which can approve a project on our borders with 3 votes</span>. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/) <span><br> + <br> + Most community leaders who have invested the time necessary to learn about Covell Village support the project, including:<br> + <br> + Helen Thomson, Yolo County Supervisor, 2nd District<br> + Ed Prieto, Yolo County Sheriff-Coroner<br> + Cass Sylvia, Yolo County Public Guardian<br> + Ruth Asmundson, Mayor of Davis<br> + Don Saylor, Davis City Council<br> + Stephen Souza, Davis City Council<br> + Ted Puntillo, Davis City Council<br> + Betsy A. Marchand, former County Supervisor, District 4 (1973-1997)<br> + BJ Kline, President, DJUSD School Board<br> + Keltie Jones, Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> + Marty West, Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> + Jennie Baker, Planning Commissioner<br> + Sheryl Patterson, Planning Commissioner<br> + Greg Clumpner, Planning Commissioner (Alternate)<br> + Elinor Moloney, Finance and Budget Commission / Business and Econ. Development Commission <br> + Odene Mitchell, Open Space Commission / Finance and Budget Commission<br> + Jerry Adler, former Mayor<br> + Bob Black, former Mayor<br> + Suzie Boyd, former Mayor<br> + Mike Corbett, former Mayor<br> + Joan Poulos, former Mayor<br> + Maynard Skinner, former Mayor<br> + Jan Bridge, former Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> + Ann Romani, former Trustee, DJUSD School Board<br> + Sara Henry, former President, Associated Students of UC Davis<br> + John Mott-Smith, former Planning Commissioner<br> + Jo Clare Peterman, former Planning Commissioner<br> + Sandra Spelliscy, former Planning Commissioner <br> + Brian Sway, former Planning Commissioner<br> + Luke Watkins, former Planning Commissioner<br> + Kevin Wolf, environmental activist<br> + Jim Sochor, former football coach UC Davis<br> + Sherry Ritcher-Puntillo, CEO, Davis Chamber of Commerce<br> + Ruth Shumway, President, All Things Right and Relevant<br> + Charlie Russell, member, Davis Sports Foundation <br> + Kate Hutchinson, Executive Director, Yolo Community Care Continuum<br> + E. Kim Coontz, Executive Director, Yolo Mutual Housing Association<br> + Rick Mockler, Co-Housing Advocate<br> + David Thompson, Affordable Housing Advocate<br> + Lucas Frerichs, member, Davis Food CO-OP Board<br> + Davis Professional Fire Fighters<br> + Davis Police Officer’s Association<br> + Davis Chamber of Commerce<br> + The Davis Enterprise<br> + <br> + Peggy Epstein, Citizen of the Year, 1981<br> + Joyce Wisner, Citizen of the Year, 1982<br> + Tom Frankel, Citizen of the Year, 1984<br> + Judy Wydick, Citizen of the Year, 1985<br> + Bill and Nancy Roe, Citizens of the Year, 1987<br> + Nancy Keltner, Citizen of the Year, 1991<br> + Doug Arnold, Citizen of the Year, 1994<br> + Jay Gerber, Citizen of the Year, 1998<br> + Donna Lott, Citizen of the Year, 2001<br> + Renee Liston, Citizen of the Year, 2003 <br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 106: </td> <td> Line 155: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Measure X is endorsed by a wide variety of community leaders (see http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Measure X is endorsed by a <span>much </span>wide<span>r</span> variety of community leaders<span>&nbsp;than No on X.</span> (see http://www.yesonxsmartplanning.com/endorsements.htm) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 110: </td> <td> Line 159: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + "Pro Argument"<br> + The Environmental Council of Sacramento" (ECOS) sent a letter to the Davis Enterprise stating that the Sierra Club's accusations in a letter to its members were “Unfounded.”' The country's leading New Urbanist Andreas Duany said, " The Covell Village plan is as good as it gets." Head of SACOG Mike McKeever said, "Covell Village meets SACOG's goals for smart growth." Covell Village meets the Sierra Clubs own smart growth guidelines.<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 153: </td> <td> Line 206: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ The City posts different expected prices for houses in different places. A chart of costs is here:<br> + <br> + [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/CV_Chart_of_housing_types_and_costs.pdf]<br> + <br> + But much higher numbers were used to determine how much revenue the project would generate -- see page 7 of the fiscal analysis:<br> + <br> + [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf]<br> + <br> + According to the fiscal analysis, if house prices in Covell Village are not at least twice as high as current 2005 levels by the end of the project, the City will lose money.<br> + <br> + The City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/story/?story=middleincome middle income housing report] suggests that a "middle-income" family can afford no more than $387,000 for a home. </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-24 19:48:24ApolloStumpy <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 4: </td> <td> Line 4: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + Show off by winning the ["Predict the Measure X Vote"] Challenge!</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-24 19:18:55ApolloStumpy <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 6: </td> <td> Line 6: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + Covell Village was designed by Michael Corbett, who also designed the ["Village Homes"]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 251: </td> <td> Line 253: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * [http://www.sacbee.com/content/homes/re_news/story/10983930p-11901238c.html Sacramento Bee]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * Sacramento Bee: [http://www.sacbee.com/content/homes/re_news/story/10983930p-11901238c.html 10/05/2005] [http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/local_government/story/13762246p-14604509c.html 10/24/2005]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-24 14:47:43JamesFowler <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 54: </td> <td> Line 54: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[Thumbnail(covellprices.jpg, <span>4</span>00, "<span>Click here to see distribution of prices at time of sale. </span>Prices and build-out schedule from City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf fiscal analysis].")]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[Thumbnail(covellprices.jpg, <span>5</span>00, "Prices and build-out schedule from City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf fiscal analysis].")]] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-24 14:44:18JamesFowler <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 13: </td> <td> Line 13: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- View Covell Village housing prices at the City of Davis Web Site.</span> </td> <td> <span>+ The City posts different expected prices for houses in different places. A chart of costs is here:</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 16: </td> <td> Line 16: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + But much higher numbers were used to determine how much revenue the project would generate -- see page 7 of the fiscal analysis:<br> + <br> + [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf]<br> + <br> + According to the fiscal analysis, if house prices in Covell Village are not at least twice as high as current 2005 levels by the end of the project, the City will lose money.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 30: </td> <td> Line 36: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Opponents of the Covell Village development say that is the largest subdivision ever proposed for Davis. It would be a sprawling development of big, expensive homes on tiny lots. Six times larger, twice as dense, this is no Village Homes. Covell Village would have many adverse impacts on our community, and it is in direct conflict with Davis' 2001 Citizens' General Plan. With such significant impacts Covell Village would do little for middle-income Davis families, renters or students.<br> - -'''(Un)affordable Housing'''<br> - -'''Level “F” Traffic'''<br> - -'''Bad for Schools'''<br> - -'''Higher Crime'''<br> - </span> </td> <td> <span>+ Opponents of the Covell Village development wrote the following op-ed for the Davis Enterprise in July:<br> + <br> + '''DAVIS CAN'T AFFORD COVELL VILLAGE'''<br> + <br> + Covell Village is not another Village Homes; it is neither slow growth nor smart growth. Six times larger and twice as dense as Village Homes, Covell Village would be a massive concentration of very big, expensive homes on tiny lots. If approved by voters in November, it would be the largest subdivision ever built in Davis, consisting of 1,864 units on over 420 acres of prime farmland, almost half of which is in the 100-year floodplain. <br> + <br> + In approving the project for the November ballot, the Council majority disregarded the concerns of its advisory commissions. The Finance and Budget, Planning, and Open Space Commissions could not support the project. In making its decision, the Council ignored key environmental findings and contradictions in the fiscal analysis that identified serious financial risks for the city, a failure to provide promised affordable housing, and traffic and other infrastructure impacts. <br> + <br> + The Commissions studied the analyses. The contrast between their advice and the Council’s push to develop is troubling—and underscores the Council’s failure to respect the citizens’ vision for Davis.<br> + <br> + '''Costs'''<br> + <br> + Covell Village would cost the City money. The Finance and Budget Commission rejected the project, citing the “magnitude of the risk that this project poses to the City Council’s goal of fiscal stability.” Because Covell Village would require annexation, the City would get 30% less property tax than if it developed parcels within the city limits like Hunt -Wesson. Recently, the County has made it clear it wants an even greater share of the project’s property tax, and won’t approve the annexation unless the new arrangement is to its liking. Each 1% increase in the County’s share will cost the City an extra $3 million annually—making Covell Village an even greater tax burden. <br> + <br> + In addition, the City’s fiscal analysis assumes home prices will double over the next 15 years. If housing prices level off or decline as many economists predict, Covell Village would generate huge deficits for the City. <br> + <br> + Finally, the impact fees charged to the developers do not address infrastructure needs likely to be triggered by Covell Village, such as the widening of roads or that the subdivision would contribute significantly to the premature exhaustion of the capacity of our wastewater treatment plant. Public Works has stated that expansion of the plant would cost at least $100 million over and above water quality improvement costs.<br> + <br> + [[Thumbnail(covellprices.jpg, 400, "Click here to see distribution of prices at time of sale. Prices and build-out schedule from City's [http://www.city.davis.ca.us/covell/pdfs/Covell_Fiscal_Model_5-9-05.pdf fiscal analysis].")]]<br> + <br> + '''Unaffordable Housing'''<br> + <br> + The developers’ illusory promise of affordable housing is equally disturbing. The original rationale for Covell Village was to provide “workforce” housing for our teachers, firefighters, new UCD faculty and staff, Davis renters wishing to buy—and our children. Instead, housing will be largely unaffordable to these and similar target groups. Although the developers claim that 2/3 of the subdivision will be affordable, city projections indicate the average for-sale house will cost $683,945. <br> + <br> + The City’s analysis indicates that “middle-income” families (those making less than $96,000 a year) cannot afford housing costing more than $387,000. Yet 92% of the for-sale houses in the subdivision will cost more than $400,000. The least expensive single-family detached house will cost $538,000. <br> + <br> + In other words, of the 1,294 for-sale units proposed only 99 are affordable, according to City criteria. This means only 10 affordable for-sale units per year, primarily townhouses, versus 120 upper-end units constructed annually. <br> + <br> + '''Traffic, safety and health'''<br> + <br> + The negative impacts of Covell Village go well beyond dollar calculations; according to the City’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), we will all be spending a lot more time in traffic. The subdivision will double traffic on Covell to 39,440 cars /day and on Pole Line to 26,900 cars/day, and use up 97% of the capacity on the Mace Overcrossing. The analysis finds that Level of Service “F” results, triggering “high delays, high volumes and extensive queuing” on many streets and intersections including L Street, Moore and the Pole Line Overcrossing to South Davis. According to the EIR, “Conditions are intolerable for most drivers,” with traffic backing up on neighborhood streets, causing all the associated safety and pollution issues for children, seniors and those with respiratory conditions. <br> + <br> + In addition, Woodland is building the 4,000 unit Spring Lake subdivision, just 5 minutes north on Pole Line Road. Spring Lake by itself will have a serious negative impact on traffic along Pole Line and Covell. <br> + <br> + '''Alternatives'''<br> + <br> + Opposition to the Covell Village subdivision does not equate with a “no change” or “no growth” philosophy. Covell Village is not inevitable; we have alternatives.<br> + <br> + Proponents want us to believe that if we don’t approve the project, we will get something worse. However, in Davis voters have the final say on any Council approved peripheral projects. As for the County approving development on its own without our input, the fear is unfounded—for two reasons. First, under the terms of a recently revised agreement with the County, City approval is required for development on our borders; for this veto power we give the County a share of our property tax revenue. This “pass-through” agreement runs for another 20 years. Withdrawing from the agreement would cost the County millions in guaranteed revenues. <br> + <br> + Second, to be feasible, urban-scale development in the County would require use of the City’s sewer system, wastewater treatment facility, and other city utilities—we would have to agree.<br> + <br> + Instead of Covell Village, Davis can choose change on a more manageable scale—change that will allow us to augment our diversity by building truly affordable housing without undermining city finances and services or our quality of life. The 100-acre site of the old Hunt-Wesson Cannery and the 27-acre PG&amp;E site at 5th and L are prime candidates for redevelopment. The PG&amp;E site, for example, is within walking distance of the downtown and the S.P. Depot. <br> + <br> + Rather than respect the legacy created by citizens and councils over the last three decades and reflected in our General Plan—of Davis as a small, safe, neighborhood-oriented community—this Council majority has chosen sprawl instead. <br> + <br> + By saying “no” to a large peripheral subdivision at this time, voters will be affirming the Davis they love and envision. They will be reminding the Council of the value of sustainable city financing, affordable housing, farmland preservation, and sensible traffic and infrastructure planning. <br> + <br> + '''Signed by:'''<br> + <br> + 1) Ken Wagstaff – former Mayor of Davis<br> + 2) James Fowler – UCD Assistant Professor of Political Science<br> + 3) Eric Gelber – Housing and Disability Rights Attorney<br> + 4) Stan Forbes – Former Council member<br> + 5) Nora Oldwin – former Birch Lane PTA President <br> + 6) Till Angermann – Hydrogeologist<br> + 7) Mark Spencer – former Planning Commissioner and Open Space Commissioner <br> + 8) Dapo Okupe – CALTRANS Senior Traffic Engineer<br> + 9) Kyaw Tha Paw U – UCD Professor of Atmospheric Sciences<br> + 10) David Balgobin - WasteWater Treatment Engineer<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 44: </td> <td> Line 105: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Measure X is opposed by a wide variety of community leaders. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Measure X is opposed by<span>&nbsp;the [http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/yolano/ Sierra Club] and</span> a wide variety of community leaders. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-24 10:09:54SamToomeydeleted repetitive sentence <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 25: </td> <td> Line 25: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Supporters also warn that if Davis does not embrace this project, we will not have the chance to vote on something like this again. One observer asked, "What developer in their right mind would try to go through this process again, considering the costs involved, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/) <span>The partners in Covell Village are respected locals that include humanitarians and Citizens of the Year. </span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> Supporters also warn that if Davis does not embrace this project, we will not have the chance to vote on something like this again. One observer asked, "What developer in their right mind would try to go through this process again, considering the costs involved, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 47: </td> <td> Line 47: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> A letter from Helen Thompson, Davis's Yolo County Supervisor, warns that if Davis does not meet the growth requirements from the State, 3 votes from the County Board of Supervisors could approve a development on our borders. Currently, a development this is much larger than Covell Village has been proposed, that would jet out on the border of Davis, called Mace Curve. In this case, the citizens of Davis would not be able to vote on its future, and would give up all of the additional benefits that Covell Village would bring to the city. Helen claims that a "no on X" vote would allow "Sacramento developers to decide how Davis grows." <span>&nbsp;The Covell Vililage design was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis. One goal was to avoid the kind of sprawl that we've seen in other parts of the valley. Walking and biking are encouraged in it's "new urbanism" design. A farmland buffer will border the neightborhood's 60-acres of ["Town Wildlife" wildlife] habitat.</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> A letter from Helen Thompson, Davis's Yolo County Supervisor, warns that if Davis does not meet the growth requirements from the State, 3 votes from the County Board of Supervisors could approve a development on our borders. Currently, a development this is much larger than Covell Village has been proposed, that would jet out on the border of Davis, called Mace Curve. In this case, the citizens of Davis would not be able to vote on its future, and would give up all of the additional benefits<span>&nbsp;and innovative planning</span> that Covell Village would bring to the city. Helen claims that a "no on X" vote would allow "Sacramento developers to decide how Davis grows." </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 53: </td> <td> Line 53: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The County CAN vote in development outside the borders. The County can unilaterally void the "Pass through Agreement" by giving up the million or so bucks it receives from the City- chump change compared to how much they'd get from development taxes. In order to receive grant money from larger government entities, Davis must grow at a .9% rate per year, something they wouldn't be doing without a development such as Covell Village or the other proposed Mace Curve. </td> <td> <span>+</span> The County CAN vote in development outside the borders. The County can unilaterally void the "Pass through Agreement" by giving up the million or so bucks it receives from the City- chump change compared to how much they'd get from development taxes. In order to receive grant money from larger government entities, Davis must grow at a .9% rate per year, something they wouldn't be doing without a development such as Covell Village or the other proposed Mace Curve.<span>&nbsp;Three votes are all that is needed, and Steve Gidaro will most-likely eventually get his way. His proposed development is plenty large enough to justify a sewage plant, etc.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Covell Villagehttp://daviswiki.org/Covell_Village2005-10-24 09:53:09SamToomey <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Covell Village<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 23: </td> <td> Line 23: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Supporters of the project say that it will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis, and is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." <span>The partners in Covell Village are respected locals that include Citizens of the year and humanitarians. </span><br> <span>-</span> <br> <span>-</span> Supporters also warn that if Davis does not embrace this project, we will not have the chance to vote on something like this again. One observer asked, "What developer in their right mind would try to go through this process again, considering the costs involved, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town devel<span>k</span>opers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/) </td> <td> <span>+</span> Supporters of the project say that it will meet some of the growth that Davis is required to meet in slow, planned, environmentally-friendly manner. The project was developed over 10 years, hand-in-hand with the City of Davis, and is innovatively designed to avoid the kind of sprawl we've seen in the valley due to bad planning. The project is surrounded by the City of Davis on 3 sides (see last page of the following booklet for an aerial photo http://www.covellvillage.com/factsheets/Booklet.pdf) The Davis Enterprise has endorsed the project, saying"amenities are so valuable and so wide-ranging that we believe Covell Village will have a profoundly positive impact on our community's quality of life." Amenities of the proposed plan include solar panels on every home, a retail center, a new fire station, an 82-acre educational organic farm, a community recreation building, a performing arts outdoor amphitheater and sites for the school district, a Rotary Hall, Yolo Hospice, Davis Parent Nursery School, and 124 acre wetland wildlife habitat, 8 miles of bikepaths, and a 776 acre farmland buffer that can never be developed. In addition, 48% of the housing units will have a price restriction. The Enterprise editorial states "Covell Village comes as close as we believe possible to providing the kind of workforce housing our community has been clamoring for. The mix of housing types and sizes offers opportunities for all: singles, couples, young families, growing families, empty-nesters, retirees, the elderly." <br> <span>+</span> <br> <span>+</span> Supporters also warn that if Davis does not embrace this project, we will not have the chance to vote on something like this again. One observer asked, "What developer in their right mind would try to go through this process again, considering the costs involved, if Davis votes such a great project down?" Instead, out-of-town developers will surely bypass the City and go straight to the County. Helen Thompson, Yolo County Supervisor for Davis, warns of this possibility. Sacramento developer Steve Gidaro, who has a history of illegally funding elections, has been pushing for an 800-acre development called Mace-Curve that jets out of the outskirts of Davis, and is truely "sprawl". (Get more information on Steve Gidaro at http://www.gidaroelectionwatch.org/)<span>&nbsp;The partners in Covell Village are respected locals that include humanitarians and Citizens of the Year. </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div>