Named by Davis City Councilmember Don Saylor is the Reverend Kristin Stoneking, a campus minister and director of the Cal Aggie Christian Association. You may wonder what a Reverend would know about land use.
At first glance, the pick seems innocuous enough. The organization is self-described as a “diverse, open community” which is progressive—open minded, respectful, and willing to share and learn.
However, a further look shows that the Cal Aggie Chiristian Association and their Reverend Stoneking is at the center of a very heated battle.
Following the defeat of the peripheral development at Covell Village, much of the development battle will turn to infill—the building of smaller but perhaps taller and more dense developments within city limits. The advantage of infill for developers is that they do not require Measure J approval.
However, as the example of the Cal Aggie Christian Association demonstrates—even smaller scale projects can be hotly contested, especially those that are deemed to ruin the character of their neighborhood.
In 2004, the Association proposed the construction of a six building complex to house 38 students of a variety of faiths and backgrounds. However, the site that they picked was only a .8-acre site which had been two lots and zoned for a single-family home. The council voted by a 4-1 vote to approve a General Plan change to increase the density allowance for the lot. Greenwald, who is generally a strong support of infill development, was the only dissenter.
Members of the Elmwood Neighborhood Association objected to the size and density. They sued the city but that lawsuit was dismissed and then they filed an appeal.
That battle is still ongoing, but now Davis City Councilmember Don Saylor has put the focal figure in the fight on the steering committee for the next General Plan Housing element. This is a strong signal about the potential direction that the council might go in terms of infill development.
Those who live not only in the Elmwood neighborhood, but also other neighborhoods that might experience large-scale infill development should be aware of the ramifications of this appointment.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
The debate over the impacts of infill is a legitimate one for this steering committee. My concern about Saylor’s choice of Rev. Stoneking is twofold.The matter of knowedge and experience you have already mentioned. Secondly, Rev. Stoneking comes to the steering committee with the added mantle of a cleric.. “Are you challenging the motives of a cleric?”,”, will be unstated but ever-present during the undoubtedly heated committee “discussions”…and of course, this pick could help to politically “bless” the newly-announced candidate for Assembly.
The debate over the impacts of infill is a legitimate one for this steering committee. My concern about Saylor’s choice of Rev. Stoneking is twofold.The matter of knowedge and experience you have already mentioned. Secondly, Rev. Stoneking comes to the steering committee with the added mantle of a cleric.. “Are you challenging the motives of a cleric?”,”, will be unstated but ever-present during the undoubtedly heated committee “discussions”…and of course, this pick could help to politically “bless” the newly-announced candidate for Assembly.
The debate over the impacts of infill is a legitimate one for this steering committee. My concern about Saylor’s choice of Rev. Stoneking is twofold.The matter of knowedge and experience you have already mentioned. Secondly, Rev. Stoneking comes to the steering committee with the added mantle of a cleric.. “Are you challenging the motives of a cleric?”,”, will be unstated but ever-present during the undoubtedly heated committee “discussions”…and of course, this pick could help to politically “bless” the newly-announced candidate for Assembly.
The debate over the impacts of infill is a legitimate one for this steering committee. My concern about Saylor’s choice of Rev. Stoneking is twofold.The matter of knowedge and experience you have already mentioned. Secondly, Rev. Stoneking comes to the steering committee with the added mantle of a cleric.. “Are you challenging the motives of a cleric?”,”, will be unstated but ever-present during the undoubtedly heated committee “discussions”…and of course, this pick could help to politically “bless” the newly-announced candidate for Assembly.
Perpherial sprawl development is where the real developer profits lie
and the real end-game of this council majority. The next move in their political chess-game will be to try and make sure that infill is particularly onerous to the people of Davis.
Perpherial sprawl development is where the real developer profits lie
and the real end-game of this council majority. The next move in their political chess-game will be to try and make sure that infill is particularly onerous to the people of Davis.
Perpherial sprawl development is where the real developer profits lie
and the real end-game of this council majority. The next move in their political chess-game will be to try and make sure that infill is particularly onerous to the people of Davis.
Perpherial sprawl development is where the real developer profits lie
and the real end-game of this council majority. The next move in their political chess-game will be to try and make sure that infill is particularly onerous to the people of Davis.
greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development, and that the no sprawl line was just one way to block development.
if you don’t grow out or up, you’re basically just driving the price of housing up. which is cool for homeowners, but lousy for everyone else.
greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development, and that the no sprawl line was just one way to block development.
if you don’t grow out or up, you’re basically just driving the price of housing up. which is cool for homeowners, but lousy for everyone else.
greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development, and that the no sprawl line was just one way to block development.
if you don’t grow out or up, you’re basically just driving the price of housing up. which is cool for homeowners, but lousy for everyone else.
greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development, and that the no sprawl line was just one way to block development.
if you don’t grow out or up, you’re basically just driving the price of housing up. which is cool for homeowners, but lousy for everyone else.
“……….greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development”
??-wu-ming..
Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property..to be discriminating about which infill projects are best for Davis is what I want my council representatives to exhibit.
“……….greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development”
??-wu-ming..
Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property..to be discriminating about which infill projects are best for Davis is what I want my council representatives to exhibit.
“……….greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development”
??-wu-ming..
Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property..to be discriminating about which infill projects are best for Davis is what I want my council representatives to exhibit.
“……….greenwald’s opposition to that project is one of the reasons why i don’t take her support of infill seriously. it became clear at that point that she was opposed to any development”
??-wu-ming..
Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property..to be discriminating about which infill projects are best for Davis is what I want my council representatives to exhibit.
“Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property… “
What infill project is that? The Wildhorse Ranch property is located outside of the city limits. If the city council approves it, it will be subject to a Measure J vote. It is ag land and the developers are asking us to convert it to housing.
Personally, I am opposed to the Wildhorse Ranch project. In my opinion it makes no sense to build a new housing development way out there on ag land. I voted “no” years ago, when WHOA forced the Wildhorse development onto the ballot for much the same reason.
It makes far more sense to grow inside the city limits — as Cannery Park will — and then to grow onto undeveloped land that is already bounded on three sides by urban development and not zoned for agriculture, as Covell Village was.
If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant.
“Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property… “
What infill project is that? The Wildhorse Ranch property is located outside of the city limits. If the city council approves it, it will be subject to a Measure J vote. It is ag land and the developers are asking us to convert it to housing.
Personally, I am opposed to the Wildhorse Ranch project. In my opinion it makes no sense to build a new housing development way out there on ag land. I voted “no” years ago, when WHOA forced the Wildhorse development onto the ballot for much the same reason.
It makes far more sense to grow inside the city limits — as Cannery Park will — and then to grow onto undeveloped land that is already bounded on three sides by urban development and not zoned for agriculture, as Covell Village was.
If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant.
“Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property… “
What infill project is that? The Wildhorse Ranch property is located outside of the city limits. If the city council approves it, it will be subject to a Measure J vote. It is ag land and the developers are asking us to convert it to housing.
Personally, I am opposed to the Wildhorse Ranch project. In my opinion it makes no sense to build a new housing development way out there on ag land. I voted “no” years ago, when WHOA forced the Wildhorse development onto the ballot for much the same reason.
It makes far more sense to grow inside the city limits — as Cannery Park will — and then to grow onto undeveloped land that is already bounded on three sides by urban development and not zoned for agriculture, as Covell Village was.
If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant.
“Greenwald has publicly come out in favor of an infill project on the Wildhorse Ranch property… “
What infill project is that? The Wildhorse Ranch property is located outside of the city limits. If the city council approves it, it will be subject to a Measure J vote. It is ag land and the developers are asking us to convert it to housing.
Personally, I am opposed to the Wildhorse Ranch project. In my opinion it makes no sense to build a new housing development way out there on ag land. I voted “no” years ago, when WHOA forced the Wildhorse development onto the ballot for much the same reason.
It makes far more sense to grow inside the city limits — as Cannery Park will — and then to grow onto undeveloped land that is already bounded on three sides by urban development and not zoned for agriculture, as Covell Village was.
If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant.
I appreciate the fact that Mayor Greenwald isn’t just giving approval to ANY infill project. She has definitely stated that she supports infill projects but not at the risk of negatively impacting neighborhoods.
I appreciate the fact that Mayor Greenwald isn’t just giving approval to ANY infill project. She has definitely stated that she supports infill projects but not at the risk of negatively impacting neighborhoods.
I appreciate the fact that Mayor Greenwald isn’t just giving approval to ANY infill project. She has definitely stated that she supports infill projects but not at the risk of negatively impacting neighborhoods.
I appreciate the fact that Mayor Greenwald isn’t just giving approval to ANY infill project. She has definitely stated that she supports infill projects but not at the risk of negatively impacting neighborhoods.
“i don’t take her support of infill seriously.”
Greenwald has supported one infill project — building houses on the corporation yard of PG&E at 5th and L Streets. The only problem with her support for this project is that there never has been an infill project proposed there. PG&E says that it needs that space for its regional operations and it has no interest in developing it into housing or selling it to anyone else.
Nevertheless, I can’t imagine that Sue will put up much of a fight against Cannery Park. The only real problem with that proposal, in my mind, is that because of the railroad tracks, all of the ingress and egress will be in a narrow area of Covell Drive, leading (of course) to more congestion on Covell, and likely traffic jams getting in and out of there at certain times of the day.
“i don’t take her support of infill seriously.”
Greenwald has supported one infill project — building houses on the corporation yard of PG&E at 5th and L Streets. The only problem with her support for this project is that there never has been an infill project proposed there. PG&E says that it needs that space for its regional operations and it has no interest in developing it into housing or selling it to anyone else.
Nevertheless, I can’t imagine that Sue will put up much of a fight against Cannery Park. The only real problem with that proposal, in my mind, is that because of the railroad tracks, all of the ingress and egress will be in a narrow area of Covell Drive, leading (of course) to more congestion on Covell, and likely traffic jams getting in and out of there at certain times of the day.
“i don’t take her support of infill seriously.”
Greenwald has supported one infill project — building houses on the corporation yard of PG&E at 5th and L Streets. The only problem with her support for this project is that there never has been an infill project proposed there. PG&E says that it needs that space for its regional operations and it has no interest in developing it into housing or selling it to anyone else.
Nevertheless, I can’t imagine that Sue will put up much of a fight against Cannery Park. The only real problem with that proposal, in my mind, is that because of the railroad tracks, all of the ingress and egress will be in a narrow area of Covell Drive, leading (of course) to more congestion on Covell, and likely traffic jams getting in and out of there at certain times of the day.
“i don’t take her support of infill seriously.”
Greenwald has supported one infill project — building houses on the corporation yard of PG&E at 5th and L Streets. The only problem with her support for this project is that there never has been an infill project proposed there. PG&E says that it needs that space for its regional operations and it has no interest in developing it into housing or selling it to anyone else.
Nevertheless, I can’t imagine that Sue will put up much of a fight against Cannery Park. The only real problem with that proposal, in my mind, is that because of the railroad tracks, all of the ingress and egress will be in a narrow area of Covell Drive, leading (of course) to more congestion on Covell, and likely traffic jams getting in and out of there at certain times of the day.
i’m going to have to go with rifkin here. wildhorse is a poor place to do infill, seeing as it’s way far out on the periphery. close to the downtown core, or within walking distance from the university are prime infill locations. way out on wildhorse is not. greenwald has it backwards here.
the old cannery, like covell village, is better than wildhorse, if not ideal because of traffic issues. nevertheless, i supported corbett on covell village simply because he’s a visionary, and because if we’re going to have medium density subuirban housing in town, it’s best to do it as environmentally savvy as possible.
the PG&E corporation yard would be a great infill site. too bad we didn’t give PG&E the boot when we had the chance.
i’m going to have to go with rifkin here. wildhorse is a poor place to do infill, seeing as it’s way far out on the periphery. close to the downtown core, or within walking distance from the university are prime infill locations. way out on wildhorse is not. greenwald has it backwards here.
the old cannery, like covell village, is better than wildhorse, if not ideal because of traffic issues. nevertheless, i supported corbett on covell village simply because he’s a visionary, and because if we’re going to have medium density subuirban housing in town, it’s best to do it as environmentally savvy as possible.
the PG&E corporation yard would be a great infill site. too bad we didn’t give PG&E the boot when we had the chance.
i’m going to have to go with rifkin here. wildhorse is a poor place to do infill, seeing as it’s way far out on the periphery. close to the downtown core, or within walking distance from the university are prime infill locations. way out on wildhorse is not. greenwald has it backwards here.
the old cannery, like covell village, is better than wildhorse, if not ideal because of traffic issues. nevertheless, i supported corbett on covell village simply because he’s a visionary, and because if we’re going to have medium density subuirban housing in town, it’s best to do it as environmentally savvy as possible.
the PG&E corporation yard would be a great infill site. too bad we didn’t give PG&E the boot when we had the chance.
i’m going to have to go with rifkin here. wildhorse is a poor place to do infill, seeing as it’s way far out on the periphery. close to the downtown core, or within walking distance from the university are prime infill locations. way out on wildhorse is not. greenwald has it backwards here.
the old cannery, like covell village, is better than wildhorse, if not ideal because of traffic issues. nevertheless, i supported corbett on covell village simply because he’s a visionary, and because if we’re going to have medium density subuirban housing in town, it’s best to do it as environmentally savvy as possible.
the PG&E corporation yard would be a great infill site. too bad we didn’t give PG&E the boot when we had the chance.
Last week,the council began the process of evaluation of the Wildhorse Ranch property for development. I thought that I was following the discussion pretty carefully and I have no recollection of anyone mentioning Measure J as being necessary… could have gotten up for a beer, I guess, and missed it.
Last week,the council began the process of evaluation of the Wildhorse Ranch property for development. I thought that I was following the discussion pretty carefully and I have no recollection of anyone mentioning Measure J as being necessary… could have gotten up for a beer, I guess, and missed it.
Last week,the council began the process of evaluation of the Wildhorse Ranch property for development. I thought that I was following the discussion pretty carefully and I have no recollection of anyone mentioning Measure J as being necessary… could have gotten up for a beer, I guess, and missed it.
Last week,the council began the process of evaluation of the Wildhorse Ranch property for development. I thought that I was following the discussion pretty carefully and I have no recollection of anyone mentioning Measure J as being necessary… could have gotten up for a beer, I guess, and missed it.
This is from last Wednesday’s Enterprise:
“Because the project would require a General Plan change from agricultural to medium-density residential, it would trigger Measure J, putting the final project to a local vote. Measure J has been used only once before, in 2005 when Covell Village was defeated at the polls.
“The Wildhorse Ranch property has been zoned as ‘horse ranch’ since 1985, when Joe and Bill Duffel ran stables there.”
I didn’t know that Sue Greenwald had declared her support for this project. It’s still somewhat early in the process, so I’d be surprised that any city councilmembers have said how they would vote on the project. They don’t even know yet how many homes will be built there — that is a question being addressed in the EIR. There are a few different options, varying the level of density. To my knowledge, Ruth supports the most density, and Lamar has advocated for less density and a greater ag buffer. But neither of them, to my knowledge, has said how he or she will vote.
This is from last Wednesday’s Enterprise:
“Because the project would require a General Plan change from agricultural to medium-density residential, it would trigger Measure J, putting the final project to a local vote. Measure J has been used only once before, in 2005 when Covell Village was defeated at the polls.
“The Wildhorse Ranch property has been zoned as ‘horse ranch’ since 1985, when Joe and Bill Duffel ran stables there.”
I didn’t know that Sue Greenwald had declared her support for this project. It’s still somewhat early in the process, so I’d be surprised that any city councilmembers have said how they would vote on the project. They don’t even know yet how many homes will be built there — that is a question being addressed in the EIR. There are a few different options, varying the level of density. To my knowledge, Ruth supports the most density, and Lamar has advocated for less density and a greater ag buffer. But neither of them, to my knowledge, has said how he or she will vote.
This is from last Wednesday’s Enterprise:
“Because the project would require a General Plan change from agricultural to medium-density residential, it would trigger Measure J, putting the final project to a local vote. Measure J has been used only once before, in 2005 when Covell Village was defeated at the polls.
“The Wildhorse Ranch property has been zoned as ‘horse ranch’ since 1985, when Joe and Bill Duffel ran stables there.”
I didn’t know that Sue Greenwald had declared her support for this project. It’s still somewhat early in the process, so I’d be surprised that any city councilmembers have said how they would vote on the project. They don’t even know yet how many homes will be built there — that is a question being addressed in the EIR. There are a few different options, varying the level of density. To my knowledge, Ruth supports the most density, and Lamar has advocated for less density and a greater ag buffer. But neither of them, to my knowledge, has said how he or she will vote.
This is from last Wednesday’s Enterprise:
“Because the project would require a General Plan change from agricultural to medium-density residential, it would trigger Measure J, putting the final project to a local vote. Measure J has been used only once before, in 2005 when Covell Village was defeated at the polls.
“The Wildhorse Ranch property has been zoned as ‘horse ranch’ since 1985, when Joe and Bill Duffel ran stables there.”
I didn’t know that Sue Greenwald had declared her support for this project. It’s still somewhat early in the process, so I’d be surprised that any city councilmembers have said how they would vote on the project. They don’t even know yet how many homes will be built there — that is a question being addressed in the EIR. There are a few different options, varying the level of density. To my knowledge, Ruth supports the most density, and Lamar has advocated for less density and a greater ag buffer. But neither of them, to my knowledge, has said how he or she will vote.
…”If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant”.
Two of the issues against Covell Village were TIMING and SIZE. Heystek suggested a Wildhorse Ranch development concept that would include urban farm/community gardens and significantly reduce the number of homes to be built and traffic issues (SIZE). Greenwald, while supporting housing on the Wildhorse Ranch property,wants to wait until the West Davis housing development is in place before developing Wildhorse Ranch(TIMING)
I thought that Wildhorse Ranch was a special designation within the city limits and therefore did not need a measure J. I certainly don’t remember Wildhorse Ranch as being an outside city limits “cut out” on the missing -puzzle-piece maps promoting Covell Village.
…”If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant”.
Two of the issues against Covell Village were TIMING and SIZE. Heystek suggested a Wildhorse Ranch development concept that would include urban farm/community gardens and significantly reduce the number of homes to be built and traffic issues (SIZE). Greenwald, while supporting housing on the Wildhorse Ranch property,wants to wait until the West Davis housing development is in place before developing Wildhorse Ranch(TIMING)
I thought that Wildhorse Ranch was a special designation within the city limits and therefore did not need a measure J. I certainly don’t remember Wildhorse Ranch as being an outside city limits “cut out” on the missing -puzzle-piece maps promoting Covell Village.
…”If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant”.
Two of the issues against Covell Village were TIMING and SIZE. Heystek suggested a Wildhorse Ranch development concept that would include urban farm/community gardens and significantly reduce the number of homes to be built and traffic issues (SIZE). Greenwald, while supporting housing on the Wildhorse Ranch property,wants to wait until the West Davis housing development is in place before developing Wildhorse Ranch(TIMING)
I thought that Wildhorse Ranch was a special designation within the city limits and therefore did not need a measure J. I certainly don’t remember Wildhorse Ranch as being an outside city limits “cut out” on the missing -puzzle-piece maps promoting Covell Village.
…”If anyone said he was against Covell Village because it represented “sprawl,” yet he supports Wildhorse Ranch, he’s not being consistant”.
Two of the issues against Covell Village were TIMING and SIZE. Heystek suggested a Wildhorse Ranch development concept that would include urban farm/community gardens and significantly reduce the number of homes to be built and traffic issues (SIZE). Greenwald, while supporting housing on the Wildhorse Ranch property,wants to wait until the West Davis housing development is in place before developing Wildhorse Ranch(TIMING)
I thought that Wildhorse Ranch was a special designation within the city limits and therefore did not need a measure J. I certainly don’t remember Wildhorse Ranch as being an outside city limits “cut out” on the missing -puzzle-piece maps promoting Covell Village.