To date, a Change.org petition that calls “upon the University of California Davis to keep the Russell, Howard, Toomey and A-Street fields permanently as open playing fields in their current (2016) configuration” has received more than 1400 signatures.
The proposal to put student housing on the fields bordering the south side of Russell Boulevard has received near unanimous and strong opposition from the Davis and campus communities alike, and yet, according to our latest information, while the university has reduced the potential development in that location, they have not pulled it yet.
As the petition notes, “recent versions of the UCD Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) called for building housing, academic, or administrative buildings on the sites of two or more of above mentioned fields. This would greatly diminish athletic space at the core of campus and open space between campus and the city.”
It adds, “These intramural (IM) fields provide valuable space for IM and club sports and other activities important to health and physical and mental well-being of students and other Davis residents and are central to student life because of their central location.”
The key question we have to ask is why? It would seem only logical that the university would follow the path of least resistance here.
I have a few thoughts on the entire process.
While opinions are divided within the Davis community on the issue of how much and where to put additional housing in the city, most everyone agrees that UC Davis’ growth policies have driven a lot of the new demand for housing in the city. Further, over the course of the last several decades, UC Davis has not put their share of housing on campus and has not honored commitments to increase their share of on-campus housing.
When they have built new housing on campus, it has often been slow to come, expensive and delayed. That was the case, for instance, with West Village.
During their Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) process, the university has been pushed by city leaders and members of the community to agree to provide more housing on campus. After initially issuing a vague statement that they would be unable to provide housing to accommodate all of the projected student growth, they eventually put a number on that and said they would house 90 percent of new students.
While 90 percent of new students is better than they were initially promising, it does not accommodate all new students, it does not accommodate new faculty and staff who will be hired to accommodate somewhere between 6000 and 7000 new students in the next decade, and it does not accommodate current housing shortfalls – that have driven the vacancy rate under one percent and stressed housing prices and the availability of single-family housing in Davis.
At the same time, UC Davis is not suffering for lack of available land. The most obvious location would be to build around West Village where land is available and infrastructure is there.
So why did the university throw out Russell, Howard and Toomey fields as potential spots for housing? That is not clear. Even less clear is why they would continue to leave something as an option out there in the face of pushback and near unanimous opposition.
Do they see it as a bargaining chip? Are they thinking they can trade it for something they want from the community? None of it makes a lot of sense.
In our view, when Helen Thomson comes out in opposition to a project, as she did back in August, it makes sense to re-think it.
Why the university seems to be dragging its heels on removing the proposal completely is perplexing, at best.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I was riding my bike there the other day and looking at the amount of space there. Its a really big space. They could easily use some of it for housing without impacting current uses out of existence. It is also close to the campus core. That Helen Thompson went Nimby shouldn’t surprise anyone, its a normal reaction in Davis. The days of opposition to housing in California are coming to an end. Its a question of when not if. See the link below.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/14/business/mountain-view-california-confronts-housing-crisis.html
Actually Misanthrope, Russell Field is no bigger than the fields your and my kid’s soccer tournament was this weekend. Would you advocate for building on those fields too?
There are many other options for were UCD can build. They are currently only proposing 200 beds in the buildings on the fields. Those can easily be incorporated elsewhere on campus. In fact the campus can and should build even more than that.
Actually I would. There was a bill passed recently that allows school districts to build housing on land they own to attract teachers who otherwise couldn’t afford to buy in the community in which they teach. A problem also faced by DJUSD. The school district could easily build subsidized housing there and the community could acquire much cheaper land outside the limit line for soccer fields just as Legacy did. If the school district does build housing for staff they have other places to do it and probably wouldn’t want the fight but since you asked as a hypothetical I answered in kind.
It was nice meeting your family there.
You mean like when she signed the letter opposing shared fire management?
I have never met Helen Thomson though perhaps she is referenced because she spends her time playing IM sports and does not go to stores and restaurants and therefore sets an example of the lifestyle she demands others lead? Could that be it?
That would be a no
So “leading by example” is out of fashion?
quielo
“therefore sets an example of the lifestyle she demands others lead? Could that be it? “
Honest question. When have you heard Helen Thompson “demand that others lead” any particular lifestyle ? You say that you do not know her. Well, I do. And I have never heard her dictate anything to anyone. So, specific examples please.
Jim: “a project”
“The most obvious location would be to build around West Village where land is available and infrastructure is there.” Only if you are stupid. Otherwise the most obvious place to build is close to stores, restaurants, and other venues students want and will push them to live a car-free lifestyle that the University wants.
quielo, you repeatedly post this falsehood that West Village is not close to stores, when there is actually a convenience store in West Village itself, and it is less than 5 minutes by bike to Trader Joes and University Mall. Once it is further built out there will be even more amenities and stores in West Village itself.
I will add though that this article overlooks a lot of other excellent places to building housing on campus by only mentioning West Village. Orchard Park has to be on top of the list, and can be built taller and denser than before. The Cowell Building and Regan Hall are an excellent place for taller dorms. The open areas by the Football Stadium are also a good place for housing. A redeveloped Russell Park could house many more students than it does now. There is a plan to redevelop Solano Park, but it can have much more housing built in it and should include the parking and adjacent temporary buildings at First and Old Davis Road to name a few.
Try Google maps sometime.
Google maps shows it is a 5 minute bike ride from West Village to University Mall.
Perhaps you are having operator error.
Peet’s Coffee, 231 E Street, Davis, CA 95616
By Bicycle From:
West Village Apartments, 1580 Jade Street, Davis, CA 95616 10 min 2.0 miles
Howard Field, Davis, CA 95616 4 min 0.8 mile
I know which is better for me.
Your making the wrong comparisons
Starbucks at University mall from West Village – 5 Minutes.
Pete’s Coffee from Tangelwood or other South Davis Apartments 5 minutes or more
Pete’s Coffee from the apartments on Alvarado – 10 minutes or more
Pete’s Coffee from UCDavis student housing at Adobe Apartments 14 minutes
Pete’s Coffee from apartments on Portage Bay (including UCDavis student housing at Arlington Farm Apartments) – 15 minutes by bike
West Village is closer to Downtown than many of the apartment complexes in Davis that house students including 2/3 of the UCD master lease apartment complexes.
West Village is even better when you look at distance to the core campus.
Central locations like Russell field and the core of campus are best used for activities (like class rooms and athletic fields) that are used by large number of students who come from all of the surrounding areas.
quielo also ignores all of the other great locations for student housing posted above.
“Central locations like Russell field and the core of campus are best used for activities (like class rooms and athletic fields) that are used by large number of students who come from all of the surrounding areas”
Far more people eat dinner and shop for stuff than play sports and they participate in these activities more regularly.
Making this about sports is a mistake. This is about an inappropriate location for additional housing.
No one is proposing restaurants or stores be built on the Russell Blvd Fields.
There are already both centrally located and neighborhood stores in Davis, and on campus. It certainly does seem the Coffee House and the Book store will need to be expanded if they are going to meet the needs of the 7,000 new students coming to campus in the next 10 years.
“Do they see it as a bargaining chip? Are they thinking they can trade it for something they want from the community? “
This is what occurs when there is a lack of transparent communication. This may be the case, or it may equally well not be. We do not have any way of knowing since the university is not addressing the issue openly. While some may see this is their right, or just the way that things are currently done, I see it as deleterious to an open collaborative process. If the university cared about cooperation with the city, a good first step would be complete honesty with regard to their thought processes as opposed to hoping to achieve a “winning strategy” in what could be a non zero sum game.
How would an ‘open collaborative process’ with individuals in the community benefit the University?
If there is no tangible benefit to the University, there is no rational reason to change their procedures.
There is likely good reason for the University to cooperate with the City, but that is not the same as responding to the demands of individuals or an on-line petition. Residents of the City are represented by our elected officials and professional staff, so appropriate cooperation would involve discussions/meetings/agreements between the University leadership, the CC and the professional staff of both entities. Individual residents have no rational reason to expect a ‘place at the table’ as that would simply make an already difficult process virtually impossible.
+1
Mark and Quielo
I read your comment a little differently than I am sure you intended. I believe in a society in which all individuals have the right, and often the responsibility to make their point of view known. You have no problem when developers and supporters speak before the city council or commission meetings and yet you are quite vocal in criticizing those who hold a different view when they speak out. I realize that you have not said this directly, but what it boils down to for me, is “If you disagree with my point of view, you should just shut up.” If I don’t have that about right, please clarify.
I don;t believe that people should shut up. I do believe that people who only represent themselves should say so and not pretend to represent me. The point here is that the self-appointed do not have a right to represent me and demand to negotiate on behalf of the people of Davis.
“If you disagree with my point of view, you should just shut up.”
They are free to comment and represent their point of view. I do object to self-appointed people demanding a “seat at the table” to ostensibly represent me.
The striking thing to me is that I have no clue what UC Davis is doing. A few years ago they were launching their own Solano Gateway with Nishi Gateway. The university was warned at that time that the city was an unreliable partner. Turns out the city pushed Nishi forward, it passed the council and got on the ballot. UCD fumbled the ball from the start. They dropped Solano Gateway, slowplayed the connector, and in a close election, might have cost the city Nishi. Now they are playing games with this. I don’t get it. Mark West, stop defending UCD.
I am not defending UCD? I am defending our form of government from the noisy few who believe their voice (and vote) is more important than any other. We are already represented in this process by our elected officials, both at the City and State levels. The University has no rational reason to heed anything you or I have to say as individuals.
If you want to call me out by name, have the personal integrity to sign your own.
Such as people who seem to post in favor of every building project no mater where? Or its OK to be the loudest voice in the room because your so sure your right?
Can’t we reverse that as well though to put it back on the few that want no project or virtually no project and get their way because they are the noisiest in the room?
The only reason I bother to post here is to attempt to balance out the ‘no on everything’ echo chamber that frequently typifies this site. I do not unconditionally support every development project, but I do unconditionally support our planning process, a process that I see being degraded by those who believe their opinions and selfish wants are more important than the needs of all of the City’s residents.
I have no belief that I am always right, but I know that the self-centered views that are frequently expressed here will not benefit the City as a whole. We have serious problems here in Davis that need to be addressed and this ongoing discussion of what the University ‘should’ do is nothing but a time-sucking side show. Our focus should be on the problems we can control, and those are the problems of Davis, not those of the University.
Mark, actually, I personally don’t feel like I have a single elected representative on the Davis CC.
You actually have 5… perhaps you mean not one with your hand up the backside to speak your “voice”… a “puppet”, if you will…
Why is that Mike? Did you not vote in the City Council elections of 2014 or 2016?
Thanks to David for another thoughtful commentary. It is indeed difficult to figure out the motives and thought processes of UCD. The draft LRDP update and other reports released by UCD continually emphasize how the university wants to use the LRDP to increase “connectivity” among students. How can a plan that will in fact cause more students to live off campus in 2027-28 than occurs now in any way logically be regarded as enhancing connectivity? More students commuting over longer distances to campus–from cities as far away as Winters, Woodland, Sacramento and beyond–does not appear to me as an example of “enhanced connectivity.”
Some Vanguard readers have stated that expanding on-campus housing at the West Village site would be inconvenient for students because it would be further from the core campus and downtown Davis amenities. In terms of commuting time by biking or Unitrans bus, an expanded West Village would still be much better than the current situation in which hundreds (if not thousands) of UCD students commute from distant apartment complexes north of Covell and west of Route 113.
Here’s another interesting observation. UCD continually claims it does not have the resources to build more on-campus housing, yet according to the Enterprise, UCD was one of 10 bidders on the Interland business park recently sold to Marc Friedman. Does anyone know how much UCD bid on the property? It obviously had to be many millions of dollars. If UCD had won the bid, where would have the funds come from to pay for the property? It seems odd that UCD can easily come up with funds when it wants to. UCD obviously does not care about the City of Davis, because if the university had successfully bought the Interland site, property tax payments to the City of Davis would have ceased. This, of course, would have been greatly detrimental to our city’s finances.
Are you kidding me? that is what developer’s do…. Ever since John Meyer became a VC …and the real estate office came to fruition, there are now realtors, developers et al…advising how to best and more quickly build up the campus, right?
Russell Field is way cheaper…the infrastructure is in… no need to put long miles of cable, sewer and so on..
Those of us on the corner of Hutch and Larue and the other nearby streets didn’t want that parking structure either, right?
UC can do what they want, right? and they do..
Unlike in the City where we vote for those who run amuk, we cannot vote for those who run amuk on campus, right?
thank you
The same infrastructure is in place at West Village or anywhere else they want to build.
of course, but it is not part of the west village agenda…and don’t get me wrong, I don’t agree with the building on that spot, but the developers are pushing it also.
follow the money and LEARN the truth..
most housing on campus now makes huge bucks for the developers who build it and run it..
UCD is now only paying the high costs for DORM>..which have different rules than the developers who are allowed to build on the UCD Land….
I have discussed these topics ad infinitum on other threads…many were scrubbed…and others are hard to find.
David, we really do need a better search engine..
I have guys in my family who could help you….. I no longer have time for techie stuff …. though I still enjoy doing my own troubleshooting…
Follow the money and learn the truth….
UCD wanted that space for things which are too expensive on campus… the Center for Neuroscience needs MORE space..and it if is in leased space it qualifies for “off-campus” F & A rates, right?
That is why UCD now has the Hatch folks in the former roller ball space…and much of the downtown is also filled with UCD departments..
CBS almost bought into the Monsanto space…formerly Cal Gene space on fifth…but it was going to be too pricey and not large enough…
Build out Russel Fields. It is the right thing to do since Davis NIMBYs have refused housing anywhere else and demanded that UCD build on its on land.
I am so tired of the whiny, entitled Davis NOE people. I have been lambasted repeatedly for calling them on their disingenuous claims that they are rational and deserving of respectful dialog. They have a single agenda to block any and all housing development. They only that they support is infeasible… they know this and that is why they claim to support it. They think it gives them cover for being reasonable and supportive of building more housing. But here we have a reasonable proposal for housing on UCD land and they reject it.
The will reject everything.
So just stop listening to them and build.
Slightly off-topic, but… many of those you describe claim to be for “community”, only mean it if others contribute to it…
A few are notable for wanting folk to pay more for schools, the poor/underserved, but do not do so themselves until everyone “has to”… at least the president-elect is ‘honest’ about it… not known for his philanthropy, he would cut back on government-funded philanthropy…
Funnier yet, some of those same folk deride those of spiritual/religious convictions that actually put their money where their faith is, without demanding others do the same…
Guess you have not been paying that close of attention to this issue. Most of the people working to save the fields are students and others that don’t fit neatly into your NOE fairy tale.
Grok’s statement is really disingenuous. The issue started with a bunch of people living on the other side of Russell getting involved. Students were kind of brought in as a secondary group. But even at the August 31 council meeting, there were not students involved. They were secondary to this. I agree with Grok this is broader than just NOE, but to argue most of the people working to save the fields are students is really dishonest.
students are great activists….just get them involved and they will do anything for pizza….even if they don’t really give a f……
and yes, the first folks were the wealthy who live nearby
and likely this is not an issue the UAW and or Teamsters will be funding either….so perhaps these students actually care about the fields…right? who knows
As far as I am aware the only student who posts here regularly is Matthew and he is not a fan of moving the students to the south 40 to protect the bourgeois.
There were students involved, but none spoke at that August Council meeting. After more students where back in town in September and sports clubs started back up and ASUCD resumed meeting there was much more visible student involvement. For example, the ASUCD Senate absolutely grilled a LRDP planner in a meeting, and ASUCD OASR has taken up Russell Fields as one of their projects and called a special meeting with the planners where again the planners where grilled. A follow up ASUCD OASR meeting with the planners is coming soon.
I guarantee that the students involved would take kindly to being called a secondary group or the suggestion that they work for Pizza.
There were students involved, but none spoke at that August Council meeting. After more students where back in town in September and sports clubs started back up and ASUCD resumed meeting there was much more visible student involvement. For example, the ASUCD Senate absolutely grilled a LRDP planner in a meeting, and ASUCD OASR has taken up Russell Fields as one of their projects and called a special meeting with the planners where again the planners where grilled. A follow up ASUCD OASR meeting with the planners is coming soon.
I guarantee that the students involved would not take kindly to being called a secondary group or the suggestion that they work for Pizza.
My neighbor is just having a bad Monday morning … if you meet him he’s actually quite a sweetheart … just telling it frankly …
really, he is much more modest than the likes of BO and HRC>>>.
Marina, yes, he is rather modest and doesn’t toot his own horn and business skills, to put it frankly …
ha ha…. I was talking about the Donald not the frankly sock puppet…ha ha…
I like sock puppets. Used them to make my kids giggle when they were young.
One thing about me… I will debate strongly and harshly, but I will break bread with anyone that isn’t dishonest and/or hostile. Some of my favorite people in the world have opposite views on almost everything.
I also like people that are strongly opinionated and tend to ramble with a lot of nonsense in-between nuggets of relevancy… so please keep posting Marina.
I was kinda late to the DV dance so I have no idea who the f@@@@@@@ most of you a@@@@@@@@ are, right?
only the ones from the days when I was much more visible…some of you may have known me in other lifetimes…as an undergrad (this name) as a GATE parent another name and so on…right?
most people do not forget me…ha ha……but I have morphed over the decades…and some of you say you remember me, and if you use your real name and I don’t remember you, heck you were simply not memorable…that was never my problem…cya
and for the first couple of decades I was way more quiet…though never this active either….as I had other things to do besides be an activist, right? and English was my third language so I was kinda shy…
i was wondering who threw that loaf of nut bread over the fence …