City Staff Pushes Forward on Development As Though It Were Business As Usual
On an item that might seem to be a relatively mundane status report on development, a few things really jump out as staff seems to be pushing for new development and following the council 1% growth guidelines despite 362 units that city staff admits have been approved but “stalled” due to current housing market conditions. That’s what the council faces on Tuesday night as it considers an item entitled “Residential Development Status Report” but is actually not merely the informational item the title implies, but rather an action plan that could Davis on a path to far more development in the next three years.
Despite admitting that the housing market is in poor shape, the city would appear to be pushing for 692 units through 2013, a number that apparently includes 362 units that are already approved.

The Sacramento Bee yesterday ran a story under the headline, “Davis Councilman Won’t Budge, May Force Costly Special Election.” In it, the Sacramento Bee firmly sticks its nose into an internal Davis political dispute as Don Saylor who ran unopposed in a supervisor’s race this year, has said repeatedly he intends to remain in office in Davis until he takes office as a member of the County Board of Supervisors.
Last year, the city commissioned the consultants, Citygate to do a study of fire staffing needs. Much to the chagrin of those who have advocated for a fourth Davis firestation, Citygate found that such an expensive endeavor may not be necessary.

The strange saga of NewPath continues as now the city of Davis has filed a complaint with the California Public Utilities Commission CPUC) alleging that the telecommunications company had begun construction on four of its facilities prior to receiving a Notice of Proposed Construction and Application for Determination of Exemption from CEQA (“NPC”) from the Energy Division of the CPUC.
Yolo County Superior Court Judge David Reed ruled against attempts by Joseph Whitcombe to change the ballot language on Measure R and denied the temporary injunction. According to Judge Reed, the language in Measure J had used the same title, it was approved back then, and has remained on the books for ten years.