“You just got

Davis Innovation and Sustainability Campus turned down by voters in November 2020. The parcel was not included in the downsized DiSC project voted down in June.

It is currently being farmed, but the pre-application submitted to the city calls for a range of residential densities and housing types, along with parks, greenbelts and more.

More than half of the housing units would be high-density multi family; about one third would be medium-density single family (possibly town homes or row homes) and just over 10 percent of units would be traditional singlefamily detached housing.

“At this time, the project applicant is only soliciting technical feedback from the city staff,” the city website notes, adding that it is not yet a formal application and will not be presented to the Planning Commission, City Council or to voters for action.

“When and if the property owners do make a formal application, the public will be made aware,” the city said.

Pre-applications were previously submitted for two other proposals — Palomino Place just east of Wildhorse and the Shriners property to the east of that.

Palomino Place

Shriners property

The Shriners property is owned by Davis Eastside LLC, which is proposing between 1,100 and 1,200 residential units “geared toward families in varying lot sizes and densities on approximately 145 acres.”

The pre-application states that the proposal “emphasizes diversity in housing types and sizes with the intent to better serve the needs of families and housing targeting the ‘missing middle’ demographic which has declined significantly in Davis when compared to neighboring cities.”

Specifically, the proposal would include multi-family rental units affordable to low, very low and extremely low-income households as required under the city’s affordable housing ordinance (which calls for 15 percent total affordable units) and would reserve 10 percent of for-sale units to sell at an average price of 70 percent of the city’s median home price.

“While not deedrestricted, these homes will be designed and priced to be more attainable when compared to existing and other new housing stock in the city,” the document states, adding that the proposal also includes additional for-sale homes “at a more affordable level in

Meanwhile, the proposal for Palomino Place, put forward by David Taormino, would include up to 164 housing units on the 26-acre site known as Wildhorse Horse Ranch.

Taormino’s project description submitted to the city says, “Palomino Place proposes much needed housing in Davis focused on providing opportunities for first-time buyers employed in Davis or current Davis residents, offered at a price they can afford. Palomino Place also includes move-up and midlevel housing so current Davis-employed homeowners can move up to larger homes as their needs and families change.

“(T)he development proposes a mix of entry level cottage and townhouse style units, mid-level units, and second move-up homes. In addition, approximately 70 percent of the mid-level and moveup lots would include an accessory dwelling unit built at the time of the home construction.”

All three proposals, should they move forward through the full city review process, would ultimately require General Plan amendments and a vote under Measure J/R/D.

But before that, the City Council would have to place them on the ballot, and the Sierra Club Yolano Group recently surveyed the five candidates for Davis City Council to get their thoughts on the proposals.

District 4

Courtesy graphiC

“On The Curve” is the latest pre-application for a housing development on the northeast side of the city. Reynolds and Brown are proposing between 551 and 788 housing units on the 85-acre site.

District 1

The two candidates vying to represent District 4, which would be home to the proposed developments, are Councilwoman Gloria Partida and challenger Adam Morrill.

Morrill said he opposed any developments that are not currently part of the General Plan, “whether they are good for the community or not.”

“We can no longer condone patchwork amendments to the General Plan as it will only contribute to urban sprawl,” Morrill said in response to the Sierra Club survey.

“Additionally, we should be looking to develop areas that have already been incorporated in the General Plan before even considering anything else on the periphery. These areas have already been vetted for how they fit into the existing community.”

Partida said simply that “every project that is to be put forward to voters should meet all our planning requirements.”

Over in District 1, three candidates are in the race for council, including incumbent Dan Carson.

Carson said, “To my knowledge, an official building application has been submitted to the city for only one of the three projects mentioned in this question and the council has not yet discussed whether the city should process any of them should applications for the additional projects mentioned come our way.

“I note that the council has not been provided key details that would be needed to assess whether we should proceed with these proposals, such as their potential fiscal implications for the city or how or if they are consistent with the city’s housing goals outlined in our draft Housing Element. Until such information comes forward, there is insufficient information to allow me to determine their merit and what if anything should happen with them.”

Carson’s challengers — Bapu Vaitla and Kelsey Fortune — did weigh in.

Vaitla said, “of the three proposals that have been submitted thus far for the north/northeast Davis periphery, I prefer Shriners. On The Curve and then Palomino have serious weaknesses.”

Specifically, Vaitla focused on affordable housing, saying, “while the Shriners pre-application doesn’t provide details about the affordable mix or percentage, the expressed intention to build multifamily units within the parameters of the Affordable Housing Ordinance is a good start. I also support the intention to price 10 percent of the units at 70 percent of the city’s median home price; however, these units should be deedrestricted to stay affordable.”

Vaitla added that, “the Shriners proposal does not provide enough detail on mitigation of the loss of high-value agricultural land. In short, the Shriners proposal has some promising elements, but I reserve support or opposition until more specifics come forth.”

As for the other two proposals, Vaitla said the preapplication for On The Curve “offers few details on inclusionary housing, affordable for-sale properties, or open space/agricultural land/habitat impacts. There is promise here in building a denser subdivision than is typical in Davis, but there are also major concerns, including with traffic impacts and poor transit connections.”

Finally, Vaitla said, “I believe the Palomino Place pre-application in its present form could be greatly improved. There is very little in the way of inclusionary housing or deed-restricted for-sale affordable housing in the plan. While I respect the intention to construct workforce housing, I believe the target income mix could be weighted more heavily towards entry-level buyers. In addition, there is little description of mitigation measures for impacts on open space.”

Fortune said she is generally not a fan of peripheral development and “at the very least, all three of these projects need to be improved.”

Palomino Place, she said, makes the most sense in that it is a small area surrounded by current development on three sides and adjacent to a grade-separated multi-use path under Covell.

She questioned the affordable housing element and the width of streets, but said, “I could get on board with this development with significant improvements.”

Fortune said she would be less likely to support the Shriners and On The Curve proposals, but noted details are still vague about both, as they are still just preapplications.

Shriners, said Fortune, “is a very large project” and while it would help address the housing shortage in town, “the city should ask for more.

“It has 15 percent affordable housing which should be higher,” said Fortune.

Additionally, she said, “I would much rather see a development on the west of Wildhorse as it is adjacent to a shopping center and again surrounded by existing development on three sides.

“It is unlikely I would support this project,” Fortune said of the Shriners proposal.

Likewise On The Curve, which Fortune said is also a very large project still vague in details.

“It would be difficult in my mind to justify building this disconnected from the rest of town, but if they are willing to provide 30 percent affordable housing and sell additional units through the Affordable Ownership Housing Program, as well as providing significant funds to better public transit, perhaps I could get on board.”

However, she added, “it is highly unlikely that I would support this project.”

Information about all three proposals can be found at https://www. cityofdavis.org/city-hall/ community-developmentand-sustainability/development-projects. — Reach Anne TernusBellamy at aternus@ davisenterprise.net. Follow her on Twitter at @ATernusBellamy.