UVAP DECISION
OPENS COUNTY TO DEVELOPMENT
Over 1.3 million square feet of new retail at Masonite
Mega-Mall!
by Richard Johnson
In the early evening of August 21,2007, the Mendocino
County supervisors made history, giving a green light to rapid development
in the Ukiah Valley. Technically, their decision was only to select
preferred alternatives to study in the impending
Environmental Impact Report on the Ukiah Valley Area Plan. But in its wider
implications, this signalled developers the world over that
community environmental opposition has been overcome, and Mendocino County
is finally and irremedially for sale.
At the Masonite plant site and the Lover's Lane area,
massive, profound growth is now possible. These are precisely the choices
opposed by Ukiah Smart Growth Coalition and numerous members of the public
as expressed for years.. In those areas, as well as on North State Street,
the decision was 3-2 with Supervisors Smith and Colfax dissenting. Supervisor
Jim Wattenburger of the second district was the swing vote in the selection
of max buildout. In the 6 remaining areas, the consensus
was total.
The Supervisors selected mixed use as the
preferred alternative for Masonite, allowing for more than a million square
feet of new retail and 870 new housing units.
The Board selected residential as the preferred zoning
for the great majority of the Lover's Lane area, providing for up to 1,400
new homes to be built. The area located west of the freeway across from
Masonite is currently in grapes and is zoned agricultural, even while
surrounded by suburban residential development on three sides.
The other areas are Calpella, North State Street,
Brush Street Triangle, East Ukiah Hills, and South State Street, and South
Ukiah Valley where new development and increased density are now possible.
Scoping hearings on the preparation of a draft Environmental
Impact Report took place in September and and again in December where there
was more anguished testimony from citizens opposed to the re-dedication of
Ukiah Valley to commuter consumerism.
The existing zoning will also be mentioned in
the report, if only to describe a no action alternative to the new growth
option already embraced by the supervisors. The draft EIR could be ready
as early as April, 2008.
But the renoticeing of the EIR preparation delayed
the final decision until after the June supervisorial elections when a
majority three seats on the board of supervisors will be decided for the
next four years. Supervisor Wattenburger has declined to seek a second term.
A Business Decision;
The Ukiah City Council represented by members McCowen,
Thomas and mayor Rodin stressed the need for City/County cooperation and
regional planning.
In previous deliberations, the unanimous position
of the City Council was to retain the industrial zoning at Masonite and agricultural
at Lover's Lane.
A carefully worded letter from the city to the county
dated August 17 favored mixed-use development within the urban core to prevent
sprawl and loss of open space and agricultural lands.
The letter also specified "except for clean-up amendments
and the Brush Street Triangle, which should be zoned for mixed commercial
and residential use, we favor the retention of the existing General Plan
land use designations."
The County's own UVAP land use inventory confirms
that the current General Plan zoning is sufficient to accommodate projected
growth through year 2025.
"Therefore, the Masonite plant site should be retained
in industrial zoning and the land north of Lover's Lane should remain agricultural,"
the letter stated.
The City also called for comprehensive tax sharing
to reduce or eliminate competition between it and the County, as well as
an agreement on an appropriate Sphere of Influence for the city in unincorporated
parts of the Valley.
But having recently increased their salaries by over
40%, and faced by constant demands to stretch shrinking revenues to cover
collapsing infrastructure and social service agencies, the supervisors
may have seen themselves simply being prudent in providing for new tax
generating activities and facilities for themselves on its side of the
city-county boundary, albeit at the expense of Ukiah and businesses located
within it.
Antonio Andrade was just one of the speakers at the
hearing pointing out that the decision to allow big box development on the
Masonite property was to call for a separate city competing with Ukiah and
located on its border.
But at the same time, LAFCO chief Frank McMichael
warned that allowing for development is irresponsible unless there is revenue
to pay for it. The creation of so much retail, along with possible light
industry and residential within the "mixed use" complex will require water,
sewage and traffic services which simply do not exist at the present time.
"To plan for development," he warned, "without the means to pay for it is
a failed plan."
Public Comment:
Speaking on the side of the developers: Mr.Anthony
Daysog, representing Applied Development Economics, working with DeveloperDiversified
(DDR); Jeff Adams, representing DDR, the owners of the “plant portion” of
the Masonite site; Dick Selzer; Bob Anderson; Brian Carter, representing
DDR; Stephen Butler, representing Creek Bridge Homes; Ms. Kerri Vau; Danny
Rosales; and Ernie Wipf and Drew Nicoll.
Speaking for the community were Mimi Booth; Lisa
Mammina; Estelle Clifton; Lisa Hillegas, LegalServices of Northern California;
Guinness McFadden; Lisa Ray Kelly; Estok Menton; Catherine Woskow;
Dave Smith-Ferri; Janie Sheppard; Robert Feltman; Judy Hatch;
Clifford Paulin; Mary Anne Landis; Laura Fogg; Freeda Burnstad;
Elizabeth Lovejoy submitted a written statement for the record; Joe Louis
Wildman; James Connerton; Els Cooperrider; AlexDeGrassi, also speaking
on behalf of the Ukiah Valley Smart Growth Coalition; Leah Middleton; Susan
B. Jordan. Lester Marston; Ms. Mary Anne Miller; Mr. Barry Vogel; Mr. Greg
Kettering; Ms. Jean Harmon; Mr. Frank McMichael; Mr. Orian Walker; Ms. Daphne
Macneill; Richard Shoemaker; Kate MacGruder; Melissa Gribi;
Joy Beeler; Mr. Alan Nicholson; Chamise Cubbison; Antonio
Andrade; Janet Freeman; Jessica Clark; Barbara
Spazek; Bruce Foster; Meca Wawona; Dave Smith; Pinky Kushner;
Julie Rogers; Susan Sher; and Edwin Nieves.
Of the approximately 57 members of the public to
address the Board, in addition to the approximately 250 written comments,
a majority clearly expressed support for the small town character of the
community, the preservation of agriculture lands, and recognition
of the importance of historic downtown Ukiah.
But others were clearly favoring greater retail shopping
opportunities, a need for more conventional business development and low-skill
dead end employment opportunities, with comments reflecting very diverse
interests regarding the future of the Ukiah valley.
The Decision:
Just before 7pm, the board consensed or voted 3-2
with Colfax and Smith dissenting that the UVAP EIR study the following options:
The unit for area is ksf, or thousand square feet. A kksf is a million
square feet. The Masonite study area has been designated for up to 1.3
million square feet of retail.
• Calpella A/B -- Develop up to 499 ksf for
3 story mixed use general commercial and 168 multi family residential units.
• North State: C plus industrial and parks and
rec. -- up to 1,260ksf total commercial including 904 ksf mixed use 3 stories,
and 615 potential new housing units. (3-2 vote).
• Lovers Lane: C - up to 869 ksf of potential
new retail, and 1,434 new housing units, mixed use 3 stories, 480 ksf.
(3-2vote).
• South State Street A/B/C up to 768 ksf mixed
use 2 stories; 388 housing units;
• Masonite: B plus industry. up to 1.3 kksf
commercial, 871 potential housing units. (3-2 vote).
ª Brush Street Triangle C minus Justice
Facility plus parks'rec. Up to 817 ksf in mixed use, and up to 230 units
suburban residential, up to 315 units multifamily residential
• East Ukiah Hills: C -- 65 new housing units.
• South Valley A up to 431 ksf commercial; up to
895 housing units.
Mr. Iacofano, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Leonard Charles
assisted the Board with its deliberations/selection of the preferred land
use alternatives.. Mr. Iacofano also noted that the team hopes for a mid
to late October 2007 circulation of the draft EIR for public comment.
Detailed discussion ensued regarding key components
of the presentation, preservation of agriculture land; “pipeline” projects;
infill and mixed-use development; Smart Growth principles; potential sites
for the future Criminal Justice Center; uses for the Masonite site (which
vary greatly); water and sewer capacity; today’s selection of preferred alternatives
and the rationale of inclusion of various areas for study which will lead
to the EIR process.
Supervisor Colfax expressed his support for the preservation
of agricultural lands, stating his opposition to any proposal that would
eliminate such resource lands.
Supervisor Pinches also commented on the importance
of private property rights, noting the absence of this theme throughout
today’s commentary. Pinches of course was directing his comments at those
who would criticize landowners for deciding how to use their land.
Supervisor Wattenburger also commented on the failure
of Special Districts to prepare their MSRs, which creates challenges for
the Board, also expressing his position regarding Discussion Area No. 4 (City
of Ukiah) that the City needs to “come to the plate” with infill, further
stating that Form-Based Zoning precludes some box stores locating downtown.
Supervisor Delbar remarked that he is not interested
in a “mega-mall,” rather, he is looking for a true mixed use that will
provide the live/work and light industrial/commercial options described
throughout the presentation.
What it Means:
The decision of August 21, 2007 is likely to be seen
as a watershed choice in the development of Ukiah Valley, kicking off an
epoch of unrestrained growth with profound negative social, political and
environmental impacts on what is a surprisingly delicate balance of land
and culture.
The demise of Masonite in the 1990s came about as
Big Timber which supplied its sawdust was running out on its depleted forestlands.
Then there were the regulators who discovered a key new molded door line
had been installed without federal air pollution permits, and the pesky environmentalists
complained about the plant's daily "plume of crap" air emissions causing
lung damage in the city to the point the company was having to buy air filtration
units for anyone who thought they needed them in their homes.
Only a few years after installing an afterburner
on its smokestack which in fact relieved the problem almost completely,
the company announced it was closing the plant and moving to Thailand where
labor unions are forbidden and environmentalists disappear at night.
Workers who said the emissions "smelled like money"
blamed environmentalists for the plant's closing.
Shortly afterwards, Masonite sold the property to
Developers Diversified Realty. Today, the plant is being demolished and
the materials recycled.
DDR at first submitted plans for 700,000 square
feet of retail with 3,900 parking spaces. These were later withdrawn pending
the outcome of the UVAP process by Jeff Adams, Senior Development Director
for the company. They have hired the local firm of
Ruff Associates to come up with conceptual drawings for a "mixed use"
complex which is anchored by two or three big box stores and includes up
to a dozen midbox stores.
Then there would be all the panoply of tricks waved
at us by consultants at the "form based zoning charette" in Ukiah earlier
this year: open space, duck ponds, solar energy, tree-shaded walkable communities,
live-work, artist lofts, residential apartments located above small shops,
etc.
Once the EIR is certified and the zoning is in place,
these trinkets will head straight for the waste basket and DDR will do what
it does best: exactly what it wants.
Headquartered in Beachwood, Ohio, Developers Diversified
Realty Corporation operates as a real estate investment trust in the United
States. The company engages in acquiring, developing, redeveloping, owning,
leasing, and managing shopping centers, mini-malls, and lifestyle centers.
As of February 5, 2007, it owned or managed approximately
461 shopping centers and 7 business centers, as well as 1,170 acres of undeveloped
land. The company's revenue is not subject to federal income tax because
it supposedly distributes 90% or more of its taxable income to shareholders.
According to filings with the Security Exchange Commission,
DDR has over $7 billion in assets and annual gross income of $800 million.
In years past, it has generated about $40 million in net profits.
Mammon is here.
The New Timeline:
A complete package
of information, including the revised Notice of Preparation, alternatives
maps and supplemental information is available at the county planning team's
website: http://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/planningteam/whatsnew.htm
An initial scoping session in September generated
a wide range of community opposition to the supervisors selected alternatives
and concern over the speed of the process. A second
Scoping Meeting was held on December 5. Richard Johnson challenged
supervisor Wattenburger to be there to defend his decision, but he failed
to show.
Planning Team Guru Phil Gorny informed MENDOCINO
COUNTRY the reasons for the revision and second scoping session was the
need for caution in light of the intensity of public reaction to the supervisors
selected project alternative of August 21, the availability of more traffic
information, and the need to include the Smart Growth proposal.
The Draft Environmental Impact Report
should be ready soon. When it is released, the public will
have 45 days to comment on the Draft in writing, or in person at a public
hearing. The consultants and planning team will then prepare responses to
the comments, which together with the Draft will constitute the Final EIR.
Following another public hearing, the Board
could then vote on whether or not to certify the Final EIR. If it is certified,
the Board could then vote (probably at the same meeting) to modify, accept
or reject the UVAP. At that point it is possible for citizens to sue the
county to reverse all these decisions.
This is sure delay publication of the FEIR into
until after the primary election.
For more information, feel free to contact the
planning team -- Patrick Ford or Phil Gorny at 467-2569.
Only Two Remedies:
There are two major remedies that can be applied
to this rapidly deteriorating situation. One is legal, the other political.
This is an election year and three of the five Clowns
of Establishment are up for re-election. They are Delbar in the first,
Wattenburger in the second, and Smith in the fourth districts. Supervisor
Wattenburger has announced he will not seek reelection.
This BOS UVAP EIR decision, along with last year's pay raise
and travel cost scandals, the failure of the Impeach Cheney resolution as
well as the decision to scuttle the grading ordinance should motivate environmentalists
to finally do what we have resisted doing for decades: elect our own to
the board.
We have tried lawsuits, we have tried negotiating,
we have tried symbolic initiatives like Measures H and Y. Now it is time
we take power. •