« February 2006 | Main | April 2006 »

March 30, 2006

MOST CHICO RESIDENTS AND CITY OFFICIALS ESPOUSE THAT CHICO IS A LIVABLE AND UNIQUE COMMUNITY-NOT THE CITY COUNCIL OR PLANNING COMMISSION

I consistently hear members of the City Council and Planning Commission publicly espouse the beauty, uniqueness and livability of the Chico Community, but they seems to loose their way as they approve residential developments and outside consultant contracts.

Here are a few examples and there are many more:
At a recent INFILL WORKSHOP, the City Director of Planning explained that infill deals with more than just the density of development--the number of dwellings on a parcel. It also deals with how houses are placed, heights of homes, whether there is privacy for the people already living in the neighborhood, how the homes face on the street and the building’s physical appearance (Enterprise Record article, March 29, 2006, first page). They missed-the-boat completely on the recently approved development, now called SORRENTO (at East 1st. Avenue and Kentfield Road), where they allowed the new houses in the development facing the existing contiguous houses to overlook the backyards and sited within approximately 7 feet of the property line with sloping red tile roofs facing the adjacent backyards--I doubt that there are very many members of the Council or Planning Commission that have this kind of situation in their own living and backyard quarters. In addition, they allowed the developer to wall-in the development with a solid wall along East 1st Avenue--very unique to Chico and does not seem to square with what was expressed by the City Director of Planning.

At the recent DOWNTOWN ACCESS PLANNING CHARRETTE (I call it a Charade)there was another example of hiring consultants to come to town (at a cost of $160,000 or more) with boiler-plate ideas from other dissimilar cities and trying to foist them on Chico--I’m not blaming the consultants since I’m assuming that they were following the requirements of their contracts. Since I attended most of the 4 day Charrette meetings, it became clear from the beginning that their only concerns were related to how to get everyone out of their autos and into Downtown via bicycles or public transit—I can just see the customers coming to town on bicycles during our rainy and hot seasons. When using their bicycles, I’m sure that they brought enough money to do their shoping, eating, and drinking—if they arrive in one piece. When asked about the local statistical information on the number of bicyclist and public transit users, I was told that information was not required by their contract, nor was any estimate of costs for the recommendations to be included in their Final Report to the City.

By the way, there was nothing discussed during the 4 day Charrette (which I now name SHAM) that has not been included in other local Downtown Plans or discussions during the past several decades—except the consultants’ suggestions to consider eliminating parking time limits and substituting increased parking fees (say 75c an hour) in high parking demand areas--they dismissed the idea of enforcing parking meter time limits.

I'm certain after the Final Report is published (I understand in a week or so) all interested Real Stakeholders will have plenty to say. I wished they had attended all of the 4 day meetings, but they’ll have another chance to express their concerns when the Final Report is considered by the City Council, sometime in May.



Posted by at 02:53 PM | Comments (0)

March 21, 2006

SPENDING ANOTHER $150,000 FOR ANOTHER DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY WITH A FANCY NAME--DOWNTOWN ACCESS PLANNING CHARRETTE

HERE WE GO AGAIN. When the City Council didn’t like the results of studies they paid for, approximately $300,000, they simply authorized another study with a new name. And, without a “blink-of-the-eye� they appropriated another $150,000 hoping that they can direct other consultant(s) to come-up with answers that “suits-their-fancy�.

If you’re not familiar with Downtown Chico, you might think that the study is really going to improve the access to Downtown--that’s a “Bunch-Of-Bunk�. Downtown has an outstanding access street system, public transit system leading to the Downtown and bicycle facilities--better access and facilities than any other commercial area in the Chico Area.

The Downtown Access Planning Charrette (better called a Charade) will be conducted by several consultants from March 23rd through March 27th. I hope the Downtown property and business owners will participate in all of the scheduled meetings and not allow the Farmer’s Market groups to take over the meetings.

Logic dictates Farmer’s Market should be relocated (one block south) at the Municipal Building Parking Lot, and a multistory parking facility built on the existing Parking Lot at 3rd and Wall Streets.

It is well known that property owners and investors will not build in a Downtown (such as Chico’s) unless there is ample parking available for existing and new businesses.

This is an opportunity for the present City Council to apply some long term vision for the betterment of its Downtown—it should remember that the Farmer’s Market groups have no financial investment in Downtown Chico.

Posted by at 01:35 PM | Comments (0)

March 18, 2006

SPENDING $68,000 for 6 Chess Tables in what was a beautiful Downtown Plaza is a "Bunch of Bunk"

Can you imagine spending more that $10,000 for each of 6 so-called Chess Tables as part of the reconstruction of the Downtown Plaza (renamed by me as Downtown Disneyland)? I secured a copy of the contract, dated 27th February, 2006, between the City and Elizabeth Devereaux, which provides her (along with at least 2 subcontractors) $68,000 to construct 6 Chess Tables (also referred as Game Tables). I have to assume the City believes “money grows on trees� and there is no limit on what it pays for its toys.

Recall that there was an Editorial and Letters to the Editor when it was revealed that Devereaux was to receive $250,000 for her work in connection with art projects relating to the Downtown Plaza reconstruction--without the City requesting bid proposals, which is normal with City contracts. I can’t believe that there aren’t others in our art community who could perform the same work that has been assigned to Devereaux. I’ll be monitoring other contracts to determine what additional work Devereaux will perform.

Previous City Councils and Park Commissions had developed a plan, and were in the process of implementing the replanting of trees and other work, to replace the removal of the aged Elm trees. That plan recognized the need to upgrade the sidewalks and other facilities that could have easily been completed with an expenditure of well under $500.000. Out of the “clear blue sky� came the present plan, estimated to cost in excess of $4,000,000—it will probably end-up costing close to $5,000,000. After receiving bids for the reconstruction work (now under contract) the City had to supplement the bid by approximately $900,000--who were the City employees or contract architects that made the original cost estimate?

After spending in excess of $4,000,000 for the reconstruction, I don’t recall that the City Council was provided with the cost of maintaining the reconstructed Downtown Plaza—it will cost plenty considering the maintenance of the new facilities.

Posted by at 02:05 PM | Comments (0)