VALLEJO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

 DEPARTMENT

CALLAHAN PROPERTY COMPANY LLC

July 23, 2012 Meeting to present proposed changes to the Vallejo Waterfront Plan

7/25/12

By Hatfield McCoy

Back in the mid 1990s, the City of Vallejo decided they wanted to revitalize Vallejo’s waterfront. The Waterfront had fallen victim to unsuccessful redevelopment in the 1960s and the other city sprawl that drew businesses away from downtown. The 60s Redevelopment was a huge undertaking to address blight on lower Georgia Street and along the waterfront. You can see from old Vallejo pictures what used to be the “before”: 12 city blocks, street after street of Victorians, an Andrew Carnegie Library, a Julia Morgan designed Women’s Club: some real gems, all torn down to make way for the JFK Library Building, City Hall, Marina Vista, Marina Towers, etc.

In April of 1997, the City awarded exclusive rights to negotiate a Waterfront Masterplan to the DeSilva Group. DeSilva then teamed up with Callahan Properties to create Callahan DeSilva LLC. In December, 2011, DeSilva & Callahan Properties quietly parted ways, transferring all the rights and responsibilities of the Waterfront Disposition and Development Agreement to Callahan Property Company, LLC.

Up until recently, the Waterfront Plan was to generate millions of “tax increment”. Tax Increment is the crux of Redevelopment: A Redevelopment Agency is legally allowed to use the increase in property tax resulting from their projects to fund infrastructure and other City costs related to the redevelopment. With some exceptions: 20% of that tax increment must be earmarked for low income housing and some portion to the state for schools. It’s my understanding that all the low-income housing developments surrounding the downtown were a result of the 1960s redevelopment. Redevelopment Agencies were dissolved last year by Governor Brown, but it’s not clear to me how much the loss of redevelopment tax increment has affected or necessitated the proposed changes to the Waterfront Plan.

And now more than 15 years after the first agreement was signed, and after multiple iterations of the plan, these new changes were presented to the public on Monday evening.

The waterfront plan at one point proposed a large office building at the corner of Georgia/Mare Island Way, a shape of a submarine, to honor Vallejo’s history of building nuclear subs on Mare Island. This was replaced with ground floor commercial retail with offices/condos above.

In 2003, before Waterfront plans were approved, the City of Vallejo rushed the State Farm building proposal through in likely what may have not been by the book. The State Farm building took away a city park (one that was carved from state lands) from the community, and cut off easy access to residents on Florida, Kentucky and other adjacent streets who used to walk through the park to the library.

The New Waterfront Plan

The purported reason for this change is to make the City of Vallejo eligible for a Request for Proposals (RFP) to build office space. One of the purported requirements of this RFP is that the location of the potential land for an office building is located near a ferry system and a North Bay location is preferable. There is no RFP now; it’s expected to be published late September/early October. Joe Callahan, principal for Callahan Property, received a tip from a commercial broker that this RFP is coming down the pike. Callahan, and Ursula Luna Reygosa, Vallejo’s Economic Development Director, indicated that Oakland’s Jack London Square may be one of our main competitors.

Several people in the audience asked who the Office Space project proponent is; the City indicated that currently, that information is confidential.

In order to accommodate the anonymous proponent and large office space, various components of the Waterfront Plan are to be moved around, for an office at the corner of Mare Island Way and Maine Street. Currently, that area—referred to as “Parcel L-1”—is planned for high-density residential (condos) and commercial retail on the ground floor. The height of the office building is to stay the same as the current plan. Unfortunately, the drawings presented for the office seemed to have used State Farm as a model – blank slate-like walls in beige/brown with no articulation. Luna-Reygosa did indicated that the Design Review Board (DRB) will approve any final designs…but it’s disconcerting that the image presented was so uninspiring. It gives the impression that someone is trying to lower expectations. Or maybe they figure why bother, since the whole thing has to go through the DRB. But pretty pictures always make the public more amenable…

They also propose turning “Civic Center Drive” (a new street connecting Capital Street to Georgia Street) into a Cul De Sac at “Independence Green” (a park along the north side of Georgia Street (i.e. the street dead ends at the park/Georgia St.) for traffic flow and pedestrian safety. Independence Park (the scrubby park across from Mariners Landing condos) is to be used temporarily for parking while the Waterfront Plan pieces are moved around like chess pieces – the Post Office is not ready to move and their lease extends for another 8 years. The area for the paseo between the bus transfer station/parking garage/waterfront that now has 50 parking spaces, to be increased to 200.

Another proposed change—which doesn’t seem to need a rush, since no one indicated there’s some other opportunity we need to prepare for—is to turn all the Waterfront High Density Residential (condos) into approximately 425 apartments, now all to be built on Parcel J (currently a parking lot across from the Ferry Building). The change is to attract developers and financing that is no longer available for Condos because currently the bottom has dropped out of that market. The City and Callahan describe these units as “luxury”; they’d be marketed to Bay Area “yuppies” who want these types of apartments but would relocate to Vallejo where they could afford the rent and have easy access to San Francisco via the ferry. And the apartments could convert to condos in 5-7 years.

Given that the downtown and waterfront are already surrounded by low-income apartment complexes—Marina Vista (“201 Maine”), Marina Towers, Marina Heights, Ascension Arms, Casa De Vallejo—concerns were expressed by some audience members that there would eventually be pressure to make these new apartments low-income as well. There may be no market for condos, but it’s not clear if there’s a market for luxury apartments that Yuppies may want on Vallejo’s waterfront either. These concerns were met with “naysayer” statements from others. One audience member, ironically in the same sentence, described wanting to attract people with disposable income, and yet described some who are already live here (those not born & raised in Vallejo) as the “naysayers.”

The devil is in the details and the City of Vallejo must negotiate a development that is a win-win. We can look all around the downtown and waterfront and see the disastrous effects of the 1960s redevelopment that the city has yet to recover. The downtown plan is stalled, with the City and Triad locked in a lawsuit that no one seems to want to back away from, and which puts a kibosh on downtown development, scaring other developers away that may have interest. Not wanting the City to make the same mistakes all over again is not “nay-saying.”

Next steps: This amendment goes in front of the Planning Commission on August 6; there will be a second community meeting on August (date to post later); it will go in front of the City Council for approval on August 28; in front of the Redevelopment Oversight Committee on August 30.

Comments

Add New Search RSS

wharf rat   |August.06.2012 @ anon yes yes you are 1,000 % right well put, glad some can see past the smoke and mirrors and perpetual dog and pony show these carpetbagging developers should be run outa town . Thing is staff loves them as they create work wich == a cost center wich == job security wich == a almost nonstop screwing of the Citizens of Vallejo who pay for the privilege . For once staff needs to defend their actions and provide an accounting to us so we can see how much they are spending to do a number on us .

Anonymous   |August.06.2012 All the "stuck on stupid" developer ideas Vallejo citizens have been fending off for years are the reason Redevelopment was ended by Sacramento. Too much pork benefiting developers, their syncophants and the Redevelopment Agencies (which pay for Terry Curtola's and, in the future, Craig Whittom's fat pensions) and too little actual benefit to the community. All the communities that never folded to pressure to establish Redevelopment Agencies are much better off economically than those cities that did. For years, the market determined what development happened. Now developers are chasing subsidies like those for subsidized housing or other Federal money. When pressured on why the new garage had to be built on the waterfront rather than on the bus transfer station (which made much more sense to the transportation planners because it could serve the dual temporal uses of day=ferry and night/weekend=entertainment district) the COV said that the Federal funding could only be used on the one site. So the Federal funding was the only site selection determinant, not rational analysis. Same for the State Farm building. Segmenting an EIR (illegal) to extract one site and then claim a Negative Declaration (no impact) to sieze a public park on State Lands with no replacement for an office building (not allowed by the State Lands trust) and claim "no impact" only means that the COV is corrupt. No other conclusion is possible.

wharf rat   |August.06.2012 @ anon Great post , things have changed since then , our economy is in the tank and the no development VS the development at all costs alternative looks much better . having lived in Vallejo for 28 years the term DEVELOPER makes me want to toss my cookies . The Community based planning concept now makes more scence than ever as we are all dealing with economic realities of the times .This could be an opportunity for civic minded people , with the developers at an economic disadvantage now is the time for the People of Vallejo to play their hand and cement in some Community based planning and vision reinforced by ZONING . I just scratched the surface with my post reome of the high quality possibilites for our waterfront . If we start implementing some positive enhancements it will be that much harder for the developers to prostitute our beautiful waterfront . "the first one to lay the brick and mortar " will be that much harder to displace . Willpower , political power , hard work and plain grit can get things done , I understand your statement re: the time and energy put in by Citezens in the last so-called Community planning process , these dog and pony shows are part and parcel of the Community contribution process with buzzwords like stakeholders , shareholders , contributers and numerous other other buzzwords that mean only that we are well fattened up and ready for the slaughter . This cycle has been going on for years , frankly I am sick and tired of it thus the cry for self planning , devoid of developers simply a Community determining what is best for all of the members and the generations following us . Your well stated post refrenced the illegal filling of what is called Mariners cove (what a bs name for a proposed 3 story condo development) tragically the money spent for fines and mitigation probably could have payed for improvements like the ones proposed in the last planning project , another reason to do a Community planing process with teeth and the less staff involvement possible , after all they WORK for US . We could have saved them from themselves and a whole lot of OUR MONEY . Most of the elements in My post could be self funding and even profitable in the long term and could be done on an incremental basis while remaining flexible for future changes if need be (not an option for Hotels , apartment's and office buildings)flexible lowrise small buisnes instalations with great destination potential could be well supported by our Community . If our waterfront is polluted with ticky-tacky beige ,big boxes we will have some real explaining to do to to our future generations ..

Anonymous   |August.05.2012 When Callaghan's first project went through the EIR phase, a neighborhood group put together an Alternative Plan stitched together from the ideas suggested by a Citizen's Advisory Committee and completely ignored. Because the ideas had been officially presented (and ignored), it caused a little hiccup because all viable alternatives need to be taken into account. That Plan, called the "Neighborhood Plan" in the final EIR called for restoration of the Mariners Cove wetland illegally filled in the 80's, rehabilitation of the marina and boatyard and addition of more shops for boat, bike, etc rentals. Nothing on the State Lands park. Pushing the development up toward the downtown with the parking garage where the bus station is now creating a plinth with two narrow office towers with fabulous views. The bus transfer station was moved closer to the ferry. The Kaiser property (Brinkmans Marine) expanded and updated with more boat and water oriented stuff. The larger part of the property was allocated to a state of the art naturalized wetland/water purification system to support the sewage treatment plant terciary level treatment. Dense upscale housing was sited on the hill where the junk cars are stored (what a waste!)right next to a new railroad station. The hotel and conference center was pushed over to the Mare Island side in rehabilitated historic buildings (Administration=hotel and power plant=conference center) all connected to the Napa Valley by railroad tracks right in front of the hotel. To connect the two sides of the river, a shuttle ferry like the Vaporetti in Venice would run between the ferry terminal and an existing ferry slip near the Ways. It was a good plan. Citizen developed with considerable professional expertise. But it did not meet the developers need for maximum profits and the COVs need to push any project forward no matter how horrible just for the short term permit fees. I, for one, am a bit tired of attending meetings, organizing oppositions and spending hours scouring EIRs plus all the appendices and attachments to figure out what real impacts and illegal actions are carefully concealed by our employees who have all day and are paid tons of money to try to snooker us. Maybe this is like jujitsu. Let them win and when the city goes bankrupt again, we can rebuild after the useless staff moves on to terrorize another community. About that revised Callaghan plan... If the rumors are true that it is a Federal building to house the VA, then the Feds don't need no stinking permit from the COV and won't be paying any property taxes. I am sure adding a bunch of homeless PTSD vets around the ferry and the waterfront will add a lot to the concentration of social services that are killing any hope for the downtown. But I don't doubt that the staff report will recommend approval and the Planning Commission and the City Council will fold to pressure to "do something!!!!". Stuck on Stupid....

wharf rat   |August.05.2012 It is apparent We need to plan our own waterfront entirely, with this developer model there are too many give-aways of our local resources and culture ,the proposed projects are nothing but a knee-jerk last ditch effort to generate developer profits in a down market (a desperate act by a desperate developer ) at great expense to our waterfront and our image 'we would be the laughing stock of the Bay area " to do this to our waterfront . Having spent almost my entire life on waterfronts I am compelled to share some thoughts and insight into what we could accomplish and the associated benefits of such . Working north to south , the old Marina needs much work and dredging, it was a money maker for decades profits being siphoned off for other projects and much maintenance being deferred it's condition is a management problem that could be overcome . The Boat-yard is a site relevant use and an asset , the two restraints are also assets and contribute funding as does the boat-yard , these well established businesses contribute to the venue and services of the Marina . The large tract of Publicly owned land east of the Marina to the Mi causeway harbours a self generated wetland (now protected) this is evidence of how high the water table is in that area the soils are not suitable for building three story condos on " when a heavy truck goes by on the causeway the ground in this entire area shakes and shudders " one concept is to expand the wetland feature (an almost zero cost improvement as it requires no maintenance and might produce mitigation credits for other waterfront projects ) a series of jogging and meandering trails of decomposed granite would provide a recreation element , picnic areas enhanced by planting willows and other native species would be a nice feature as well as low cost and low maintenance as discussed in the past the MI way fronting could support low-rise commercial , with a nice parkscape to gaze upon this would be ideal for restraunts and cafes and would in fact shield the park from traffic impacts . Properly landscaped with native plants and a zeroscape approach the entire project could be extremely low maintenance and a great local asset . The Yacht club speaks for itself has been there over 100 years and is a totally relevant waterfront land use and should be included in any process . Moving south the promenade and large green is major Community asset hosting numerous events and providing people access to the waterfront it speaks for its self and should be protected from developers at all cost . This stretch of our waterfront has the capacity to support one or two side ties for tall Ships or historic vessels "what a visual " considering our maritime heritage an appropriate and attractive addition to the waterfront and not inordinately expensive requiring only a small landing for each berth and some piling clusters for tie up , imagine the towering masts visible from west Vallejo and downtown towering above the waterfront " real salty stuff " and a good tourist draw . A real gem for our waterfront would be a large boat house and or rowing club (google south end rowing club in SF and dolphin club ) dry boat storage has a great return on investment as the per square foot rental revenue with minimal infrastructure costs yield good profits , this would be a wonderful addition to our waterfront it would provide boating opportunities for people of all income levels and would have regional pull , a prefabricated metal building with some architectural enhancements would be perfect and could be very profitable this would create another waterfront venue and eventual events certainly a quality development and good recreational opportunities for many . When considering the many possibilities for enhancement of our waterfront if we do what the Community would like and support and of a scale that is reasonable incorporating some commercial elements looks pretty good provided they are not huge monolithic beige boxes . Apartments are absolutely the worst thing to do and the location does not look good for a large hotel (which could end up being apartments ) SF and Oakland have a large surplus of office space rumours are nothing to drive development plans Vallejo has numerous areas for office building construction the waterfront should be the last place considered . I hope I have presented some stimulating ideas for everyone I believe we need to self plan the waterfront and when completed the various parcels with designated uses could be put out for consideration or even constructed in house then leased to operators . If we are not enhancing the waterfront environment we would be better off doing nothing after all it belongs to all of us .

Anonymous   |August.01.2012 State Lands are those that were navigable when the State came into the Union (as modified by specific legislative actions) Navigable waterways filled later are still State Lands.

Anonymous   |August.01.2012 What scares me is that BIG ANON actually works for the COV or a developer in some capacity and is spouting off erroneous pontifications that actually influence outcomes.

Anonymous   |August.01.2012 Hear hear Wharf Rat!!! Big ANON is wrong about the State Lands trust AND wrong about historic districts. They are not ever "done". Places important to American history are designated to recognize them and provide guidance to those that would protect them for the enjoyment of future generations. Plus the designation gives some protection under CEQA and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. No protection from "investor" greed or political stupidity is provided so our precious historic neighborhoods are irretrievally damaged with no penalties. You chide some of us for our anonymity and deride our opinions by offering up obfuscation and posturing. Seems we know more. By our words and deeds you shall know us.

wharf rat   |August.01.2012 Before General Vallejo set foot on Vallejo soil both Mare Island and Vallejo proper were inhabited , a two mule town and a rinkydink ship repair operation on Mare Island ,crude and bootstrap as they were the location beckoned for these services , little to know what would evolve in the future . Before Mare Island was occupied by the Navy Vallejo had a ship/boat building Company a small concern serving local farmers and ranches . So you see our Maritime heritage pre dates the Navy days and our City-side waterfront was a small but vibrant port , not surprising considering the logistic location and great weather . So here We are in 2012 with proposed apartment construction and an office building being considered for our waterfront (based on the rumour of a rfp coming down the pipeline) WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP !! to even consider such a thing is to throw away hope for our City to finally do a quality planning and design project with one of the LAST assets we have "if We screw up the waterfront it will be gone forever" . It is time We did a comprehensive waterfront plan "not a develop at all costs fiasco" rather a real quality and attractive destination oriented area with both local and regional draw , many venues and interesting experiences "a tapestry of open space, numerous small business and maritime elements . Keep in mind We now have a waterfront on both sides of the Straight (the envy of many a City) and We have a very important commitment to our future generations "TO DO IT RIGHT" . Vallejo has a multitude of available housing stock We are over built in this area and out of land for more , the game has changed residential development is the last priority ,neibourhood revitalisation is the new priority , and should be forefront and foremost this needs to be our main priority before more family neibourhoods go down the tubes . The waterfront can advance even if done in sections , with an excellent plan this could happen and in fact it should be done by our Citizens (the ones who will answer to future generations ) this developer oriented copout might be good for non visionary staff but serves us little and costs us much ! . Developers laud the need for housing (to fund the improvements ) this is a load of crap , in fact if We developed a waterfront improvement fund twenty years ago and filtered funds into it We would have funding today ! the Marina is a disaster and once was a profitable enterprise fund only to have assets diverted to other departments , this is a shame it probably could have funded many waterfront projects over the years while keeping it maintained and dredged with the high occupancy it once had . So here We are emerging from bankruptcy smack in the middle of a recession/depression getting fed the same cold pap from another developer while he tells us how lucky We are for his presence and all the wonderful things he will bring to our Town , just like Lenar , oh and remember Cullinan Ranch and the LNG plant and Tony's Prison . Once again our only hope is local Community involvement and I know that many are exhausted and burned out from the many battles fought against those that are paid by us and live elsewhere but keep in mind We need a Citizen victory every decade or so to keep em in check and our waterfront would be a most honourable cause for battle ..

wharf rat ESQ   |July.31.2012 @ ANONYMOUS You are wrong!! the State lands requirements have to do with navigable water ways and the associated shoreline this is a long held set of LAWS that prevent monopolization of one of our main methods of transportation and prevent Cities from having their acess to maritime trade and transportation cut off or controlled by special interests to the detrement of a Community . You clearly know nothing about this subject and should do your homework before you foist yourself off as if you are in the know . Just who do you work for ??? and most importantly what is your agenda ?? Research the harbours and navigation act followed by State statutes and when you are informed you can post on the subject with some modicum of intelligence . opinions are allways appreciated , ignorance presented as fact diminishes your contribution ...

ANONYMOUS:   |July.31.2012 There you go again: Where did I say we shouldn't have open space or public access?..It is in the waterfront plan now and shouldn't be eliminated.I never said Triad didn't spent $$, in fact I said their plan was a good one, but they didn't spend the $$$ Callahan spent, but they spent a lot. I didn't say we would have had nice homes without the historical district, I said they expanded it to other areas before finishing the original one. Which caused none of them to reach their original potential. Just calmly read what I said, drive around and look at these areas and then tell me if I am wrong. As to what the State Lands Commission required, take the time to read it and then you can give your opinion. Their approval has been follwed for the past 30 years. You are just guessing what you think (or hope is in their approval)but do not have the facts. I do!!! Now as far as using my real name, you start and I will gladly comply. But for now, check what I am stating, versus what you are and you will find out who is correct. I realize it is easier, just to call people that don't agree with your VISION names and try to put them down, but you need to understand that we all live her, for 1, 2, 5, 10 or 30 years and some of us know what has happened to our City and some only try to guess or place blame. Those that follow the latter premise are losing and our City is suffering. But then I guess that is why you don't use your real name??? Some day we will meet, for the good of Vallejo I hope it is sooner than later. Good luck on what you are trying to achieve?????? I am here daily.....

Anonymous   |July.31.2012 When the COV made the deal back in the 1970's with the State Lands Commission to take control of the State Lands along the waterfront, they promised it was going to be used for a public park. That is consistent with the legally allowed uses of State Lands which include water oriented industies and transportation but never, never residential uses or non-water dependent commercial uses. Fast forward 40 years and the old switcheroo. I wonder what that State Lands transfer document actually says. Maybe the lands revert to State Lands if the COV fails to live up to the terms of the agreement.

wharf rat   |July.31.2012 So exactly what is wrong with open space and public acess on the waterfront , WE have many events and gatherings there these are good for Vallejo and bring People together this is net positive for our Town . Apartments and offices are net negative and have no association with a "waterfront"We cant afford to screw it up better to do nothing than to do a botched job .

Anonymous   |July.31.2012 The nice houses in the historic districts are owner occupied. The trash, deteriorating and crime filled properties are owned by the "investors". The abandoned and squatter occupied dwellings have been milked to death by "investors" and just left to rot. Since the COV has no functioning Code Enforcement, the few remaining nice, owner occupied houses are transitioning to rentals as the owners give up because of the deteriorating quality of life. Soon you will get your wish, the historic neighborhoods will be all rentals and when the historic integrity is lost, the Feds will delist the districts.

Mousy   |July.31.2012 My personal favorite is how he assumes we'd have nice houses without the historic districts.

Mousy   |July.31.2012 My personal favorite is how he assumes we

Just Sayin'   |July.31.2012 Callahan spent $$$? So did Triad and the City kicked 'em out of town. After they spent millions. Just sayin'

wharf rat   |July.31.2012 @ ANONYMOUS what a load exactly who do you work for ? while you preach to us re:using our real name you post as ANONYMOUS perhaps you can return to the cesspool whence you came from . Your attempt to lionize carpetbagger developers just shows the depth of your cesspool and how shallow your perspective is , not uncommon for parasites and leaches ..

ANONYMOUS:   |July.30.2012 This is really getting rediculous. You so called experts have all of the answers, but none of you are brave enough to use your real names, so the rest of us can know what kind of expertise you really have. You are living in a dream world. The last person said, no developement is better then not what you want??...That is what we have done for the past 50+ years and you see where that has gotten us. As far as Historical Preservation, in the late 1960's when those GOB's put it together, it was great. Save what you could, but develope the rest and what happened, those idiots (similiar to who writes here down) had to expand it. All of a sudden we had St.Vincents Hill; York St; Washington Playground area, Bay Terrace? We had so many historical districts, with a multitude of regulations, that none of them were EVER completed. Look around in each of those neighborhoods, some nice renovations, some old, never touched homes and a whole bunch of crap! Now go to the Waterfront. There have been plans that were great, not for all of you, but good for the City. Open space mixed with development; some housing for the middle class; and office complexes. But NO you here, wanted it perfect? What happened NOTHING. You blame Callahan, he is the only one that has stayed with us, spending big bucks (a lot more than you can imagine since 199 and you blame him. He is a qualified developer, that has a fantastic track record in the areas you all wish you could live in or afford, In Pleasanton he made the City what it is today; In Concord/Walnut Creek is was revered. And do we do here? Call him names, blame Mayor Davis for help keep him here? Triad's plan was also great, but they never spend the money that the Callahan Group did. I they would have put their heads together, we may have finally accomplished something great for Vallejo. You complain about State Farm, but it has been the ONLY office complex to come to Vallejo in the past 20 years and you still complain about the way it looks? Have you ever looked in a mirrow or at you own home or car, maybe you have expectations that are so high that you personally could never achieve them on your own, so you blame everyone else that try's with the own capitol. Maybe if you put your real name on the line (forget your own money, because that will never happen)you could then have a good honest debate on why the City is where it is and where it is going??? what a waste!!!!

wharf rat   |July.30.2012 We continue to shoot ourselves in the foot year in year out . our Town is full of examples of what not to do , this is upsetting I wish our Town showed examples of what TO do . It could be done it will require replacing some personal with Visionaries (preferably on a contract basis) listening to the Public and retooling the current govt structure to one that rewards outcome and substance and discourages those that are beige to apply . Redevelopment is dead and we have built out the suburbs it's time to shift gears , re:the waterfront doing little or nothing now might be the best course to take post bankruptsey and a down economy are good reasons for this if we ruin our waterfront it will be for ever , if we drop back and wait for exceptional projects that are supported by our Community it will be a win - win the way I see it no development is a heck of alot better than bad development I hope another lawsuite will not be required

Anonymous   |July.30.2012 You hit it on the head for Vallejo - "The body politic has found a hundred ways to redline, blueline, greenline, and brownline underclass communities into isolation and convert their neighborhoods into dumping grounds." Isn't that what happened in Vallejo's history when they didn't want certain people (i.e.- colored folks) anywhere near the downtown, and corralled then into the Country Club Crest, for example, far far away? Now the current talk about downtown because of Section 8 and their ethnicity (i.e. - colored folks). Interesting pattern.

Anonymous   |July.30.2012 ... From containing violence in identified bad areas to excusing chronic education malpractice, ignoring catastrophic unemployment rates, destroying families with parent incarceration for addictions that the rich indulge in with impunity, to herding two thirds of underclass men into the gang controlled crime factories we call prisons, to disqualifying ex felons from jobs, we build hot zones as deliberately as the pharaohs built the pyramids. Gang hot zones are the blowback of structured isolation and planned exclusion. Economic forecasting models do not include the underclass because of the assumption that this group will never join the mainstream economy. The poorest of the poor are not in the economic forecasts or the recovery projections. They are, however, considered in the projections for prison beds

Anonymous   |July.30.2012 From Connie Rice's recent book "Power Concedes Nothing", a memoir about her work as a civil rights attorney for the NAACP to secure the most basic of human rights... freedom from fear. The body politic has found a hundred ways to redline, blueline, greenline, and brownline underclass communities into isolation and convert their neighborhoods into dumping grounds. We then pretend that the deadly conditions result solely from some natural order or their behavior and refuse to see how our policies not only end upward mobility but passively resurrect the systemic exclusions of Jim Crow. From containing violence in

wharf rat   |July.30.2012 I liked the concept of getting rid of the planning dept , we could have a couple of technicians to do most of the routine permitting and daily functions some of the money saved could be used to hire real rainmakers , this could be done on a retainer contract format with no pension liability . We would pay less and get much more and of quality .

Anonymous   |July.30.2012 Rocketman's logic is a bit fuzzy. Blaming historic preservationists? No body has brought up that issue in this discussion. There is nothing historic on the waterfront to save. Bless the brave historic preservation minded citizens who stopped the Redevelopment bulldozers from scraping off all of the historic old town and the Mare Island National Historic Landmark. Cities who have leveraged adaptive reuse and rehabilitation are way better off than the cities who rely on blight, Redevelopment, magic bullets and glitzy powerpoint presentations.

Anonymous   |July.30.2012 This is actually easy. The VA needs a building within 15 minutes of a ferry terminal? We got a VA on Mare Island and an unused ferry terminal adjacent to the Ways just a block or two from the existing VA. Just adjust the ferry route to make a second stop on Mare Island. Done.... Next?

Anon II   |July.30.2012 BTW - This is an excellent report yet again from Hatfield. He is a good reporter Marc. Keep him.

Anon II   |July.30.2012 I agree totally with anonymous. The rendering that Callaghan showed is despicable. Yet another example of developers coming to rob, and rape our town. We need forward, progressive, intelligent and most of all creative thinkers. We do not need these jokers coming here from Alamo and Orinda & such other places, and taking our land. This town is over burdened with too many low cost rentals as it is. Out with Callaghan. And just remember that Osby Davis and he are 'in bed together' since Osby was his lawyer for quite some time. Hmmm, is that why Osby fired Triad? Dahhh.

Iconic Architecture   |July.31.2012 Google search images: "iconic architecture buildings". Excellent examples for Vallejo downtown. COV Planning needs to be fired, and hire people who are forward-thinking. Get rid of the Design Review Board as they are SOS - stuck on stupid. https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=iconic+architecture+ buildings&bav=on. 2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&biw=1280& bih=820&wrapid= tlif134367595493710&um= 1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa= N&tab=wi&ei=Nt4WULuEDMW9qAG0pIDIBA

rocketman   |July.30.2012 This town has the worst gaggle of so-called, self-professed historic preservationists. This regime of historic preservationists needs to be overhauled--big time.

Anonymous   |July.30.2012 The COV is stuck on stupid. The Planning Department is imposing the blanket suburban parking standards they developed years ago for strip commercial and new subdivisions for Transit Oriented Development. The idea for TODs is to reduce dependance on private automobiles, reduce the area dedicated to cars and increase walkability to create life on the street. And what do we get? A developer proposing something called a Texas Wrap where "one car per bedroom" (suburban standard) is parked one the upper level of a parking garage right outside your door and no one ever has to step foot on the street. Way to go, COV!!!!!

Anonymous   |July.30.2012 @rocketman - What COV need is iconic modern architecture of the downtown skyline. That requires hiring one of those European designers to come over and propose iconic structures like you see all over the world. Vallejo is never going to attract commercial and residential downtown with what's there. Why hasn't the COV Design Review Board made such a proposal?

rocketman   |July.29.2012 Architecture of any NEW buildings will be a huge element for downtown. The designs MUST be interesting, even exciting to a certain extent. Innovative, maybe a little bit quirkyll They can NOT be the boring, utilitarian buildings like City Hall and even JFK Library. A bit of the spectacular is needed.

rocketman   |July.29.2012 Waterfront architecture--want examples? http://www.flickr.com/photos/48465793@N00/1120379138/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/56596769@N02/5244542750/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/17152481@N00/2823610348/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/41075403@N07/4383835004/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/21954501@N07/2229978362/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/13654796@N04/1392126787/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/joebeh r/4828691293/ A lot more cuold be found all over the country. The visions I have seen for Vallejo are very constrained, very much low on the scale. It should be suggested that Vallejo deserves a LOT better than what they are getting.

rocketman   |July.29.2012 Hey enough! When did WETA make a public presentation at which they declared that Vallejo's parking structure, with the HIGHEST cost to park of all the ferries on the Bay, will INCREASE their ridership by 20%? When did that happen? Actually, IO don't think WETA has said ANYTHING since Public Works Director Kleinschmidt laid that bomb before City Council a few weeks ago. And if they charge for parking in that garage that is 3 and 4 blocks from downtown Vallejo, why will the City not be forced to install parking maters all over downtown to defend the parking fees at the parking garage? The cost to enforce parking for the ferry is rising as we speak. Except NO ONE will pay one dime at a meter to go to downtown Vallejo. Feed coins into a parking meter in order to witness the derelicts, black racists and mentally ill people who congregate up & down Georgia Street and the other downtown streets, and to walk by empty storefront after empty storefront?! Don't think so. As long as downtown has the hangers-on, the rude, crude crowd hanging out, the cultural derelicts and jive-ass punks yelling across the street at each other, and behaving crazy, downtown will remain essentially dead. Want a clue? Imagine an Apple Store on Georgia Street as you see it now! If you actually think Apple would even consider for one-quarter of a second of putting one of their stores on Georgia Street . . . What is the vision of Vallejo? If you think having Section 8 housing all over downtown is just wonderful & necessary, forget about doing ANYTHING good downtown. You can rattle on about social justice, serving the underprivileged, and getting Federal Section 8 money, but it does NOT build anything good. It is a just a hole into which you toss big money--or rather other taxpayers do. And it kills the better spirit of the place. And even Buck's buildings will stay empty. For a LONG time.

Anonymous   |July.28.2012 Character problem. empty comment

Anonymous   |July.28.2012 our freight rail is the envy of the world, carrying over 40% of our intercity cargo.

Anonymous   |July.28.2012 @Anonymous Is there an example,in some city, of the type of architecture you would like to see on the waterfront?

All the Talk about Rail   |July.28.2012 U.S. freight railroads will get $23 billion worth of upgrades this year, and taxpayers won't pick up the tab. That's because the railroads build, maintain and improve their own infrastructure and even pay property taxes on their tracks. Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/07/09/us-freight-railroads/#ixzz21y7C934r

All the Talk about Rail   |July.28.2012 Here is an article about rail service in USA. The important thing to note if you do not have time to read it is this: U.S. freight railroads will get $23 billion worth of upgrades this year, and taxpayers won

wharf rat   |July.28.2012 The heck with Yuppies or Techies the real big money is with Government Employees as evidenced by COV salaries .

Anonymous   |July.27.2012 This is the problem re: Mr. Callahan. He has had "plans" since the mid 1990s re: the waterfront. 15 to 18 years and what do we have to show for it FROM HIM? Nothing but changing plans, pipe dreams, and the what ifs. Someone earlier wrote that to bring "yuppies" or the like (peopel with a higher economic level than the current average now), there needs to be a reason... an infrastructure of things to do, restaurants, cafes, art, shows. Target, CinemaPlex, and the Empress, along with drive buys, murders, and unsafe streets will not do it. Cheap rent when compared to SF is not the reason... the people sought to rent these "luxury apartments" would have the money to rent in SF and would be looking for something more than spending money on rent and a ferry with nothing else. This is a huge gap in Callahan's proposal. He thinks he can get the VA to agree to the waterfront, so he wants to push the change as "more commercial then apartments" instead of what is on the plans now. But be careful when the Feds come in... they want what they want, and how they want it, and when was the last time you saw a Federal building with any architectural style? We don't need another building like the State Farm block of cement. We need commercial, yes, and if the VA wants offices and will commit, GREAT. But don't sell us the other crap..... let's figure out what WE WANT FOR OUR WATERFRONT... not what 1 developer who has been unsuccessful for 17 years thinks he wants.

a Big IF ...   |July.27.2012 re: If one can lock in a core group of yuppie renters/tech workers from the city... yes, that is a big IF...and as important what IF it does not happen that way? One of my neighbor is a tech worker who works in the city and moved from out of state to Vallejo about 7 months ago. He is moving to north bay. I asked him why and he said 2 things: 1. there is nothing to do in town 2. It is not very safe. I also asked a friend she was working and renting in the city last year to check out some place in Vallejo, she was not interested and did not. She bought some TIC (convertible to condo in a few years) in the city for $500k. I also asked a couple who currently renting in North Beach to check out a house here where mortgage will be much cheaper than their rent and they have not come over yet. They indicated that if they are going to buy something cheap, they will probably buy at Clayton or Oakley. We can all hope for the best but we need to plan for the worst. Not being able to "lock in a core group of yuppie renters/tech workers" is bad but we are living with that right now. LOCK IN a core group of derelicts is something we CAN NOT AFFORD. It is not that I am against development, limiting downside is more important than ever. Does Mr. Callahan have any good track record in town to show us since he has been in this game for how long?

Separate Commercial and Reside   |July.27.2012 Can you trust a developer? Look at Temple Arts Loft project and tell me. We SHOULD NOT change the condo to apt just because they are entertaining a RFP for commercial development. They don't even know if they will win the RFP. At first meeting (at Empress), a downtown luxury apartment landlady was talking about getting renter from Marin etc, How successful is she? Do we have more apartments or more renters in downtown? Owner is better than renter for the city in the long run. There is no need to change at this moment. Unless the developer can prove positively that there will be no negative effect as we talked about here, DO NOT change to apartment. Separate the commercial and residential development. They do not need to be considered together.

craig   |July.27.2012 I was at the presentation and felt that Mr. Callahan presented an interesting proposal. If one can lock in a core group of 'yuppie renters/tech workers' from the city, then it opens up expansion possibilities. I'm not sure that I trust Mr. Callahan but it was my impression that many in the audience were real estate people, looking out for their own interests and very wary of what these proposals would do to their own properties. I would hope that we will keep an open mind and see what this could develop into. Certainly, what've got is a mess and stagnating. What this is is a toe-hold for good growth.

Enough   |July.27.2012 To Rocketman: Where did you obtain the information that WETA advised Vallejo that opening the parking structure would negatively effect ridership in Vallejo and if so, that WETA would move the Vallejo ferry?

Downtown Campus   |July.27.2012 @ rocketman I hear your frustration. I also like a saying: "In a room full of darkness, it is much easier to bring in a candle than trying to push out the darkness." At the first meeting (at Empress), a man suggested bring in some (art) school to use our downtown space as their extension campus and he indicated he has the contacts and can make introduction. I think that is a great idea and I hope someone has followed up with him.

rocketman   |July.27.2012 Oh, yeah, the panhandlers. I've been panhandled in Vallejo when I get out of my car at a gas pump at a gas station. I've been panhandled at a dumpster near the entrance to a storage facility I was going into. I've been panhandled outside the door of Vallejo restaurants. The fact is, no one with a brain, no one with money, wants to be in Vallejo. It is full of derelicts, full of panhandlers, full of punks who are both arrogant and stupid, and they are on display all over town--and proud of it! These jokers do not and will not change--they must be run out of town, one way or another. How did New York City transform Times Square, with was full of derelicts, the homeless, prostitutes, drug dealers, and the endless rabble of hangers-on? Current-day downtown Vallejo is not much different from New York's Times Square in the 1970s.

rocketman   |July.27.2012 The VA?! With a requirement that it be situated near a ferry? Not the Vallejo ferry! It is, by far, the most expensive ferry on the Bay, with the longest one-way ride to SF, and with what will be, by far, the most costly parking scheme in the Bay Area associated with mass transit. Virtually ALL other ferries on the Bay provide FREE parking. Vallejo is afraid to open that parking structure, because WETA has told them that it will have a significant adverse impact on ferry ridership out of Vallejo. When mass transit loses the 'mass' it will be gone quickly. And if the ferry is moved elsewhere, Vallejo will be left with an empty, totally useless parking garage. Well, not totally useless--that huge blank wall on the south end is a magnificent canvas for graffiti artists, a boon to the Vallejo art community!

rocketman   |July.27.2012 One of the unidentified was quite correct. The jive-ass black punks and derelicts hanging around ALL the time the downtown streets are the GREATEST problem facing Vallejo's downtown. Anyone exposed to that behavior and demeanor simply will NOT go back to downtown Vallejo. It is a very strange bunch, who do not behave like anyone you know. They are arrogant, stupid, obnoxious, insulting, rude and crude. One old guy--a white derelict--went on a yelling, screaming tirade on Georgia Street about something or other. Vile language spewing from his hole, behavior a bit out-of-control. Anyone without street sensibilities witness to that would be gone in a minute and would NOT return. And they would conclude that THAT is Vallejo. This guy was an exception--most of the denizens of downtown are black men of varying ages, but it is ALL unsavory and will generate literal fear in some. Unless there are vagrancy & loitering laws that cause these jokers to be swept off the steets, downtown Vallejo is going NOWHERE. First Amendment right?! What about the rights of taxpayers and visitors to NOT be panhandled, to not have black men--or any men--yelling at each other across the street. To not have black men congregating in groups, large and small on Georgia Street corners, to not have black men standing, at all hours, in doorways and before empty storefronts. Until downtown Vallejo looks like an inviting and fun place, and NOT a scary place for social derelicts to hang out and run the streets, it will be a tough, sad slog downtown.

Anonymous   |July.27.2012 The wife and I stopped for a bite to eat at the Front Room last night. Right at the front door a collection of raggedy black dudes was laying in wait to hit us up fo some money. We're not going to attract any kind of tourist trade, any kind of wealthy people or any kind of vibrant economic activity until we deal with the out of control population of poor blacks in the downtown area. People might not like to hear this but that's the facts, Jack.

wharf rat   |July.27.2012 @ Mousy and et:all With all due respect I support your comments and am glad you have a forum to express them . One must keep in mind that most Artists do not do their work in a theme - promoted by a specific concept derived by a body/politic rather the pure expression and innocent almost Childlike love to CREATE ! This is sooo evident with Kid's art possibly one of the purest forms in existence . An Antropological perspective helps to understand the ethos of Human expression and the passion to communicate ! after all what is it all about , but communicating and sharing , some of the most fundamental and Darwinian things for a large brain mammal to do (with some local exceptions no name mentioned) We all have images and ideas in our minds eye, and are fortunate to have the few who can communicate and convey these images and expressions to the tribe . Please forgive the anthropological link (it is an early and non accredited study) My final comment on the subject is the pure and totally A- political and real and great works done by Artists , those that are not bought and sold , Rather the one's that study for years and are committed to their Art-form and the great work they present to us . Save all the Child art that you have or collect it. as you will see they are some of the best Masterpices . In fact a Child Art repository/archive would be one of the most compelling and historically rellavent collections to be preserved to preserve our history.

Mr :O   |July.27.2012 Art's lofts. These can become 'roach motels' where a random bunch of people deemed artists move in. The successful ones move out. Eventually you end up with what are really hobbyists and music teachers being subsidized to live there. They will never move out because they no longer have other job skills and their art does not pay market rents. They will be better behaved than typical section 8. I am wondering where the money is going to come from. It seems that market rent won't pay for these projects so the hope is that Section 8 will ultimately pay for it. The danger is that if austerity measures come, Section 8 might be cut. At that point it will be hard to maintain section 8 properties. In terms of good news in the region, Reno NV managed to snag huge data center deals from Apple and another data center. They did this with massive tax breaks for Apple, and I suspect unused electric capacity available from the closed down casinos. Needless to say an actual arts community has sprung up around Burning Man making use of local advantages like the salt flats, without much central planing. Reno snagging Burning Man and Apple are examples of what can be accomplished by a city that was down on its luck with the collapse of its main industry, Casinos. Compare with centrally planned California cities like Vallejo where an industry collapses and nothing replaces it except poverty housing and other real estate scams.

Anonymous   |July.26.2012 GREAT idea Mousy! Baltimore has crabs all over town (sculptures, like SF hearts, not the vermin!)

Mousy   |July.26.2012 Yes, god-forbid someone buy art supplies on the Internet. The horrors! Vallejo is already attracting an arts community. There is more to the arts than just paint brushes. Vallejo is becoming a center for metal arts, which is incredibly fitting given our history. What we should do is sponser a public art display contest, like SF did with its cheesy hearts. Only make the theme fitting with Vallejo - Ships and subs. I'd love to see cool artwork made by local artists all over town.

wharf rat   |July.26.2012 What defines an Artist ? is it their body of work or actively supporting themselves by selling their work or one who shows and is known in the Art world ?? There are very strong laws re:discrimination for low income housing projects this could be an issue . if someone is refused housing due to not being an Artist could they sue ? Mare Island is packed full of many misc buildings with great potential for Art Studios , these could have been rented out years ago even with low rents the revenue would have been constant all these years and a real Artists community would have formed . Art Studios need great light , clear spaces , and low rent . Art supplies are not the issue it is easy to have supplies ups'd .Vallejo has attracted many Artists over the years due to our low cost of living climate and non snobby attitude all the virtues Sausalito once had .

Anonymous   |July.26.2012 re: amenities that are attractive or needed by artists Greendog, care to share what will be considered as an ideal setup for artist. I do like the fact that Obtanium Works moved here, If we can support more people like them or burning man, that will be great.

Anonymous   |July.26.2012 re: First of all, if your annual income is over $750k then you can be considered as the 1%. In Vallejo's situation, total assets (real estate + income + bank account + 401k) of ~$750K is super rich. That's Vallejo's 1% population.

greendog   |July.26.2012 I agree with "for everybody", well said. And, agree w/the poster who said 67% is way too much. As far as Temple Lofts, I say it will be interesting to see how "real" the lofts are for artists, what it will cost, and an artist has to sacrifice a lot to move here. We don't even have an ART STORE. Is Temple Lofts planning on opening a Dick Blick on the first floor? We don't have amenities that are attractive or needed by artists. I know because I am one. This is a very uninspiring place and one has to spend way to much time on the road to get the things one needs.

ugh   |July.26.2012 good golly. Luxury apartments to attract yuppies to Vallejo????? This town is doomed with the leadership it has! WAKE UP. There is no infrastructure to sustain what you call "yuppies". There are plenty of us here who want more, better, nicer, etc and we're barely hanging in. More and more are renting out their homes and moving away. Before even considering revitalizing the waterfront, focus on bringing white collar industries to Vallejo. Good jobs will bring folks here. We need high tech. Offer them sweet deals. If we can have high paying industries here, we will begin to have the means to revitalize, we'll be attractive to nicer grocery options, etc. This town needs to work on it's foundation first. A strong foundation is needed to support growth. Without it, we will continue to languish and all the revitalization will soon turn into trash because no one is here to support it.

Temple Art Loft   |July.26.2012 If Temple Art Loft project run into any problem as voted by the city council with clearly state intent then VHA/city Hall better have someone's head ready to roll. City Council was ill-advised in this matter.

I Hate Double Talk   |July.26.2012 re: Downtown is for everybod, that includes the 99% who are not super rich. Double talk: language that appears to be earnest and meaningful but in fact is a mixture of sense and nonsense First of all, if your annual income is over $750k then you can be considered as the 1%. We are not talking about that at all. I wonder if we have even one resident here in the whole city that falls in that category.

Over 67% is TOO MUCH   |July.26.2012 You need to understand HOW things work and this is not haves v.s. have-nots. Let us say, there is a section 8 opening in Carmel downtown and another in Vallejo downtown, which one would you like to get? and Why? I sure like the get the Carmel one because then I have access to some of the resources that I will not able to get with my own means. Social program is built on the tax/culture base of the haves. Without this base, there is no benefit to the have-nots. It is not that I am against the have-nots, it is just 67% is too much. If you really care about the have-nots, be smart, do not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Of course, some people in VHA/City Hall are more concerned about themselves ,keeping their jobs and busy farming the poor.

Anonymous   |July.26.2012 @For everybody - Downtown is for everybod, that includes the 99% who are not super rich. No redlining and gentrification.

For everybody!   |July.26.2012 Yes, you are correct, the downtown is for everybody, not just the poor, in fact perhaps rich folks should sue Vallejo for not making an area that is nice enough for rich people, descrimination is a two way street, and in Vallejo upper middle class and the upper class are not provided for, we just like to "farm poor people." Lets get more money flowing in Vallejo, provide housing and recreation for folks with disposible income, not just cheap stuff for poor folks (rich folks dont want to visit our clinics, cheap markets and thrift stores and second rate shopping like Marshalls and Goodwill located at the Gateway shopping center.) If you build it, they will come, look what we have built and look who has come...

Separate Commercial and Reside   |July.26.2012 @ Luxury apartments Who says we NEED to build more apartment here now? Why create problem as you described? We can always build more when the market is "hot" and there is a demand. If there is a need for commercial office building, let us look at it. Where is the need for more luxury apartment building? When a 4/3.5 house on Mare Island is sold in the low 300's why do we expect people to pay 400's for a condo conversion? We should only build when there is a demand. The current demand is LOW. Do not grant more apartment building just because the developer is ENTERTAINING a RFP. SEPARATE the consideration for commercial and residential building.

Anonymous   |July.26.2012 @Over 67% is TOO MUCH - And what about the Temple Arts Loft next to the Empress Theater, which is supposed to have "struggling low-income artists" live there? Are you against that one, or is that different because it is the so-called "artists"? IF you support "low-income artists" in th Downtown, but against 201 Maine "low-income" residents, then you are discrimantory and show favoritism to a certain low-income group.

Mousy   |July.26.2012 Catering the "rich" downtown would actually do all lot to even out the poverty.

Over 67% is TOO MUCH   |July.26.2012 re: Downtowns are meant for everybody, not just the rich. How about let us change this to : Downtowns are meant for everybody, not just the poor? Over 67% low income, very low income and extremely low income is TOO MUCH for downtown. Where do you live? If you live around downtown you will not make such silly statement.

Anonymous   |July.26.2012 Downtowns are meant for everybody, not just the rich. Section 8 is inclusive and non-discrimatory. You cannot have the nexus of a city walled off from certain income groups. That is redlining and illegal.

Luxury apartments   |July.26.2012 Since there is no funding for luxury condos, apartments would be the only high density housing you could get funding for. In this poor housing market, it's actually a better plan, as if luxury condos were built, the buyers buying them would not be able to get a $400,000 plus appraisal, guess what would happen? Investors would buy them all up to hold until the housing market recovers, during the interim, they could get filled with section 8 backed voucher'ed poor folks, who would provide the landlord with guaranteed rental money until they could flip the property in 5 years. I have no doubt that this happened. I suspect that this was the motivation behind many landlords buying houses in the historic area, they intended to flip the houses when the market was hot, placed section 8 vouchered housing to pay the rent until it was time to flip the property. They forgot the golden rule : "you dont poop in your own bed." That is, you dont harm and downgrade your own investment that you want to sell later for a profit, which is what happened and now slumlords are stuck with their own property that they "pooped on." My biggest concern is more section 8/affordable/low income housing in the downtown, will these new apartments/condos be subject to a requirment of affordable housing? Actually in Vallejo's case the opposite should be true, the builder should not be allowed to build any affordable units at all(unless he builds them in Napa haha! Which can actually be done, now... There's a thought...)

Anonymous   |July.25.2012 He's desperately trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. It's not going to work. We cannot have more butt ugly state farm buildings on our waterfront. It's our best asset! Throw the carpetbagger out for good!

How much space is needed?   |July.25.2012 How much office space is needed? How much we have available currently in downtown? That is 15 min walk to the ferry. The huge building across Post office is available. The old BOA/current VHA building is within 15 min walk. Also, building apartment first then convert to condo also sounds fishy to me. If the market does not support it now then don't build. Let the demand drive the build.

Anonymous   |July.25.2012 Lets not forget that the prime waterfront land state farm was built on, was sold for a song to someone in Kansas ($110k, less than I paid for my house). State Farm has a ten year lease ending in 2013. Rumor is they're moving back to Rohnert Park. State Farm wanted to go on Mare Island. They would have gone to Northgate. It was Terry Curtola, former mayor & entry-level economic analyst for one year (PERS you know) and other city staff that advocated for the waterfront location.

Anonymous   |July.25.2012 Get rid of Callahan. He has no vision or creativity and is "so 1990s". We need rental housing on our waterfront like we need another fast food "restaurant". We need to start over with a fresh look based on the new economy.

wharf rat   |July.25.2012 If the fed needs a building 15 min from a ferry terminal 201 Maine would be a perfect location problem solved forever and would bring jobs to town ++

Fan   |July.25.2012 IF "enough" is correct that the potential tenant is the VA, it could be a huge help in changing all of downtown. Until the federal building in Oakland was built, followed by the state office building, that area was much worse than Vallejo has ever been. Call Miller and Thompson to lobby the VA on behalf of the VA coming here if you would really like to see the start of an improvement.

wharf rat   |July.25.2012 What a pile of crap , no vision no creativity just more beige blocks the same old pap they have been feeding us for years . You can bet the apartments will be converted into subsidised units . A waterfront is no place for housing , we have tons of housing in town in residential areas . The easy money is in section 8 units. good by waterfront festivals and events . The housing element should be resisted no housing = no section 8 in fact no development would much better than the alternitive just another pork project at our expence

Monica   |July.25.2012 We clearly do not need offices or retail spaces with the dozens that currently sit empty in the downtown area. What we need is less Section 8. Use imminent domain to eliminate the. Urgent Marina Apartments and then have them go condo with a limted percentage of the units to be non-owner occupied They would be affordable for many, have a prime commuter location, and would encourage a different downtown culture. Changing that culture is the first thing that this city must do if it is to ever fulfill its potential as a destination for visitors.

Enough   |July.25.2012 The "confidential" tenant is the Federal Government - Veterans Affairs. They are looking to set up shop either in Vallejo or Jack London Square. A requirement is that they have to be set up within 15 minute walk from a ferry. Unclear if it would be a new VA outpatient clinic such as what is on Mare Island (which would close) or only administrative offices.

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.23

3.23 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."