Even worse, the city is attempting to sieze a lot and then sell that lot to the Los Rios community college district. This land owner had a deal with the college district, but the city came in and undercut the deal. Even worse, the city has not stated that they will give the owner the price that they sell the land for. This means the city could seize land and then sell it for a profit. Not a good thing.
For these reasons, we need a new voice on the city council. We need a city government that protects businesses, not a city that destroys relationships with the small business community.
Wayne, you could not be further from the truth as to this posting. Allow me to set the record straight for the other five people who are following your site: the City IS NOT SEIZING PROPERTY ALONG THE BLVD with the intention of building housing.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Folsom Blvd Specific Plan, a building owner can maintain their property for an indefinite period of time without being forced to incorporate housing while they own it. The building could burn down, and so long as they rebuild and re-occupy the property within 18 months, they can continue to enjoy the same property rights as specified.
You are also incorrect as to the percentage of housing required in the mix. In short, the Council may decide not to require housing if the proposal does not match either the spirit of the Specific Plan, or if the property is too small to accomodate housing.
These owners along the Boulevard have filled you with inaccuracies which you are using to create fear where nothing of the sort should exist. In future, please research your facts before sharing your findings.
Here is the link to the Plan - you might want to familiarize yourself with it: http://www.cityofranchocordova.org/Index.aspx?page=127
Matt Cummings
Concerned Resident
Hi Matt,
ReplyDeleteI wanted to respond to your post. I am quoting from the specific plan. The property in question has been rezoned UR-1. This is what the plan you referenced has to say about this zoning "This sub-district is ultimately intended for small lot, single-family detatched, single family attached (e.g., townhomes, condominius, brownstones), and small apartment complexes, and neighborhood serving retail and service establishments." The plan makes it pretty clear about what the city wants to do with this area. If you were a business owner on Folsom Blvd, what would you think the future of your property is? This is the big complaint that the business owners and I have about the city plan. It creates too much uncertainty, which is exactly what our business community does not need. Matt, I encourage you to look at the business' perspective by looking at calpropertyrights.com.
I also think that the real point of this issue is being missed. Why is the city placing obstacles in the way of our businesses? It is true that the Folsom Blvd businesses can continue as-is, but they will not be able to grow or expand. Plus, the specific plan severely restricts how the business owners use their own property. I believe that our city should be doing what we can to encourage business.
To me, the big issue is why did the city decide to change the zoning in this strip of Folsom Blvd and destroy the relationships with our business community? The city council can solve this problem very easily. Since the city can decide to not require the housing, why doesn't the city restore the commercial zoning to the businesses?
The city needs to find ways to bring growth and opportunities to our city. Changing the zoning of existing businesses and forcing housing construction is not the way to do this.
Wayne Hart
Wayne, let's be clear: the City's efforts to revitalize Folsom Blvd will NEVER come at the expense of building owners. These property owners retain every right they did before their designations were adjusted.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a building owner on Folsom Blvd, I would wonder why I cannot retain tenants for any substantial period of time. Talk about ‘uncertainty,’ these owners engage in such practices every day by leasing their properties to sub-par businesses, only to see them depart after a short period.
The lack of stability along the Boulevard has forced residents to seek quality businesses elsewhere, such as the city of Folsom: this creates an unnecessary drain on our tax base, while the very owners you support continue to fill their buildings with services that we neither need nor feel safe in frequenting. I suspect your supporters might not have made you aware of these long-held facts.
If these owners really wanted long-standing tenants, they would lease to quality businesses that would attract traffic from across the city; or, they would partner with the City to facilitate redevelopment of their property. That is the true spirit of the Plan, and something you have failed to grasp. Your desire to return to previous land uses only continues the malaise which has plagued the Boulevard for decades and inhibits the very growth we deserve to experience.
You have also missed a point I made about fit: the City will not seek a cookie-cutter approach to re-development. If a proposal for housing does not fit the area or match the feel they are looking for, the City will not approve it.
I will repeat my earlier comment: the City wants to revitalize Folsom Boulevard, not destroy it.
As a potential city councilmember, you must learn to balance the needs of our community with the wants of it. It concerns me that you haven’t taken a more considered approached by becoming better informed. In fact, there were several outreach efforts that were scheduled regarding the Plan that have occurred over its development. Where were you for these meetings? If you had spent one meaningful moment doing so prior to your filing, you might have gained a more balanced perspective that respects both redevelopment and the rights of property owners. Instead, you've created fear where none existed prior - that is not the hallmark of a good leader.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHello Matt,
ReplyDeleteMatt, it is not the businesses that are making problems on Folsom Blvd. It is all the apartments that are the problem. The businesses provide jobs, sales tax revenue for the city and convenience of shopping for the local neighborhoods. Don’t you care about the local neighborhoods? Let us keep our neighborhood businesses. We already have too many apartments.
WE NEED WAYNE HART!! PLEASE PROTECT US FROM MORE APARTMENTS!
Matt Cummings is an enemy of Folsom Blvd businesses! Matt Cummings was sitting on the Rancho Cordova Building Commission when numerous Folsom Blvd business and property owners complained for being zoned as residential. Instead of showing any concern for the harm he was causing us, he actually got angry with us and threatened us. Matt Cummings was angry that his dream of apartments on Folsom Blvd had opposition.
ReplyDeleteMatt Cummings was nominated as a Rancho Cordova Planning Commissioner by Dan Skoglund for January 2007 to December 2010. That is why Matt Cummings does not like businesses on Folsom Blvd and wants more apartments there. So to get rid of Matt Cummings we need to get rid of Dan Skoglund.
ReplyDeleteHi Matt,
ReplyDeleteAs you can see, I am not the only one that has concerns about the plans that city hall has. It would be easier to believe that the city revitalization plan will not come at the expense of business owners if the city did not use eminent domain as a revitalization tool.
While I could go on about what constitutes a "sub-par" business, I want to talk more about the philosophical differences that we have. When it comes to property rights, you clearly come down on the side of the city. Makes sense since you are the planning commissioner. As for me, I support property owners more than I do the city. To me running roughshod over businesses and forcing them to do what you want is not the correct way to balance the needs of the city with its wants. This is why I am getting the support of the business owners along Folsom blvd.
True leadership involves listening as well as leading. You cannot force growth and progress, it must be a partnership. This is why I am getting the support that I am getting on Folsom Blvd and across Rancho Cordova.
As a city planner, you should realize that there is more than just one way to revitalize Folsom blvd. I hope that the city is actually willing to listen to all side and form a true partnership with our businesses. The change that we ALL want for Rancho Cordova will come, but only if we all work together. It may be slower than you want, but it will come. And as we work together, the change will be much more effective. And that philosophy is what we are missing in Rancho Cordova. This is why I am running.
First of all the way to get more business in RC is to show them the successful biz that is already here not push more falling down fly by night businesses on Folsom Blvd. I for one do not want any more mom and pop businesses on Folsom Blvd. those types don’t have the money or following to keep up the property. Most of the buildings on Folsom Blvd. have not been updated or taken care of in years. Hence the reason Joann’s left. I would like more national stuff here. The city did a great job with that new development off Zinfandel and White Rock. They have attracted a good mix of stuff including a Chili’s. Why? Partly because it looks nice. 2nd there is not 10 liquor stores over there like Folsom blvd. I don’t want to wade through the drunks and welfare recipients to get a soda or gas. Also last I checked target remodeled during a recession here in our city! Ross is moving to the same shopping center and building a bigger store! We got an upscale card room/casino with a really nice restaurant in RC. I for one was skeptical that it could work but the city said let's give them a chance. Seems like a lot of businesses here are happy with the city and happy to make their home here. We are a city rampant with owners who do not care about their property or the city. Most don’t live here and serve as absentee landlords. Many of the complaints I have observed from the coalition (interesting title they have given themselves) is from owners who have not had the best interest of the city in mind in the past or now. They only care about their bottom line. Which is ok because they are in business to make money right? Thing is we need more stores, eateries and services from people who are making their home here; not fly by night stuff from people who don’t really have a business plan. I don't know if Mr. Hart has enough experience with Rancho residents to be ready for council but I am happy to see someone stepping up. By the way Matt Cummings is not a city planner, he is a planning comissioner. Sounds semantic but there is a big difference.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Rancho Cordova city plan was being made housing was booming. Most thought that boom would continue. So the makers of the city plan recommended changing some of the commercial properties to housing. But that housing boom is history and will not be back. In reality we already have too many apartments. When a building gets older it takes time to come up with a good plan. It even takes the city time to come up with a good plan. The problem is that now the city wants that plan to include at least 50% apartments. Do you agree with the current city plan that when a commercial property is developed or redeveloped that it must be at least 50% apartments?
ReplyDeleteAnd do you really think that commercial property owners do not care about the city their property is in? Commercial property owners are not stupid. They want the city to be better and better. That increases the value of the property.
One reason there are liquor stores, check cashing stores, etc. is because there is a demand for them because of all the apartments. The city has put a moratorium on liquor stores, check cashing stores, etc. now that will stop more of them. That is good.
Every city in this country has lots of mom and pop businesses. Rancho Cordova is possibly the only city that seems to have a lot of negative things to say about small businesses.
I am for Wayne Hart all the way. HE IS JUST WHAT OUR CITY NEEDS!!!