Lesson I: To Perform One's Civic Duty!
It began with a simple telephone call from Betty Ball of the Mendocino Environmental Center, last September. She informed me Ken Fowler, proprietor of Ken Fowler Motors, a local new and used car dealership, was appealing the Ukiah Planning Commission's denial of his request to move his business from its present location north of Ukiah, to the Airport Industrial Park (now officially named Redwood Business Park). His appeal would be heard by the Ukiah City Council at its regular meeting on October 2, 1996.
Although the MEC Board of Directors had not officially taken a position on this issue, Betty was concerned that should the City Council reverse the Planning Commission, and approve placement of the dealership in the Park, there would be significant aesthetic, environmental and social impacts to the Ukiah Valley, which has already been compromised. She therefore requested I familiarize myself with the isssues involved and attempt to recruit other members of the community, who might have similar concerns, to attend the City Council meeting.
Prior to the hearing on October 2nd, I reviewed documents obtained from the City Planning Commission. They revealed the following:
1. Mr. Gary Akerstrom, developer of the Redwood (Airport) Business (Industrial) Park, requested authorization from the City Planning Commission to be given broad discretionary power over future development within the Park, thereby limiting the City's oversight authority.
2. With Akerstrom's support, Mr. Ken Fowler, of Ken Fowler Motors, proposed relocating his automobile dealership from its current location, outside the city limits north of Ukiah, to the Redwood Business Park, occupying a site of approximately sixteen acres south of Friedman Brothers, adjacent to the 101 Freeway.
3. City Planning Department staff opposed the broader authority sought by Akerstrom, but, as a "compromise", supported Fowler's proposal to locate his dealership within the Park.
4. This placed City Planning staff at odds with the City Planning Commission who unanimously opposed both Akerstrom's and Fowler's proposals.
My objection to placement of the car dealership in the park, adjacent to the freeway, had to do with aesthetics. One has only to consider the phalanx of dealerships along freeway corridors in the vicinity of Santa Rosa and Petaluma to be convinced this is a form of visual blight that should be condemned.
The large retail structures currently sited in the Business Park have already degraded the appearance of the central Ukiah Valley and an automobile dealership with the attendant promotional features and displays would only compound the problem. (I subsequently became aware that members of the Ukiah City Council and Planning Commission have also voiced concern over the impact of "Big Box" structures on the visual corridor to the West of the freeway).
On September 24, 1996, I sent a letter to Mr. Fred Schneiter, Mayor of Ukiah, objecting to the Fowler proposal and requesting action by the Council be delayed until greater public awareness of the issues involved could be generated. Copies of the letter were sent to other members of the City Council, the Ukiah Planning Commission, and the Ukiah Daily Journal. Copies were also sent to approximately fifteen people in the community whom I believed, would be concerned about this matter. They included several county officials and candidates for public office.
At the City Council meeting on October 2, 1996, only one of the twenty or so persons I had requested to attend was present. This was Tom Montesonti, long active in the community in working with the developmentally disabled. Montesonti himself had notified Phil Baldwin, a school teacher at the time running as a write-in candidate for Mayor of Ukiah.
In his presentation objecting to the dealership, Baldwin argued that the City Council should delay action on Fowler's and Akerstrom's appeal of the Planning Commission decision until the matter could be presented to the public. He was convinced relatively few area residents were aware of the issues involved and their relative merits. Baldwin believed the topic should be injected into the mayoral campaign and thoroughly debated.
In my presentation, I concurred with Baldwin's emphasis on the need for greater community awareness. I also underscored the value of aesthetics and quality of life considerations noting that preservation of the visual quality of the Ukiah landscape is also a wise business decision. In my view, the Planning Commission had made the correct decision and should be supported.
By far the most impassioned presentation was by Tom Monesonti who conjured up the vision of a car carnival; an explosion of balloons and pennants presided over by the menacing presence of a mammoth Earl Sheib. As a refugee from Chicago, Monesonti has developed a pronounced affection for the beauty of the North Coast and the Ukiah landscape and his aversion to its degradation was apparent.
Among those speaking in favor of reversing the Planning Commission decision were Akerstrom, Fowler and local businessman, Jack Cox. Akerstrom defended the proposed modification in the zoning ordinance citing the need for greater independence and flexibility in making decisions relating to development. Having the Fowler dealership in the park would also add needed revenue, thereby placing the park on a more secure financial base.
Fowler emphasized the facility he proposed for the business park would be attractive and well designed. He disputed the contention that his dealership would constitute an eyesore and detract from the appearance of the valley. The showrooms he envisaged would not be obtrusive and would conform with city design review standards.
City Planning staff summarized their position indicating they concurred with the Planning Commission recommendation that the broader, discretionary powers over development in the park sought by Akerstrom be denied. However they justified their "compromise" proposal of permitting Fowler to locate his automobile dealership in the park by stating their belief that this was an appropriate use of the site south of Friedman Brothers, and in keeping with zoning specifications.
Although nearly all City Planning Commissioners attended the hearing, none chose to speak. I was informed afterwards by Dr. Phil Ashiku, Planning Commission Chair, that he surmised the Commissioners felt they already had been given opportunity to air their views at the Planning Commission meeting and in the subsequent report.
Upon conclusion of the public comment period the Council proceeded to discuss the issues raised in the appeal and to vote. Mayor Schneiter stated he could find no persuasive reason not to permit Fowler to locate his dealership in the business park. In this, Council Member Wattenberger concurred.
Council Member Malone described Fowler as a reputable businessman and believed he would keep his committment to insure his dealership was attractive from an architectural standpoint and not obtrusive or garesh. Malone also maintained the demanding requirements of modern automotive technology necessitate hiring skilled, highly paid personnel -- a goal of the business park. He was not troubled by the preponderance of retail as opposed to manufacturing enterprises, already in the park.
Council Members Shoemaker and Mastin expressed opposition to the appeal, upholding findings of the Planning Commission. Mastin pointed out that installation of yet another retail operation in the park did not constitute sound planning.
Mayor Schneiter then called for a vote, and as inferred by their remarks, he and Council Members Wattenberger and Malone voted to reverse the Planning Commission and approve installation of the car dealership in the Park. Council Members Shoemaker and Mastin were opposed. The Council voted unanimously to deny Akerstrom's request for modifications in the zoning ordinance.
And so - that was that. The decision had been made and we were on the short end of a three to two vote. I grudgingly accepted defeat and prepared to move on to my next mid-life crisis. However, there was some unfinished business yet to transact regarding the Business Park - as you will note in Lesson II.
Lesson II. Reality Check
In the days immediately following the City Council meeting of October 2nd, I had a series of chance encounters with several members of the City Council and Planning Commission, and in the course of discussing issues relating to the business park, came to the conclusion my original assumptions needed further examination.
I therefore contacted Dr. Philip Ashiku, then Chair of the City Planning Commission, and requested he meet with me to provide his personal perspective. Dr. Ashiku and I met on two occasions, the most recent being February 3, 1997. He agreed that a summary of his views be published in the MEC Newsletter.
Dr. Ashiku is a local dentist who served on the City Planning Commission for two years, the last year as Chair of the Commission. On November 5, 1996, he was elected to the Ukiah City Council.
Contrary to my initial impression, the primary reason for the City Planning Commision's refusal to endorse placement of the automobile dealership in the business park was related to economics rather than aesthetics.
Ashiku stated when the business park was proposed in the early 1980s, it was promoted as an opportunity to afford space to the proprietors of light industrial enterprises in the Ukiah area at attractive cost. The professed intention was to cultivate a non-polluting industrial base with potential for providing high-paying, skilled jobs, thereby contributing to the region's prosperity and removing some of the sting from the decline of the timber industry.
The result has not met expectations. Although the business park has two major tenants, Wal Mart and Friedman Brothers, both are retail establishemnts. Contrary to its original designation as an "industrial park", no manufacturing or industrial entities are located there.
Opposition to the car dealership by the Planning Commission was based on their conviction land available for manufacturing purposes in the Ukiah Valley is becoming scarce. Loss of space for industrial use in the park will ultimately increase pressure for development, conversion of agricultural land and fragmentation of the area's infrastructure. Dispersal of industry is inefficient, placing increased demand on utility and transportation systems.
This dispersal, and the ensuing fragmentation, is inevitable if sites for industry are not identified, planned and developed. Ashiku considers it highly likely that various forms of "leap frog" development will occur, with the North Valley, East of the freeway, the primary area where competition for space will take place.
Ashiku acknowledged both the Planning Commission and City Council were concerned over the "Big Box" structures in the business park and their unappealing visual impact. However, an industrial building could be potentially as unsightly as a car dealership. This is due to the limited authority allowed the City in the design review process for the park. Currently, the City's authority is relegated to such elements as parking, signage, landscaping and building height.
By the time a project is submitted to City Planning staff, it is usually well advanced in the design stage and the City is frequently placed in the position of accepting a fait acompli. By then the developer and architect are heavily invested in the design and reluctant to accept change voluntarily. Ashiku recommends establishing design review criteria in zoning ordinances. This not only gives the City authority to forestall inappropriate or deficient design, but also benefits the developer by providing a clear blueprint of the City's expectations and requirements regarding design.
It is essential for the public interest to be protected in decisions relating to planning and development. Ashiku therefore was pleased when the City Council unanimously refused to support Akerstrom's appeal of the Planning Commission decision to deny his request for greater authority over development in the park. Had such authority been granted, the City's jurisdiction and powers would have been significantly curtailed. Ashiku's recollection was Akerstrom requested authority over boundary adjustments in the park, placement of curb cuts, pattern of traffic flow, infrastructure improvements and elimination of use permits for office structures.
Availability of land for industrial development is of central importance for the Ukiah area. With the addition of the automobile dealership, approximately fifty percent of available space in the park will be occupied - by retail establisments. Suitable land for industry is hard to come by and expensive.
Ashiku surmised a factor that may contribute to the scarcity of land is the agrarian nature of the Ukiah - Redwood Valley area and traditional patterns of ownership. Many landowners have held their land for generations and wish to retain title; preferring to lease rather than sell.
Ashiku believes the "compromise" proposed by the City Planning staff which involved their support for siting the automobile dealership in the park, against the recommendation of the Planning Commission, was initiated by Ukiah City administration. The dealership will be advantageous to the City in terms of revenue, generating as much as $150,000 a year in sales taxes. Considering the financial woes to which the City is subject, this in indeed alluring.
Because of sales tax generated, there is often a built-in bias by communities favoring retail over industrial enterprises. Manufactured products generally do not yield comparable tax revenue, as sales taxes are levied on goods sold at retail rather than wholesale. Preferring retail to industrial development is frequently short-sighted. Jobs in light-industry are usually more highly skilled, thereby warranting superior wages and benefits for employees, and contributing to a more stable work-force. The flow of payroll income results in a significant revenue stream into the community which benefits from the subsquent "roll over" effect. By emphasizing retail development at the expense of light industry, the City is sacrificing long-term benefit for short-term gain.
Ashiku stated the action by the City Council reversing the Planning Commission was an anomaly. During his two year tenure on the Planning Commission, he could recall only one other occasion where the Council overrode the Commission.
However, the degree of cooperation and coordination between the two bodies needs to be improved. In the past year, there has been only one joint meeting. Often it appears the Council has its own agenda and fails to take into account the findings and priorities recommended by the Planning Commission.
In similar fashion, the degree of coordination between City and County planning staff should be strengthened. Ashiku described the County approach to planning as excessively cautious and restrictive, tending to treat the County General Plan as sacrosanct. Ashiku recommended joint meetings between the City and County Planning Commissions, complaining the County has yet to approve the City's General Plan which he feels is critical for the plan to be effective.
A dynamic industrial base involves a critial mass of complementary institutions, laws, values, and conditions. These include an enlightened business community, an effective educational system, a well-trained work force, availability of natural resources, including land and water at competitive cost, and a favorable relationship with local govenment.
Ashiku noted that businesses are inter-dependent, relying and depending on each other. Major industries support and enhance the ability of smaller, dependent enterprises to exist and thrive. Having an effective and flourishing industrial base helps with job mobility and career development and enables communities to retain local brain power.
It is essential to forge close ties between industry and the educational system. However, Ashiku feels that schools have not been effective in developng a skilled work force.
The primary challenge of society is how to involve private citizens in issues that affect their lives. Each generation is confronted with the necessity of establishing effective methods for protecting their freedoms through citizen action and community awareness, or face the consequences. While the family instills values, government must reinforce and foster democratic civic institutions by effectively educating the public.
This goal is difficult to attain on any level. Ashiku observed that City Council and City Planning Commission meetings are sparsely attended and few private citizens are involved in the planning process.
It is imperative that local government be open and forthright regarding decisions relating to planning and development. In this regard, the media has a major role to play. Ashiku strongly recommends more extensive coverage of City Council and Planning Commission deliberations by print and electronic journalists.
In summary, Ashiku suggested the following to improve planning and development in the Ukiah Valley:
1. Work with our representatives at the State level to revise the tax code making it more attractive for small industrial concerns to locate in rural areas and compete successfully with retail enterprises for desirable locations.
2. In assigning space for development, planners should take into account the long-term benefits accruing to the community, of encouraging formation of a light industrial base. Higher salaried positions requiring greater skills, will result in a more stable work force, enabling young people to have attractive careers without leaving their communities, and an expanded tax-base.
3. Develop procedures for insuring closer, more effective coordination between the City and County in the areas of planning and development. Find ways to end harmful competition between the City and County in providing sites for businesses to locate.
4. Provide thorough orientation and in-service training for City Planning Commissioners.
5. Be scrupulous in observing the letter and intent of zoning ordinances and development plans. Avoid amendments that weaken them and defeat their purposes.
6. Cultivate avenues for increasing citizen awareness and involvement in the planning process. Invite the media to provide more extensive and detailed coverage.
7. Strengthen and expand City authority over the design review process. Incorporate adequate and appropriate design review standards in zoning ordinances.
Lesson III. What I Learned in Class
1. As a native-born American, exposed since infancy to the brutal realities of capitalism en-flagrante, you would think by now I would have developed an appreciation of the fact that such considerations as aesthetics and appearance are little more than fleeting superficialities in the world of commerce and enterprise, and must always yield to the stark reality of the profit motif. Economic considerations drove decisions made on the business park and will continue to do so in the future.
2. To extend the classroom analogy, I should have been more thorough with my homework. Had I contacted Dr. Ashiku, or another member of the Planning Commission prior to the City Council meeting, I would have been better prepared and could have discussed the issues with greater clarity and precision. As it was, major factors involved in decisions relating to the park were either omitted or alluded to in only a fragmentary, indirect manner. This would have been remedied, to some extent, if those members of the Planning Commission present had chosen to participate.
3. Even if I had been a more diligent student, I'm not so naive as to imagine the outcome would have been affected. My assumption is the issues were discussed in private conversations between the parties involved well before the City Council meeting - and the outcome predictable. However, better preparation and a thorough exploration of the issues would have resulted in a discussion that more accurately reflected the real world - and - who knows, might have changed some opinions.
4. I was impressed with the enthusiasm and clarity in which Dr. Ashiku presented his views during the interviews. His reccomendations should help establish a constructive agenda on matters relating to planning and development during his tenure on the City Council.
Copyright Mendocino Environmental Center 1997
Permission granted to excerpt or use this article if source is cited