Seaside has a long history of poor land use decisions.
Monterey Downs, the controversial horse
race track, hotel, and other assorted components proposed for an
undisturbed portion of Fort Ord land, was a hot item at last
Thursday's Seaside council meeting. I did not attend in person, but I
did watch much of it on TV. The question of the day was whether the
city should extend an exclusive negotiation agreement with the
developer, Brian Boudreau, for another year or give up on it now.
In the grand scheme of things, it
wasn't a major turning point or an earth shattering decision, but it
drew an enormous crowd anyway. After two and a half hours of public
testimony with a majority opposing the project, the council voted 4-1
to approve the extension.
No surprise there. With the exception
of Jason Campbell, Seaside city council members have been known to
drool excitedly over the prospect of any new development in Seaside,
and something on this scale is beyond anything dreamed of before
Boudreau came along. In short, they're seeing $$$$$ dancing in front
of their eyes.
This isn't the first time Seaside
leaders have been dazzled by the prospect of easy money. It has
afflicted almost every mayor and city council over the last 30 years
leading to a string of poor land use decisions of little economic
value. One young lady, a student from CSUMB likened Seaside to an
ugly girl who will accept a marriage proposal from the first guy who
comes along. So true!
I've felt that way ever since Chili's
restaurant came into town. Here was a prime lakefront commercial
property, unlike any other available in the entire city, and the best
use city leaders could find was a bargain-brand chain restaurant with
a big red pepper above the door. The city told us Chili's would have
outdoor seating overlooking the lake, but that never materialized. I
have nothing against chain restaurants per se, but Chili's boxy
building does little to take advantage of the property's scenic
assets, and the standard corporate architecture cheapens the park
setting.
Evidently, the city learned nothing
from this experience, because the one remaining lakefront parcel is
destined to become a drive-through hamburger stand.
A short skip down the street on the
corner of Del Monte and Canyon Del Rey we got a Starbucks. We can
thank the late Jerry Smith for that. Prior to Smith's administration
that plot of land was to become part of a new train station to serve
the revival of long-planned and much-needed rail service between the
Monterey Peninsula and San Francisco. Its location across the street
from Seaside's two biggest hotels was well suited to an intercity
transportation terminal, and would have spurred future development in
the surrounding neighborhood. But Smith took the quick coffee money
and effectively blocked state and regional transportation plans to
connect the Peninsula with California's growing passenger rail
network.
A couple blocks north of there is the
west end of lower Broadway, a run-down avenue which the city has been
trying for decades to develop into a “downtown” environment with
attractive shops and restaurants. About a dozen years ago I had the
opportunity to talk to some consultants the city hired to help
develop the lower Broadway plan. When I told them the city had just
killed the train station I practically had to scrape their jaws off
the floor, they thought it so foolish.
Meanwhile, the city sort-of managed to
complete the first step of the Broadway plan with the completion of
the City Center shopping center at the corner of Broadway and
Fremont. They got the architectural design right, it's the most
attractive building in Seaside, but the tenants are all wrong.
They're the same kinds of neighborhood strip-mall stores you find all
over town. That corner needs a major anchor, like a department store,
to draw shoppers from all over the Peninsula, not just the immediate
neighborhood. That in turn would attract smaller businesses to the
rest of Broadway. If Seaside had a department store on one end and an
intercity rail station near the other, Broadway would be well on its
way to becoming an economic engine for Seaside. If only....
Here's another inexcusable failure. For
decades Seaside has wanted to build a new library on Broadway next to
the post office. $3.5 million from the county was made available for
this purpose in 1997. Seaside lost the money in January 2014 because
we sat on it too long.
Two other major projects have also been
on Seaside's drawing boards for a couple of decades, including a
resort hotel at the city's golf courses, and the Main Gate shopping
center, both on Fort Ord land. These, too, have moved at a snails
pace. Not a speck of dirt has been moved. Meanwhile, neighboring
Marina has managed to slowly but surely redevelop its portion of Fort
Ord making tangible economic progress while Seaside stagnates. Why
is that?
Mayor Ralph Rubio offered a worn-out
excuse at Thursday's meeting. He said Seaside can't develop the
blighted areas of Fort Ord because the city can't afford to demolish
the old concrete Army buildings to make the land suitable for new
development – a problem he says Marina didn't have to deal with. He
implied that the income from Monterey Downs would provide the
necessary revenue for Seaside to clean up the blight, hence the
importance of keeping Monterey Downs alive.
If that is true why did Seaside take on
the responsibility to clean up the Army's mess in the first place if
the city didn't have the financial resources to do so? Shouldn't the
federal government be paying for that? And what is the Fort Ord Reuse
Authority's role here? It's their job to help local cities
successfully redevelop the former Army base. I haven't followed
FORA's workings very closely, so I'm at a bit of a disadvantage here,
but shouldn't FORA, not Brian Boudreau, be the one helping Seaside
subsidize the clean up? We shouldn't have to scar undeveloped land to
fund the redevelopment scarred land.
So Seaside has a long history of land
use blunders. Many of them involved underdevelopment of prime real
estate. Monterey Downs takes the city to the opposite extreme –
overdevelopment – beyond the region's capacity to support it.
Housing, shopping, hotels, and a racetrack hosting numerous special
events all require roads and water to function, and we don't have a
lot of either. The Peninsula already hosts dozens of special events
every year, more than many big cities. How can our little corner of
the world handle the additional crowds, without stressing our
infrastructure and resources to the breaking point?
With Monterey Downs I think Seaside is
taking on more than it can chew, especially given city hall's track
record of poor judgment. The best case scenario I envision has
Monterey Downs collapsing under its own weight. The forthcoming
environmental impact report will likely show that the area hasn't the
capability to support it, everyone will agree with the findings, and
it will die a painless death. The city will then concentrate its
focus on the Main Gate, the resort hotel, and lower Broadway – all
non-controversial projects with basic infrastructure already in place
– and hopefully get at least one of them off the ground in the next
couple of years.
Dream on. If past experience is any
guide, Boudreau and his friends at city hall will dig in their heels,
spin the numbers to their liking, maybe scale things back a bit, and
plow ahead. Monterey Downs will become an obsession, taking planning
department resources away from the more credible projects. It would
be analogous to invading Iraq and neglecting Afghanistan resulting in
a mess on both fronts. In the end nothing will get done, Seaside's
economy will continue to stagnate, and city leaders will blame
everybody but themselves.
Comments
Post a Comment