A LOT of people turned up last night for the Arden Arcade CPAC meeting. So many that the County Planning staff had to hustle into the back store room to fetch a bunch of extra chairs. The community members were there to give their opinions about the proposal to convert the old Macy's building into a self storage facility. Why? So a hotshot real estate investment firm from Seattle could get approval later for an apartment building between old Macy's and El Camino.  The RE investors hired former Sacramento City Councilmember Steve Hansen, who runs the Sacramento office of a big-deal PR firm, Lighthouse Public Affairs ("the preeminent statewide public affairs consultancy in California" that "helps clients clarify a vision and message that will resonate with constituencies, engage community stakeholders to build powerful coalitions, and foster the collaboration that leads to a win.") to shill for the project. Slick and condescending as the presentation was, it did not go very well.

Maybe 100 people showed up at the meeting. Speaker after speaker told the CPAC that the self storage facility was a bad idea. The audience clapped loudly in agreement after each 2-minute testimony. There were a couple of people who were supportive of adaptive reuse for the Macy's building because it had been designed by Charles Luckman, a prominent architect of the Mid-Century Modern era, but they were not keen on having a self storage facility as a Mall anchor for Country Club Plaza. Some other ideas were also put forth for the building, including expansion space for American River college and maker space for entrepreneurs and artists. Mr. Hansen even suggested that a Sheriff's facility could be part of the project {...hmm, a desperate ploy to deter crime in the vicinity?}, but he forgot to bring the Sheriff along with him for confirmation.

The investors' real plan apparently involves using the historic preservation via self storage play as an excuse to move ahead with the large apartment complex. That's what they told people at a hastily-organized "open house" inside the musty old Macy's building a few hours before the CPAC meeting. They even brought along big photo boards showing the apartment complex with its glorious forest of mature tress. The audience made the planning staff admit that housing, not being on the agenda, was not open for discussion. That did not deter the consultant from trying to wedge housing into his presentation whenever he could. And it was apparently confusing for KCRA TV, which conflated self storage and apartments in its reporting.

After all the testimony, one of the CPAC members - one with actual land use planning knowledge - lectured the audience about the myriad ways the proposed project conflicts with county plans, ordinances and procedures. It was a lecture that the planning staff should have given to the CPAC, had the staff bothered to study those documents. (Or maybe they did and the people higher than their pay grade did not care? We don't know...) The lecture mesmerized the rest of the CPAC members, who were speechless except to say "Aye" when asked to support a motion against the project. And that was actually something weird about the evening.  You see, it is not the CPAC's role to pass judgement on a project. That's what the Planning Commission is supposed to do. The CPAC is supposed to ascertain public opinion about the project. It should have been SO easy for them. All they had to do was report that nearly everyone hated the project except a few people who thought the proposal had some good points here and there. But that's not the CPAC way. Had it not been for the thorough, thoughtful and factual guidance from that one CPAC member, they might have been there all night negotiating fine points and nuances with the applicant's representative in an effort to help the project move forward.

What's next? Even though the CPAC voted unanimously to not recommend the project (again, not their role), the actual deciders are the appointees on the County Planning Commission. Typically those people do whatever they are told to do by the Supervisor who appointed them or they do what the staff wants them to do. Our Newsroom Elves tell us that listening to the community and paying attention to detail are usually very low priorities for the Planning Commissioners. At present, three of the appointees are Sac City residents, one lives in Antelope and the other lives in Carmichael. That means only one of them is likely to have some kind of gut feel for Watt and El Camino. Anyone who thinks the self-storage project is dead thanks to the CPAC is sadly mistaken. The next game in the series will be played on the Planning Commission's home court.