A LOT of people turned up tonight for the Arden Arcade CPAC meeting. So many that the county planning staff had to hustle into the back store room to fetch 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 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, might be a deterrent to all the crime in the vicinity?} but he forgot to bring the Sheriff along with him for confirmation.

After all the testimony, one of the CPAC members - who happens to have 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, because it was spot on - so much so that the rest of the CPAC members were left 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 easy. all they had to do was conclude that nearly everyone hated the project except a few people who thought the proposal had some good points here and there. Had it not been for the thorough, thoughtful and factual guidance from one CPAC member, they might have been there all night negotiating fine points and nuances with the applicant's representative such that the porject could 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. At present, three of them 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.