Tag Cloud
Sunday, May 19, 2013
City Council denies McDonald’s drive-thru for Oak Park
by Melissa Corker, published on June 19, 2012 at 10:46 PM
Storyline: Politics
Loading images
Two years of conflict and debate over a potential McDonald’s restaurant in Oak Park came to an end Tuesday when the City Council unanimously voted to deny an appeal to build the project with a drive-thru.
“I’m pleased that the council stayed focused on the real issue, which was the drive-thru,” Michael Boyd, president of the Oak Park Neighborhood Association, said after the meeting. “They listened to the community, which has spoken so loudly for so many years and wanted to be heard. We’re very grateful.”
Franchise co-owner John Ritchey declined to comment on the denial of his appeal after the council vote, but a representative provided a prepared statement from the Ritchey family.
“We are extremely disappointed with this decision,” Ritchey said in the statement. “Our restaurant would have created much-needed jobs in a community with high unemployment and limited transportation options. It is unfortunate that the council members did not agree.”
The decision from City Council Tuesday sets the stage for Ritchey to either alter design plans to build the project without a drive-thru, or to pursue the matter in court. If Ritchey chooses to build without a drive-thru, the plans could sail through the planning and design process because current zoning rules would allow the project, according to Principal Planner Greg Bitter of the city Community Development Department.
Ritchey and more than 50 supporters for the project were met at City Hall Tuesday by an equal number of protesters opposing the plan to build the drive-thru on the corner of Stockton Boulevard and Second Avenue in Oak Park, across from the UC Davis Med Center.
“It doesn’t have to do with the quality of food or the quality of the company,” Sacramento architect Ron Vrilakas told the City Council. “It’s about what we want the community to become over the long run.”
Vrilakas’ feelings were echoed by many people who attended the meeting, many of whom are part of Healthy Development for Oak Park, a neighborhood group that organized to oppose the McDonald’s.
Protesters came to the meeting armed with signs that read “NO DRIVE-THRU,” and 27 people spoke to the City Council in opposition to the drive-thru during public comment.
“They anticipate 1,000 cars day-in and day-out, 365 days a year for the next 20 years,” said Oak Park resident Chris Bender. “This is not neighborhood enhancement.”
Another 35 people spoke to the City Council in support of the project, largely because of the employment opportunities it would provide.
“McDonald’s hires everyone,” said Oak Park resident and 15-year recovered addict Sherry Hall. “They hire old people, young people, the disabled and people like me who are trying to turn their life around.”
Ritchey’s application for a special permit to build a McDonald’s drive-thru in Oak Park was rejected by the city Planning Commission April 12 because it failed to meet criteria in the city 2030 General Plan.
The city’s General Plan calls for urban corridors to have multi-story and more-intense uses at major intersections with moderate lot coverage and lower-intensity uses adjacent to neighborhoods. The McDonald’s design uses about 10 percent of the lot with the drive-thru being the most prominent feature, according to commission findings.
Margaret Trujillo, area construction manager for McDonald’s, also spoke to the City Council in support of the project on behalf of franchise co-owner, John Ritchey, Jr.
“At the heart of everything we do, there is nothing more important than the trust of our customers and their families,” Trujillo said.
Among the design concessions that Ritchey agreed to, according to Trujillo, were additional signage posted on the property for pedestrian safety, and the addition of a low wall to obscure the glare of headlights from vehicles in drive-thru lanes.
After more than 50 speakers addressed the City Council, members deliberated briefly before voting to deny the appeal.
“This is a question of whether this is the right place at the right time for a drive-thru, and I don’t think this is,” Councilman Jay Schenirer said. “The type of use we put into this corner – which is a gateway to Oak Park – is really important.”
Councilman Kevin McCarty said he agreed with Schenirer, calling the importance of community input “spot-on” on the issue.
“I don’t know that this (McDonald’s drive-thru) is the best fit for this area,” McCarty said. “We need to find something that makes us all proud.”
Opposition to the Oak Park McDonald’s project began in 2010 when community members first realized a McDonald’s was being considered for the Stockton Boulevard/Second Avenue site, and continued for nearly two years.
During a nearly two-hour debate at the April 12 Planning Commission meeting, residents, community activists, doctors and architects voiced unease about the project’s impact on traffic, air quality, walkability, bike safety, land use, adjacent homes and perpetuation of an unhealthy and sedentary lifestyle.
The Planning Commission voted 6-1 to deny the drive-thru permit, and Ritchey immediately filed an appeal to the City Council.
Melissa Corker is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press. Follow her on Facebook and on Twitter @MelissaCorker.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
After listening to those who supported the McDonald's plan, it's a sad day when our young people in under-resourced communities have so few job options that a fast-food restaurant is seen as a panacea against unemployment.
Let's build on this momentum to identify a stronger business development plan for that corner--more jobs for residents of Oak Park and more healthy food choices.
Look... if you bought a house on a street with a vacant lot zoned for business, you rolled the dice. You don't get to control someone else's property.
Why should communities get to deprive the many hungry consumers driving down Stockton Blvd of a tasty Egg McMuffin? I hope this McDonalds gets built anyways, NIMBYS be damned.
I have followed this issue with interest for awhile, but this is first I have heard about this. Why haven't any of the opponents or journalists captured this point before?
If the property is now zoned for mixed use with apartments, then why is the drive-thru even the compelling issue? With or without the drive-thru, a McDonalds clearly is not mixed use with apartments. Was there another rezone approved by the Planning Commission since 2002?
If a 2002 rezone was for mixed use (whatever the hell that means), then adjacent land owners are right to complain. However, all the McDs opponents that live blocks away (i.e. most the people in the council meeting) ... have little or no grounds for complaint.
I'm no fan of zoning, should be done away with... creates blight, stops development, lends to cronyism. If your neighbor builds a buzzsaw or stinkbomb factory, should be a case to sue them for nuisance until they shut down. People should think carefully before moving next to empty lots.
This proposal should have been thrown out from day one. It meets almost none of the criteria for that location.
This a great example of big business flexing muscle, fronting a local franchisee to give it a personal, local touch, and generating astroturf support once they realized that it wasn't going to be a cake walk.
The only surprising issue was the one dissenting vote from the Planning Commission.
Lastly, Steve's idea that zoning should be abandoned and litigation be offered as a remedy ignores the inequality of those that have power and money and those that don't, and is blind to the disasters that can follow a laissez a faire approach. Examples are legion. Lets start with a little stinkbomb factory in Bhopal.
Remember Lauren Hammond and the old Washington Market at 37th Street and 2nd Avenue. It was torn down years ago with promise of new development. It still sits surrounded by chain link, Bare and strewn with trash.......In the heart of Oak Park.
And you are completely mistaken if you believe that the now vacant lot to be strewn with trash. All three SHRA blocks in that area are almost always clear of trash and weeds, and are neatly mown and well maintained. I travel past them almost every day.
I know of no current residents in Oak Park who regret the removal of that business. I would be surprised if you know anyone that would support your view.
It seems ironic that you chose to leave this neighborhood, yet denigrate the efforts of its current residents to shape it into a community within which they are comfortable to live.
The same residents you deride reasonably asked the city to abide by planning and safety regulations, and heed the recommendations of City Staff and uphold a rather clear ruling of the Planning Commission. What is disappointing about that?
Is that a requirement in the zoning definitions? If so, some folks might want to go back and reconsider the construction of City Hall.
City Council made it clear that the issue had nothing to do with McDonald's. The debate was about the drive-thru, which is not allowed in this C-2 zoning; it requires a special permit and that is what council denied.
It was also great to hear Schenirer emphasize the importance of this "gateway" corner!
If you want fast food there it sounds like you can build that, but the city is not bending over backwards to change the general plan to get a McDonalds built.
System works.
This was exactly why we live in communities to begin with. Watching the hearing on this, I think I saw the best of Sacramento. The Council made the right decision.
How do these yayhoos deny a permit to a fast food gig like McDonald's, yet in the same breath have no problem granting pot shops permits all throughout the city? There are some seriously jacked up priorities on this council. Every last one of the city council members should be recalled.
My question to you, sir, if not McDonald's, then who? When? How long do these good people have to wait until someone will make a substantive effort to improve the economic climate and provide jobs for their community?
If I were unemployed and couldn't make ends meet, the last thing I want to see is Schenirer, McCarty, and other council members turn away willing investors that create jobs. To me, this decision clearly exemplifies how out of touch these city leaders are w/ the citizens of Oak Park.
Who: Fresh and Easy, Old Soul, BFD, Naked Coffee, the Brick House, Ron Vrilakas, OPBA, OPNA, Oak Park PBID, UCD Health System (6,000 employees and growing and recruiting locally) Po'boys (excellent "fast food" and a first rate employer of locals) Two new art galleries in the Triangle Precinct.
When: Now and ongoing.
This economy is tough, I know from first hand experience, but building a double drive though take-out, in breach of planning and safety criteria, which will have a life span of probably 50 plus years, and "creating" jobs in an already supply saturated market segment - with no significant growth opportunities, but merely cannibalism from competitors - just isn't the appropriate long term solution to the immediate problem of creating jobs.
And your throw-away comment regarding Councillor Schenirer is simply not based on fact: He is approachable, extremely well engaged and communicates frequently with the Oak Park community, and has done much to protect and grow Oak Park's resources. Eg Farmers Market, Triangle Project, Redistricting, OPCC, Way Up Initiative, Community Gardens, McClatchy Park Redevelopment.
That you would choose to ignore the voice of the immediate community, disregard the advice of professional city planners, overturn the almost unanimous decision of a qualified and duly appointed planning commission and also ignore city code and safety criteria in favor of the priorities of big business clearly show us your perspective of what constitutes good governance.
Healthy Development for Oak Park is a great example of an effective wellorganised grass roots community organisation.
To those in our community (and others outside also) that have valid concerns about lost opportunity for jobs, and impetus for further investment in Oak Park: Your voices have been heard, and I personally sympathize with your perspective, and I believe many others that opposed this development also understand your stance. And in answering that concern, a huge amount of effort is being undertaken to attract other investment into Oak Park, which will provide well paying jobs and stimulate the overall economy.
To take a view that the people that oppose this project are "NIMBYs" or "anti development" or "pro gentrification" is simply not a true representation of the facts. Already much has been done and is being done to re-develop Oak Park, and much of it is being done by the same people who were so vehemently opposing this project. And although these other developments and improvements may not be taking place at this exact location, and are not being commenced today they are being done in a planned, consultative manner with significant input from community.
Thank you for the response. Here are a few thoughts that come to mind:
"Who: Fresh and Easy, Old Soul, BFD, Naked Coffee, the Brick House, Ron Vrilakas, OPBA, OPNA, Oak Park PBID, UCD Health System (6,000 employees and growing and recruiting locally) Po'boys (excellent "fast food" and a first rate employer of locals) Two new art galleries in the Triangle Precinct."
I think that all of these are wonderful things, however, I don't think they speak to the point I was making. First, I'd like to point out that while the aforementioned Oak Park associations (OPBA, OPNA, Oak Park PBID) certainly endeavor to attract business and create jobs, they offer no real or tangible employment anywhere close to the scale of that of the proposed McDonald's.
While many new small businesses are certainly good progress, all of them combined do not approach the employment opportunity offered by the rejected McDonald's.
As it pertains to UC Davis, I extend no quarter to you, the aforementioned organizations, or this city council as UCDMC has been around for close to 5 decades.
Therefore, I stand by my original assertion that this city council is the most oppressive, anti small business, wrong priority city government in my lifetime.
My comment in regard to Mr. Shenerir is accurate. Sure, Jay is a nice fella and he is certainly amiable. If these qualities are all you look for in a leader, then you deserve exactly what you are getting. When it comes to creating jobs and economic development, Mr. Shenerir is out of touch with his constituents. I use the McDonald's example and the lack of economic development and/or opportunities for the residents of Oak Park as the crux of my position. In the two years that Mr. Shenerir has served on the council the unemployment rate has increased and the blight and despair are more prevalent. This is irrefutable and factual.
"That you would choose to ignore the voice of the immediate community, disregard the advice of professional city planners, overturn the almost unanimous decision of a qualified and duly appointed planning commission and also ignore city code and safety criteria in favor of the priorities of big business clearly show us your perspective of what constitutes good governance."
If anyone is ignoring the voices of the immediate community it is you and this city council. Do you honestly believe that just because you or whoever was able to systematically organize a few caucasian residents to hold signs at a council meeting that you truly represent ALL of the residents of Oak Park? Who do you think you are fooling? The African American community is disproportionately unemployed and/or underemployed. All this city council did was further their suffering. A McDonald's that would create 80 jobs would be a God send right now. I, and many others, aren't drinking the Kool Aid.
In terms of drive through and building project, I say hogwash. There is no doubt in my mind that if this city council were more business friendly that they would find a way to work out a deal (see failed arena deal).
You sir have in no way persuaded me.
Good day.
If you feel you truly have something to add to the community of Oak Park, then I would welcome you to attend our next OPNA general meeting, where I can introduce you to some of the people who were actively involved in this effort and other key issues that impact our community. We would welcome any real solutions you may care to offer that will address key quality of life issues in Oak Park and the surrounding area.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post.
I would encourage you to do some research on how big chain businesses affect economic development vs. how small businesses affect it. While we all want to promote commerce and job creation in our respective communities, the idea that adding a McDonald's to Oak Park will have a net job creation effect is a stretch at best. McDonald's doesnt bring a net inflow of money into an area. Companies which are creating things to be sold outside the area, or providing services which keep local money local, are the types of things which create vibrant local economies. The restaurant franchies model does quite the opposite. In fact, McDonald's even used this wonderful statistic, seemingly in their own defense, at the city council meeting: They expect to keep $0.46 of every dollar in the local community.
That means $0.54 leaves. When that process is iterated over thousands, or millions of times, it means that money is consistently leaving the area, faster than it is coming in.
Now adding a restaurant to any area, wont increase the amount of food consumed in that area, unless it is a destination restaurant, creating a highly differentiated product. This franchise may 80 80 part time jobs, but certainly would subtract payroll capacity from food providers in the immediate area. Would the gain equal or surpass the loss? Studies have been done on this subject and ones cited at the city council meeting seem to point to the fact that big chain businesses commonly bring a net loss of jobs to an area. The lost jobsare not the loss of higher paid white collar jobs, had by the folks who may or may not have gentrified the area. They are service industry jobs had by the poor working class who need them most.
P.S. While we clearly dont see eye to eye on this issue, let me say thanks for your public service. I truely believe the most important job anyone can do for our country and economy is to educate the next generation of voters/taxpayers.
Thank you for your response. I really think the problem here is two fold; the anti business climate created by the city's leadership and a lack of understanding as it pertains to economic progress and/or economic equality in minority communities.
I appreciate your offer to attend a meeting. You may see me there soon.
Regards.
I agree on where we need to get to. I think we just see different paths in how to get there.
Cheers
Great debating with you and thank you for caring about your community and the well being of its citizens.
Cheers!