Davis commission backs Willow Grove design changes, urges expanded native plantings and culvert removal

The Davis Open Space and Habitat Commission on its February agenda reviewed the Willow Grove development (the former Shriners site) and passed a series of recommendations asking the applicant and city staff to strengthen habitat protections, add native plantings and tree cover, limit long-term irrigation in open-space areas, and remove an on-site pump and culvert where doing so would not substantially delay permitting.

Eric Lee, the city’s senior planner, told commissioners the project has been under review for several years, a draft environmental impact report was open for public comment through January, and staff expects public hearings and reports in the coming months before summer. Staff framed the commission’s role as advisory on open-space, buffer and habitat components ahead of those hearings. Vanessa Eric Hardy, outreach lead for the applicant team, said the development would deliver parks, green belts, nearly 3 miles of trails, a 19.2-acre community park, more than 2,500 new trees and housing targeted to the “missing middle,” and that 43% of homes would be affordable in some form (20% deed-restricted plus 23% attainable product).

Why it matters: Commissioners and neighbors focused on the Wild Horse agricultural buffer and a linear watercourse called Channel A. The applicant team said it is providing a 50-foot avoidance buffer for Channel A, redesigned stormwater detention and bioretention basins to treat runoff before an engineered outfall to Channel A, and is pursuing state and federal permits. The applicant and their wetland scientist, Patrick Britton, stated the aquatic-resources delineation concluded Channel A is likely jurisdictional under the Army Corps and state standards, which would affect what treatments and plantings permit agencies will allow.

What the commission recommended: In a series of voice votes commissioners asked for (a) a valley-oak woodland and California sycamore grove in the northwest open-space node, (b) more trees and native plantings across the project and on any off-site improvements in the Wild Horse buffer, (c) detention and bioretention basins seeded with predominantly native grasses and forbs where feasible, (d) trees along basin edges where public-works maintenance and flood-protection requirements permit, (e) minimization of permanent buried irrigation in open-space while keeping permanent access points for temporary establishment watering, and (f) minimizing paved concrete through the eastern agricultural buffer except where required for accessibility (for example near park access or dog-park areas).

Public comment and outreach: Neighbors and scientists urged wider buffers and softer edges to preserve habitat for burrowing owls, raptors and small mammals; several residents described the Wild Horse buffer as heavily used and biologically valuable. Other speakers, including early outreach participants, praised the project’s trail connectivity and its open-space commitments. The applicant said it has conducted extensive outreach — more than 50 meetings/events and mailed notices to nearby homes — and is continuing meetings with adjacent neighborhoods to refine the east edge and lot setbacks.

Permitting and technical constraints: The applicant noted the Central Valley Flood Protection Board has indicated regulatory interest; the project team has chosen an avoidance strategy of a 50-foot Channel A buffer to reduce permitting risk. Engineers described pipes and an outfall from the bioretention features to Channel A and said discharge will depend on the basin treatment and flow limits that preserve existing downstream capacities. Open-space staff and public-works staff flagged maintenance and flood-safety constraints (for example, narrow basins and maintenance access) when discussing tree locations and fence design; commissioners asked staff to pursue options that balance maintenance needs with habitat value.

Votes at a glance (recommendations adopted by the commission):
- Strongly suggest a valley-oak woodland and California sycamore grove in the northwest open-space node (motion carried by voice vote).
- Recommend removing the existing culvert/opening the channel on-site to improve animal movement, recognizing that any such removal is contingent on permitting (motion carried by voice vote).
- Recommend removal of the existing pump/pumping infrastructure unless removal would substantially hinder the project’s schedule or permitability (motion carried by voice vote).
- Maximize native plantings across project common areas and any enhancements in the Wild Horse buffer (motion carried by voice vote).
- Minimize permanent irrigation in open-space areas but provide permanent water access points for temporary irrigation during plant establishment (motion carried by voice vote).
- Minimize concrete pavement in the eastern agricultural buffer, with accessible sections (near park/dog-park and key tie-ins) paved to meet access needs (motion carried by voice vote).
- Seed detention basins and other maintained open-space areas with a native-grass and forb mix where feasible (motion carried by voice vote).
- Plant trees around basin edges where consistent with public-works maintenance and flood-safety requirements, and minimize fencing around basins (motions carried by voice vote).

Quotable: Vanessa Eric Hardy, outreach lead for the applicant, said the project team has tried to design with “Davis’ values in mind” and noted the project’s affordability and open-space commitments. Patrick Britton, the wetland scientist, said the aquatic-resources delineation followed Army Corps and regional board standards and indicated Channel A is “likely waters of the U.S. and waters of the state.” Tracy (Open Space staff) emphasized the city’s practice of using temporary irrigation for establishment and avoiding permanent irrigation in open-space.

Next steps: Staff said comments to the draft EIR are being compiled and will be addressed in the final document; the project is expected to return to public hearings in the next few months and to other commissions (the social-services commission was noted as a forthcoming reviewer). The commission’s recommendations are advisory and will be forwarded for consideration in the city’s review and the applicant’s permitting work.