Informational Item #6 - Community Comments 2015

Transcription

Connolly Center
Community Comments (Received after 11/18/2014 City Council Hearing for PRP)
Please note:
This document includes Community Comments received after the Preliminary Review Procedure
application was presented to the City Council on November 18, 2014. (Earlier comments were
included with the agenda packet for the November 18, 2014 hearing and they are also provided
as a separate Information Item in the current agenda packet, see “Informational Item #10 Community Comments 2013-2014.”) Multiple comments from the same contributor are
grouped together.
Community Comments #29
From: Lawrence Fong [mailto:fonglaw gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 3:37 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Re: Connolly Center-General Plan Amendment
Dear Mr. Roth,
We would like to briefly state again that we are not in favor of changing the general plan from commercial to MediumDensity for the Connolly Center because once you eliminate the commercial zoning there, commercial use will be lost
forever there. Additionally, we believe it is not compatible with the surrounding and adjacent properties to allow
Medium-Density 4 story buildings there.
These buildings will be the tallest buildings in the neighborhood and would block the view, exposure and signage of the
surrounding existing businesses next door where Super Taco is located. The tenants may seek an injunction to halt the
construction of these tall buildings because the zoning change and the proposed building plans for the Medium-Density
high rises will render the businesses useless.
At the last Planning Commission hearing, Mrs. Cavette mentioned this problem to the Planning Commission. Also the
expert who did the special report on behalf of the city of Fremont (can't recall his name) mentioned this problem and
concern regarding the adjacent businesses with this project.
Additionally, the Medium-Density housing will create more burdens to the existing infrastructure in Fremont as it relates
to the schools, water use and other utilities, and the additional congestion. For these reasons, we request that the city
council reject this proposed amendment to the general plan for the Connolly Center. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Larry Fong and Lily Tan
From: anna simmons [mailto:aws1930 yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 1:30 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Connolly Development
I moved from San Jose to Irvington 2 years ago. I live about 2 blocks from the Connolly area. We enjoy having these
businesses so close to us. We think it is the ideal area to be in. My granddaughter is looking for a home to buy in
Irvington.. She is looking for a fixer-upper and would certainly be looking to do business in at least three of the
businesses in that area.
1
I have just returned home from a 2 month trip and was not able to attend the Fremont Planning Commission meeting. I
do want to express my concern on the planned townhouse project. Have you seen San Jose lately? The character of
San Jose areas has changed. The streets have become a solid wall of apartments, townhouses and comdos. And they
are building more! Fremont Blvd does not need more townhouses by sacrificing established business.
2
From: Larry & Sandy <huisinghls yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 3:42 PM
To: Julie Vidad
Subject: Connolly Center
To all Planning Commission personnel,
When & how did we lose all control over what you folks are doing with the City of Fremont?
Many of us can't understand why a thriving area like the Connolly Center would even be considered for demolition,
to be replaced by 56 townhomes + additional live/work units. ??
How is a decision like this made? Clearly none of you live in or near the Irvington Area.
While those of us who do live in the area & enjoy and use the existing businesses on the Connolly site thought that we would
always have; Connolly's, an excellent furniture store-which features many furniture items that are made in America. Kelly Moore Paints
a quality paint store. Conklin Brothers Floor Covering, high quality floor coverings with a proven track record. Bob's Giant Burgers, a
classic old fashioned eating place enjoyed by all. The American Cancer Discovery Shop, an excellent high end, well maintained &
managed resale store that benefits the community in two ways by providing affordable quality merchandise, and secondly raising
thousands of dollars each year for the American Cancer Society. There is a fitness club, several other food places and more. The
parking lots are always full, have any of you even been in this area to see these thriving businesses?
The Center was completely renovated not that many years ago and still looks great. We do not need more housing in Irvington. The
City of Fremont has not addressed the severe drought while you approved thousands of new homes being built all over Fremont. Just
saying there is some place in the ACWD system that supports new construction,( which is not what my water bill says) does not solve
the problem. You have not presented any long term feasible plan to support the infrastructure of the city; Law Enforcement, Fire
Departments, Education, Hospitals etc.
The population of Fremont is exploding, fueled by all the new developments. Where are people going to go for medical care with our
overburdened 2 existing hospitals? Where are all the new First Responders; Police, Fire and Paramedics?
It takes a lot of time to hire, train and get "field ready” these personnel. Adding a few positions each year will not provide adequate
protection and services for our city. Fremont schools are some of the best in the state, how will that continue when we are not building
any new schools, with the exception of the small school which is only a partial elementary school, being built in Warm Springs?
Not to mention the traffic problems the city is already facing before most of your projects have been completed. It just seems that this is
all about money. The developers have your ears, not those who you work for, the residents of the city of Fremont. I am just a senior
citizen, concerned about what I see and hear is happening in Fremont.Please do not tear down existing properties that are doing well
and are a part of Fremont's history and its future.
Respectfully,
Sandra Huisingh
3
4
From: Gary Dorighi [mailto:gdorighi comcast.net]
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Connolly Center Development Proposal
Dear Mr. Roth,
I would like to express my opposition to the development proposal in Irvington that would impact the Connolly Center. I
feel this property and the businesses there are a thriving and an attractive element of the Irvington area. I would like to
see the Connolly Center remain.
I am not as opposed to the Chapel Business Center redevelopment. It appears older; it is less attractive; and it is less
visible from Fremont Blvd. Nonetheless, having lived in Fremont for 37 years, I think Fremont is putting in too much high
density housing.
Thank you for your consideration.
Gary Dorighi
Boitano Drive
Fremont, CA 94539
From: Don Hall [mailto:kq6kv1 gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:12 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: 5 Corners shopping center destruction
Dear Mr. Roth.
My wife and I have been residents of Fremont since the late 1960's. We purchased our first home and raised two
children in Fremont.
We have been long time customers of the shopping center in the 5 corners area, and we STRONGLY feel that the
Connolly's shopping center should NOT be turned into more housing!!
We purchased our first sofa at Connolly's, and have been customers many times since. We buy paint at Kelly Moore,
burgers at Bob's Giant Burger, and are members of Fitness 19.
These are successful stores with a long history of serving the residents of Fremont. PLEASE DO NOT DESTROY these
businesses!!!
We need these businesses more than we need more housing in Fremont. You have started to build homes on EVERY
vacant parcel on Mission Blvd. Enough is enough!!
PLEASE KEEP THESE BUSINESSES IN THEIR PRESENT LOCATION--they are needed more than a few more houses!!!
Fremont is already building plenty of new homes!!
PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THE CONVERSION OF THIS SHOPPING CENTER TO RESIDENTIAL!
Thank you
Donald Hall
Encanto Way
Fremont, CA
From: Don Hall [mailto:kq6kv1 gmail.com]
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Re: 5 Corners shopping center destruction
5
Mr RothThank you for the e-mail. I did not realize that the Connollys owned the shopping center, and wanted to develop the
site.
That makes it a bit easier to understand, but I still like the shops at this site and don't think we need a lot more
housing in a business district.
Thank you
Don Hall
From: smevans comcast.net [mailto:smevans comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 5:18 PM
To: Bill Roth
Cc: Evans, Carol
Subject: Opposed to demolishing Connolly & Chapel Business Centers
Mr. Bill Roth
Fremont City Planner
Dear Mr. Roth,
We are opposed to demolishing the Connolly and Chapel Business Centers.
We both have been Irvington residents since 1977 and over those years we have regularly purchased, and would like to
continue to purchase goods and services from these business centers including: Bob's Giant Burgers, Connolly's
Furniture, Kelly Moore Paints, Conklin Brothers Flooring, Domino's Pizza (and others).
These are very popular local businesses and they have been established on Fremont Boulevard for for many years.
Why would anyone what to change the zoning designation from Business to Residential on what is probably the biggest
business-zoned street within the city of Fremont?
Please advise us as to what circumstances have changed since the 2011 Fremont General Plan was adopted that would
require such an amendment (as proposed) in so short of a time?
Sincerely & respectfully submitted,
Stephen & Carol Evans
Frontenac Park Court
Fremont, CA 94538
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message. However, a number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced...
From: Stephanie [mailto:bug54 sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 9:46 AM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Dec. 10th development proposal
Dear Mr. Roth,
I am strongly opposed to the tearing down of the Connolly Center and Chapel Business Center. I have lived in the
Irvington district of Fremont since 1990, and seeing pasture lands developed and businesses razed all around us is
extremely upsetting and taking away many of the attractions that drew us here in the first place. Traffic from added
housing units is already becoming a severe problem, as is parking. Please do not add to these problems!
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
6
Stephanie Rouse
From: Stephanie [mailto:bug54 sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 6:57 AM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Re: Dec. 10th development proposal
Dear Mr. Roth,
Thank you very much for your rapid reply to my concerns about the Connolly Center rezoning proposal and all of
the information you provided. While a study may show that the traffic impact should be less with the proposed
condominium development, my experience living in a condominium nearby is that occupants do not always follow
the City-mandated occupancy limits. A two bedroom unit in our complex houses six adults and they are planning
to move shortly, having found that parking all of their cars nearby is a problem (and creates a problem for their
neighbors trying to park on already crowded residential streets).
I love riding my bike or walking to businesses in the Connolly Center and Chapel Business Center, especially the
Discovery Shop operated by the American Cancer Society. We buy our furniture from Connolly's because it is in
our area and relationships have been established with their salespeople.
My husband does not believe writing about his concerns about the rezoning proposal will help change the
outcome, but joins me in hoping the businesses will remain where they are in the Connolly and Chapel Business
Centers.
Thank you very much for your thoughtful consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Rouse
From: noreply@civicplus.com [mailto:noreply@civicplus.com]
To: Julie Vidad
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Contact the Planning Commission
The following form was submitted via your website: Contact the Planning Commission
Your name: Tish Davidson
Commissioner (choose one): All
Subject: Plans to replace Connolly Center and Chapel Business Center
Comments: I am writing you to express my concern and opposition to Replacing the Connolly Center and Chapel
Business Center with townhouses. I do not believe any more living spaces should be approved in Fremont until the
situation with public school overcrowd9ng is resolved. School overcrowding negatively affects the property values of all
homeowners and is, in my opinion, a factor that will drive people away from buying homes in Fremont. In addition,
replacement of the Connolly Center and the Chapel Business Center will not only force out several long‐established
Fremont Businesses, but is likely to add to traffic congestion and the scarcity of parking in that section of Irvington.
I am not opposed to change, and I do think that the area of Fremont Boulevard where these centers are located is a bit
shabby and could use a face lift, but I strongly urge you not to replace these businesses with homes and home/work
spaces. Please balance the need for development in this area with the needs of the broader Fremont comminuty.
Tish Davidson
7
Your name: Deni Caster
Subject: Connelly Center hearing
Comments: You know, for years I have shopped at Connolly Furniture, and Conklin Brothers carpet & tile, and Kelly
Moore Paint located in the Connolly Center was started here in San Carlos ‐ a local company that has gone
nationwide..... Add to it the Super Taqueria that is always packed and Bob's (wonderful) Giant Burgers.... 5 businesses
that MAY be put out of business because a developer wants to put townhome's on that property instead.
For this to happen, the Planning Commission has to approve a request to change the zoning of the location from
Commercial/Mixed Use to Medium‐Density Residential and then it would have to go thru an approval with the City
Council.
We have lost the Beauty College and best TV repair shop I knew of over on Peralta to townhomes. Funny, in a recent
new article the San Jose Chamber of Commerce President said that commercial businesses were the "lifeblood" of the
city. Here in Fremont, if a business is not at the far end in Pacific Common, or planned for "downtown" apparently it is
not worth it (although I see Connolly's IS putting in a store in Livermore's lovely downtown area).
What the heck is Fremont doing.... you want to allow 800 apartments with 1.5 cars per unit, but expect them to go to
Milpitas (?) to buy furniture, or rugs for their new homes? You do not want to keep both the sales tax and the corporate
income taxes of these locally owned businesses in Fremont, Alameda Cty? You want this to become an "urban" area and
not be a "bedroom community" but you are ONLY ALLOWING bedrooms.....
deni caster
37880 3rd St
Fremont, CA 94536
8
From: grace [mailto:gracechin comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 12:58 AM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Connolly Center and Chapel Business Center
Dear City Planner,
I am a resident in Fremont and is very concerned with the proposal to tear down the Connolly Center and Chapel
Business Center in Irvington. I went to that place from time to time as it is a convenient location for me and has good
traffic in that area. The Connolly Furniture and other retail shops over there are running well and I see no reason to tear
that place down and replace with residential area. This area , together with the business /shopping center on the other
side of Fremont Blvd is a convenient location for people in Irvington to go and shop or eat, instead of going north to the
HUB or Central Fremont. I believe Fremont city should support local business and encourage people to spend money in
local business.
If that business center is replaced with residential area, the Fremont Blvd in that section may become overloaded. The
structure of the local community will be totally different. It will be more densely populated with less retail stores, and
more people will have to go further to shop and eat.
I hope the city will consider the welfare of the local residents and keep the Connolly Center and Chapel Business Center
as it is.
Thanks for attention.
Grace Chin.
Resident of Palm Ave,
Fremont CA94539.
9
From: DEBBIE MARKOVICH [mailto:dmark1255 gmail.com]
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Irvington Business
Mr. Roth,
I've just read that the City of Fremont Planning Dept. will be reviewing a proposal to tear down the Connolly Center and
Chapel Business for townhomes.
Having lived in Fremont for over 50 years I must say NO. Those business provide Fremont with other shopping choices.
Bob Burgers alone is an icon to Fremont. also the fitness center offer a low cost workout place for the people of
Fremont.
The property is well maintained, and the business are thriving.
To tear down for Townhomes is not in the best interest for Fremont.
Not to mention traffic. I'm sure you have driven down Fremont Blvd.
and know what a traffic mess it already is, and to build townhomes will just add to it. Bad enough that Townhomes are
being built on Fremont Blvd and Irvington Ave. That will be a nightmare for traffic trying to get in and out of that place.
It already back up past Carol St. I must voice my concerns about this plan.
I say no it should remain commercial. No Townhome apartments house nothing just commercial like it is now.
If you want to build Townhome it should have been over by the Spouts Market and bank the City took down for the
pedestrian friendly walk way by the Hub.
That property was run down the gas station went out of business and the whole place was a dump. Fremont Blvd at that
spot could have handled the extra traffic. but no the City wanted a pedestrian friendly walk way for business.
What business everything has been moved to Pacific commons.
I must say NO to this new development.
Thank you
Debbie Markovich
Fremont Citizen.
From: Nancy Dorighi [mailto:ndorighi comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 11:30 AM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Connolly Center development proposal
Dear Mr. Roth,
I would like to express my opposition to the development proposal in Irvington that would impact the Connolly Center.
I feel this property and the business there are a thriving and attractive element of the Irvington area. I would like to see
the Connolly Center remain.
I am not as opposed to the Chapel Business Center redevelopment. It appears older, is less attractive and less visible
from Fremont Blvd. Nonetheless, having lived in Fremont for 37 years, and I think Fremont is putting in too much high
density housing.
Thank you for your consideration.
Nancy Dorighi
44142 Boitano Drive
Fremont, CA 94539
10
-----Original Message----From: Barbara Wiley [mailto:bwiley2082 sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 7:09 AM
To: Bill Roth
Cc: Barbara Wiley
Subject: Connolly shopping center
Dear Mr. Bill Roth, City Planner:
I just read, with interest, the proposal for the development that is proposed for the Connolly shopping center.
I have heard rumors about this center for over a year and was hoping the plans for a residential project was dead.
The article in the Tri-City Voice raises some poignant questions: This developer is asking the City to amend the 2011
General Plan Why? Irvington is supposed to be protected as one of Fremont's key commercial centers. This shopping
center has highly rated businesses; therefore it does not qualify under Fremont's "pruning policy" as being
underperforming or underutilized, and is certainly not in deteriorating condition(it was remodeled not too many years
ago), nor does it have high vacancy rates, or a rapid turn-over of tenants. Many of those businesses have been there for
a very, very, long time and three of them were in the top choices as "best businesses" in several categories.
For the above stated reasons, Why, Why should this shopping center be razed?? Yes, Fremont does need more housing,
and affordable housing, also. BUT, currently almost every spare piece of property has either been approved or is being
proposed for residential usage. Fremont says it wants businesses, good usage of commercial property. Then don't go
and destroy those businesses who are already in an acceptable area and are bringing in good tax dollars. Also, has a
report of Durham elementary school from FUSD been asked for as to the population of that school? Does it have more
room for students? Already, Irvington High and Horner Jr. High are impacted and are planning additions for more
projected students. Horner will be a 6th-8th grades middle school this next year if plans are on track. The City and the
FUSD need to work closely together to make sure that the educational facilities don't continue to be overtaxed. Parents
don't want their children attending a school on the other side of town from their neighborhood. When adequate funds
aren't received from a developer when a school is needed in the area of the new residential project, the school district
can't provide a new school and has no choice to have the new students attend the closest school which has space.
Please use good, common sense in the continued planning of our City in which we have resided for forty-five years. We
hope the Planning Commission and the City Council will work together in conjunction with FUSD when necessary to
carry out the General Plan which has been made and when changes are needed, that these bodies of government won't
yield to pressure from developers who are here today and many gone from the area tomorrow.
Sincerely,
Barbara Wiley
From: rebecca b. [mailto:rbockstiegel hotmail.com]
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Please Don't
Dear Mr. Roth,
I have lived in Fremont for close to 40 years. My two children were born here. I have taught in its school district for
almost 30 years. I just recently spent several tens of thousands of dollars to renovate my home here. I CARE ABOUT
11
FREMONT. It is upsetting to learn that the Fremont Planning Commission will consider a proposal to tear down all the
buildings on the Connolly Center and Chapel Business Center properties, and replace them with more townhouses.
There are several businesses there that my family and I have relied on for many years. I don't want to have to go to
other cities to shop and to eat, but lately that is what I find myself doing.
Please speak in favor of developing Fremont into more than just a "bedroom community", in favor of it becoming a place
that supports all of its residents' needs.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Rebecca Baker
510-301-8568
4328 Stevenson Blvd.
-----Original Message----From: Margaret [mailto:margaretmccutchen sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 3:44 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Connolly Property
I am opposed to Fremont's proposal to tear down all of the buildings on the Connolly property and change the zoning to
residential. The businesses on the property are successful businesses and are important to the Irvington Business
District and residents living in the area.
Don't do it!!!!!
Margaret McCutchen
Fremont Resident since 1978
Sent from my iPad
-----Original Message----From: The Cavettes [mailto:thecavettes gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 3:14 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Disapprove Connolly Center
WARMINGTON CONNOLLY RESIDENTIAL (PLN2015-00275)
First and foremost, I do not think Warmington should be granted a General Plan Land Use Amendment to change the
Connolly Center and Chapel Business Center properties from Commercial/Mixed-Use to Medium-Density Residential.
Those commercial centers do not need pruning. Warmington is not providing Fremont with any affordable/senior
housing. They are not proposing a quality project as was asked for by the City Council last November.
All they propose is row after row of 5- and 6-plexes. The townhouses are like all the other nearly 800 townhouse units
approved in the last 3 years - not even counting the Warm Springs projects.
12
The live/work units are pointless in this location. Irvington needs locations for small retail and restaurants - not tiny 16' x
15'offices. Remember that the type of business allowed in a live/work unit is limited.
The live/work units are right at the sidewalk and they block the signage of the businesses behind Super Taco. So, not
only would the eleven businesses in these two centers be removed but the businesses in the Super Taco center would
lose line-of-sight to their signage.
And at the last minute they added an 11th live/work unit in the building adjacent to Super Taco that will block the Super
Taco signs. Because of the added unit, the project will not have the required parking spaces and they will be asking for a
variance.
Or maybe they added the extra unit in order to have a "throw-away" unit to divert attention from how ordinary the
building layout is.
Please recommend disapproval of this entire project.
Regards,
Alice Cavette
From: The Cavettes [mailto:thecavettes gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 4:59 PM
To: Bill Harrison; Suzanne Chan; Vinnie Bacon; Rick Jones - Councilmember; Lily Mei; suzannelchan@gmail.com;
Suzanne Chan
Cc: Bill Roth
Subject: Warmington Connolly Project Plans
Mayor and Councilmembers,
Attached addresses my concerns with the project plans submitted for the Warmington Connolly development.
Regards,
Alice Cavette
>>attached letter <<
Mayor and Councilmembers,
On Dec. 10th, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Warmington Connolly Center project in a
4 to 3 vote.
In their deliberations, the commissioners did not discuss the specific project plans. I would like to address
problems I see with the plans so that they are not lost amidst the discussions of the GPA and live/work concept.
In November 2014, the City Council asked Warmington to bring them something special - not just an ordinary
townhouse development.
Look at the layout below. Is there anything special about blocks of buildings in straight lines? I love that many of
Fremont's apartment/condo complexes have buildings in a variety of alignments. Doesn't this layout look just
like the plain apartment blocks of old?
13
And look where they are putting the small open-space and tot-lot --- right next to the business parking lot. And
right over the wall will be the tire shop with its air guns blasting away.
They have added an 11th live/work unit to the building that will be adjacent to Super Taco. This makes Building 9
even closer to Super Taco than the rows of townhouse buildings behind it. This will block the signage of the
shops in the Super Taco center and hurt even more businesses.
Mr. Greensfelder, who had prepared the Irvington District Land Use Study, even said that the signage being
blocked was a valid point that should be addressed.
By adding that 11th live/work unit, they are now missing two required parking spaces. If you are going to OK
live/work units, at least make them take out the middle unit of Building 9, move the building over, unblock the
view of the signage and eliminate the need for those 2 parking spaces.
Please consider these points in your review of the application and do not be afraid to have them change the
project plans.
Regards,
Alice Cavette
Castillejo Ct.
Fremont, CA
14
15
16
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 12:32 PM
To: Julie Vidad
Your name: Paul McGovern
Your Email address<BR>: Paul Crossroadsfremont.org
Subject: Connolly Center
Comments: As a resident who lives within a 1/4 mile of this project I am very concerned about increased traffic on
Fremont Blvd. during high commute hours. Between 5‐6:30 pm ‐ Northbound traffic between Washington and Grimmer
is a nightmare. This project will just increase the already congested traffic. I'd like to know what the Planning
Commission intends to do to address this concern.
From: jitender makkar [mailto:j_makkar yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2015 9:27 PM
To: Bill Roth; Jitender Makkar
Subject: Fw: Warmington-Connolly Initial Study Posted
Hello Broth,
I briefly looked at the plans and have one serious issue that I would like you to raise to the builders, architect and
planning commission:
Parking.
Parking is very poorly designed. It is focused in one area only and it is extremely difficult for guest to walk and find a
home especially when some one elderly comes or family is tired or they are carrying sleeping kids. Even normal young
couples will have a hard time walking such long distances in cold, heat or rain. Please suggest them that parking should
be spread out.
I say this because I have designed several subdivisions. Now, I sell them and it is a nightmare to park and for prospects to
walk up to open houses. No one likes to buy in such neighborhoods with far away parking.
-Wishing You Most And MORE....
Jitender Makkar
OHomez
B r o k e r® DRE# 0 1 4 7 2 7 3 8
C e l l : (510) 3 9 6 - 2 1 4 9
17
From: lively gardens [mailto:moosemama5864 sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 12:17 PM
To: Bill Roth
Cc: Lively Gardens
Subject: Connolly Townhouse project
Hello Mr. Roth –
I attended the meeting at Fremont Main Library last Tuesday regarding the Connolly Townhouse Site and am completely
against the entire plan:
1. Adding all this proposed residential traffic thru this area will be intolerable. As well as the parking.
2. These units are not designed for older persons, but families. Where will all these additional children go to school?
We have no school buses in Fremont anymore, not only will employment/errand traffic increase dramatically, but so will
school commute traffic to whichever over-crowded school these children are shoehorned into. What ever happened to
neighborhood schools?
3. Connolly’s, Bob Giant Burgers, the Discovery Shop, Dina’s etc…are all popular businesses that will be forced out. How
will the City recompense these businesses? It won’t. It never does. Fremont is cruel that way. While a large business like
Connolly’s may move and survive elsewhere, smaller businesses will just die.
4. we are experiencing a major drought – and the city wants to add more of this stress?
5. the idea of live/work units in Fremont is a lovely dream. Once again, the City of Fremont does not want or encourage
independent businesses. Fremont has demonstrated again and again that it wants only least common denominator
chain stores. These are not located in these types of units. The future of these little shops will be to create a retail ghetto
and blight of empty stores.
6. The physical height of the proposed buildings is completely out of character for the area. Blocking the views of older
residences and towering over their yards is wrong. The ugliness of packing in so many can be easily seen by the current
projects in Newark. This should not to be copied.
7. and etc….but I think you get the idea of my opinion.
The General Plan should stand – this is a business parcel, keep businesses, employment, and that tax base intact. The
City needs to stop letting developers call the shots. This could be a segue into how disingenuous the City is being with
the Olive Hyde parcel in Mission San Jose, but that is another issue.
Thank you for this opportunity to voice my opinion in this important local issue.
Patricia Lacy
37110 Blacow Rd.
Fremont, Calif 94536
18
19
From: jack christensen [mailto:carolyn555 sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 2:29 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Townhouses
Bill Roth:
I strongly oppose the building of townhouses in our Irvington District of Fremont in the area where long time
businesses, Connolly's, Bob's Giant Burgers, Kelly Moores Paint, and Dominos Pizza are located.
This is our Irvington shopping and business area and it should not be residential at all. Please leave it
alone. We already have enough problems with traffic and parking and to make more problems is ridiculous.
Most of the current businesses have been there for a long time and we identify them with our Irvington
area. The whole plan has not been well thought out. The live in work units do not sound very sensible at all.
Please leave our Irvington area alone.
A long time resident of Fremont,
Carolyn Christensen
From: Shirley Hicks [mailto:literacy4y2k sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 2:15 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: CONNOLLY DEVELOPMENT
To Bill Roth:
RE: CONNOLLY DEVELOPMENT
The health and viability of a city are dependent upon at least three critical factors, namely, a) the
accessibility and quality of public education that it offers to all students, b) the number of police officer per capita as
needed to provide adequate protection and safety for its citizenry, and c) the sufficiency of city services to ensure
clean streets that are in good condition.
The proposed increased density in population here in the Irvington District will, in all probability, compromise the
quality of life, not only for us, the residents here, but will impact the City of Fremont as a whole. Please reconsider.
Respectfully,
Mrs. Shirley Hicks
20
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 3:01 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Warmington Connolly Community Meeting Summary
Bill Roth
Fremont Planning Department
Re: Connolly/Chapel Development Community Meeting Summary
Warmington Residential held a Community Meeting on March 31 in the Fremont Main Library, Fukaya Room B. They had
listed the library address and meeting room incorrectly in their letter of invitation to residents, and had omitted the
project plans from the first mailing.
Warmington may contact residents again to determine how many people went to the wrong location. Jay Deckard, Vice
President of Community Development Southern California Division opened the meeting. David Agee, Project Manager,
Northern California Division and one other person from Warmington were there.
The meeting was lightly attended with about 12-14 residents and local business owners present. After a brief
presentation on the company and the site plans, Jay Deckard answered questions from the audience. He reassured
residents that no vehicle or pedestrian connectivity was planned from the development site to Kvistad Drive. He also
confirmed that there would be no four-story elements or affordable housing units within the project.
Several people questioned the viability of the ten live/work units facing Fremont Boulevard. They asked if the work
space business failed, would the owner have to move? Jay said no. Could the owner rent the downstairs to another
business? Again, no. Had they built any similar live/work units elsewhere in Northern California? Another no.
In general, he gave the impression that Warmington didn’t really care.
He said the downstairs business space could easily be used for storage or as a home office or an additional bedroom and
bathroom if the owner installed curtains or shades on the front windows/door -- that the city just wanted to give the
“impression” that the downstairs spaces were commercial. When asked if Warmington would consider dropping the
live/work idea and constructing true commercial buildings along the front of the site, he said no.
On another subject, the owner of the business center immediately south of the project (Super Taco, etc) expressed a
concern that the three-story live/work unit (Unit 10) directly adjacent to the property line would block visibility to his
buildings. (The proposed townhouse units further east on the site have a significantly greater setback.) There was no
resolution to that point.
There were also concerns about the impact on traffic, noise, and schools, but they were left unanswered pending the
formal application review.
In conclusion, Jay Deckard summed up by saying that most of the audience didn’t want the project, but the property
owner and developer did. “We’ll just have to agree to disagree,” he said. All in all, he gave the impression that they were
going to proceed no matter what the residents wanted. It was a very unsatisfactory community outreach meeting in my
opinion.
Chris Cavette
21
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 12:03 PM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Connolly/Chapel Development Community Meeting Summary - June 30, 2015
Bill Roth, Fremont Planning Department
Warmington Residential held a second Community Meeting on June 30 in the Fremont Main Library, Fukaya
Room B.
The meeting was lightly attended with about 10 residents and local business owners present. All but one were
opposed to the project, one seemed neutral.
The following items were discussed:
- The project is currently for 71 units, but the developer said they will probably reduce it to 66 units to meet the
city’s requirement that all structures within 50 feet of the property line adjacent to lower density housing be no
more than 30 feet tall. They will also change an unspecified number of units from three-story to two-story to
meet this requirement.
- The project still includes 10 live-work units facing Fremont Boulevard because “the city wants the buildings to
look commercial”.
Most people felt the ground floor work areas would not be used for businesses and would end up being closedoff storage or bedroom areas.
- None of the units will have tandem garage configurations (presumably after some of the current floor plans are
changed to two-story as noted above).
- The bare common open space now has play equipment and benches.
- The city is pushing the developer to install roof solar panels and electrical connections, but there was no
commitment to do that.
- All water heaters will be wall-hung, “box-like,” demand-flow designs. It was not clear if that was a city
requirement, a state requirement, or a developer’s choice.
- The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment walkaround inspection of the site had been conducted that day
(June 30). No information on the findings.
- Nearby residents were concerned about the loss of existing businesses on the property and additional traffic
on nearby streets -- especially on Max Drive, which according to some has become a cut-through speedway.
Other concerns were about the general trend to higher-density housing in Irvington, the impact of the
development on local schools, and crime.
- The owner of the Super Taco property asked that the live-work unit on the south end be deleted to give better
street visibility to the businesses on his property. The developer said no.
22
- One big concern was that there is now a fire department access gate to Kvistad Drive, despite the previous
assurance there would be none.
Residents were especially adamant that the gate be solid enough and high enough that people could not walk or
climb around it. (With two driveway access points, I don’t see the need for a third access point) ___
As an aside, and not related to this project, many residents used the meeting to vent about the lack of the city’s
response to various problems in the area:
- Residents have been asking for speed limit signs on Max Drive and/or beefed up police enforcement to cut
down on speeders. Installation of speed humps were also mentioned.
- People near the T-intersection of Max and Grimmer have been parking vehicles all the way around the corners
of that intersection, which limits visibility and makes turning off Max dangerous. The owners of two airport
shuttle vans were mentioned as significant offenders.
- Theft and graffiti in the area have increased since the nearby skate park opened.
- One house on Kvistad has “four families living there, park cars all over the street, and dump their trash in the
backyard to avoid paying for trash service.”
(In every case, I suggested they use the City of Fremont comment/help menu item on the city’s Website to
report the problem and ask for
correction.)
Chris Cavette
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 8:45 AM
To: Bill Roth
Cc: Kristie Wheeler
Subject: Warmington Connolly (PLN2015-00275) - Why Live-Work Units Won’t Work Here
I am strongly opposed to the proposed live-work units in this project because I feel they will not work
for several reasons:
- First, there is no legal requirement for the owners of the live-work units to operate businesses in the
ground-floor spaces. If one or more of the businesses fail or close, the owners do not have to move out,
or even start new businesses. They are also prohibited from renting or leasing the spaces to other
businesses. No amount of Home Owner Association Rules or Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions can
force the owners to maintain businesses. Instead, they can draw the curtains, lock the front doors, and
use the spaces for storage, game rooms, or even extra bedrooms -- leaving a patchwork of blank
windows facing Fremont Boulevard.
- Second, the restrictions on business uses of live-work units preclude many desirable types of
operations. For example, the owners may not have restaurants or food stores because of health and
parking requirements. They may not sell retail goods because of restrictions relating to inventories, and
23
they may not operate daycare or afterschool tutoring program because of restrictions relating to
student safety.
- Third, the upper-floor living areas of the live-work units face directly onto the noise and traffic of
Fremont Boulevard, making them less-than-desirable places to live. If the owners decide to move to
better housing, they cannot continue to operate their businesses here.
- Fourth, the asking price of the proposed live-work units is estimated to be upwards of $800,000 or
more. This level of investment is out of the price range of many small business owners, who can rent
commercial space elsewhere at a lower cost and with fewer restrictions.
- And finally, the developer has stated during community outreach meetings that the only reason livework units are included in the project is because the city wants to make the ground floor along Fremont
Boulevard "look commercial". I think it's just going to look shabby and unused.
___
For the record, I feel this entire site should remain commercial as designated in the General Plan. The
successful businesses here should not be forced to relocate, and new housing should not be wedged
into the middle of an existing business block.
If this project is to have a residential element, it should be in the form of a mixed use development with
40-45 townhouses at the rear of the property. The commercial element along Fremont Boulevard should
be separate buildings with sufficient floor space and parking to support a variety of businesses.
I appreciate your consideration of these comments.
Chris Cavette, 42800 Castillejo Court, Fremont
From: The Cavettes [mailto:thecavettes gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 10:39 AM
To: Bill Roth
Subject: Warmington Connolly Residential (PLN2015-00275) - Successful Business Location
Bill Roth,
One of the reasons I like living in Fremont is that we have many good businesses that are
conveniently located throughout the city. I don't have to drive across town to get what I need.
I was reading the results of the Fremont Bulletin's 2015 Best of Fremont voting recently and noted
that five of the winning businesses were located next to each other in the same block on Fremont
Boulevard in Irvington:
Connolly’s Fine Furniture, 40774 Fremont Blvd Best Furniture/Antiques - First Place
Bob’s Giant Burgers, 40720 Fremont Blvd
Best Hamburger - Runner Up
Fitness 19, 40758 Fremont Blvd
Best Health and Fitness Club - Runner Up
24
Taqueria Super Taco, 40798 Fremont Blvd
Best Mexican Restaurant - Runner Up
Dina’s Family Restaurant, 40800 Fremont Blvd Best Breakfast Spot - Runner Up
The question that crossed my mind was how can five of the best businesses in Fremont be located
on a site that a consultant has identified as being "not a prime, or even good, retail location"?
Because that's exactly what a city-hired consultant wrote about the Connolly Business Center and
surrounding area.
I think the answer is that the report was based on generalities and did not consider the ongoing
success of those businesses. The fact is that this is a good business location filled with good
businesses that have operated successfully for many years.
Even today, with a changing economy and demographics, these businesses continue to provide
goods and services that meet the needs of the community in a location that is convenient and
inviting to their customers. Forcing them to move just to make room for more houses is wrong and
it will hurt both the businesses and the community.
I ask the Planning Commission and City Council to reject the consultant's report as flawed and
disapprove the proposed General Plan Amendment to convert this site from commercial to
residential.
Chris Cavette, resident of Fremont
From: dan sanchez [mailto:dlbcs att.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 10:48 PM
To: Bill Roth; vinnie bacon4fremont.com
Cc: Jay Deckard; Kathleen Francisco; Bill Harrison
Subject: Connolly/Chapel Business Site
Hello - My name is Lori Sanchez. My husband, Dan, and I reside on Max Drive, the neighborhood directly
behind Connolly's Furniture. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed development of this site to
build multi story townhomes and condominiums. My sister, Katie Francisco, lives next door to me. She, too,
has written to express her opposition. Our mother who is 90 years of age resides with my husband and
myself. We have been long-time Fremont residents and have seen this community grow over the years. I'm
sure you all are well aware of the congestion on Fremont Boulevard and Grimmer Boulevard in the Irvington
District. This proposed development would only contribute to the congestion. During commute times, making a
left turn onto Max Drive is ridiculous. I have no doubt our street would become an access street to this
development. We have no sidewalks on our part of Max Drive so walking on our street would become even
more hazardous. While my children are grown, we now have grandchildren who frequently visit and I do not
want any more traffic on my street than what exists already. In addition, the construction of these multi story
dwellings would overshadow our neighborhood. It is not in the interests of Irvington District to add additional
housing at this site. I appreciate the small businesses surrounding our neighborhood and to take these away, I
believe, would be detrimental to our local economy. I haven't even touched on the issue of schools. Please,
please do not allow this. I am unfortunately, not able to attend the community outreach meeting on Tuesday,
March 31, 2015, so I am writing to voice my objection in this e-mail. I hope to attend future City Council
25
meetings and urge the Fremont City Council to re-think this proposed development at this location and vote to
not change the designated land use from commercial to residential. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Lori Sanchez
Dan Sanchez
40650 Max Drive
Fremont, CA 94538
From: Kathleen Francisco [mailto:katiefrancisco1 gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 7:09 PM
To: Bill Roth
Cc: vinnie bacon4fremont.com; Sanchez, Lori
Subject: Fwd: Update from Vinnie Bacon - Fremont City Councilmember
Dear Mr. Roth,
I am forwarding to you the email I sent to City Council Member Vinnie Bacon. I do not want the designated land use of
the Connolly Shopping Center to change from commercial to residential! It is not in the best interest of our
neighborhood or the City of Fremont to rezone this commercial property to residential. Placing high density, low/zero
income housing in this location in order to meet the City of Fremont's affordable housing needs is not fair or considerate
to the existing neighbors. Connolly Realty (owners of Connolly Furniture) will be the ones profiting from this change. All
of the decision makers, from each planning commissioner to each city council member, needs to ask themselves:
"Would I want this if it were my neighborhood? If it were my street?" Please consider the good of the people's safety
and peace.
Respectfully Yours,
Kathleen (Katie) Francisco
Max Drive
Fremont, CA 94538
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Kathleen Francisco <katiefrancisco1 gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 8:28 AM
Subject: Re: Update from Vinnie Bacon - Fremont City Council member
To: vinnie bacon4fremont.com
Cc: "Sanchez, Lori" <dlbcs att.net>, jayd warmingtongroup.com
Hello Mr. Bacon,
My name is Katie Francisco. I live at 40638 Max Drive in Fremont's Irvington district. My 90 year old mother
lives with my sister, Lori Sanchez, next door at 40650 Max Drive. We are extremely opposed to the residential
development by Warmington Residental on the Connolly Furniture site. My sister and I are unable to attend the
Community Outreach Meeting on March 31 as we are celebrating a childhood friend's 60th birthday that night.
We are hoping you or another city council member can attend the meeting and be the voice for Max Drive
residents.
26
My street runs from Grimmer Blvd.to Chapel Way. I fear that Max Drive will become a through street used by
the residents of this new residential site to access the Chapel Way entrance into the development. It concerns
me that on the map provided by Warmington in their "Reminder" letter regarding the community meeting, it
fails to identify the "neighborhood entry" from Chapel Way. The map only identifies the Fremont Blvd.
"neighborhood entry." Their failure to disclose or adequately identify this life-impacting Chapel Way entry
access indicates a failure to fully disclose the impact this development will have on our street. It borders on
being devious and deceitful to the existing families that live on Max Drive. Perhaps Warmington recognizes the
impact and doesn't want residents to be aware of this entry.
I voiced my opposition to a Warmington representative that knocked on my door last year presenting the
planned development. I sent an email to a member of the City of Fremont's Planning Commission voicing my
opposition and my reasons. If you lived on my street, or nearby streets, you would experience and be aware of
the already heavy traffic on Fremont Blvd. that fronts the Connolly building site. It is very difficult to turn into
businesses there or side streets such as Clough Ave. I avoid turning on/off Fremont Blvd. at Clough Ave. as do
many neighbors. We access Max Drive as well as Chapel Way and Kvistad Ct. via Grimmer Blvd. Adding
additional car traffic on my street will make it difficult and dangerous in my neighborhood both while trying to
get in/out of Max Drive at Grimmer Blvd as well as simply walking down the street. There are no sidewalks on
my section of Max Drive, as well as none on Clough Ave. Families walk with small children, walk pushing
strollers, walk their dog down Max Drive while walking in the street. Do something to keep my street from
becoming a dangerous thoroughfare. Please share this email with the Planning Commission and other council
members (including Mayor Harrison.) Mr. Bacon, please keep our neighborhood safe!
Sincerely,
Kathleen (Katie) Francisco
Max Drive
Fremont, CA 94538
27

Informational Item #6 - Community Comments 2015

Transcription

Similar documents

Fremont Chevrolet`s 4th of July Parade Fremont Chevrolet`s 4th of

Fabulous 40 - Sandusky County Parks

Find info: Online 88 Pokies

Sant Priti: Ashvindada

PV0006

Skyline Drive - Royal Gorge Region

SAVE Annual Report FY 2014-2015

PV0003 Data Sheet