City staff analysis of 1388 Bancroft Project

-

For those interested in the proposed rezoning of the parcel along Bancroft Avenue between Estudillo and Joaquin Avenues (1388 Bancroft) and plan to construct a 73-unit apartment complex, I highly recommend reading the proposed findings of fact drafted by City planners for the Planning Commission's review on Thursday night. The findings start at page five of this document: https://sanleandro.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=5549362&GUID=BA63E52D-3CC2-4135-885C-00394863B129 The findings are devastating to the project. Here is just a sample of the findings: 1. The proposed re-zoning of the site as DA-3 property is inappropriate and inconsistent with the General Plan because the rezoning “would enable a higher and greater intensity development than designated. The DA-3 zoning designation is specified for the inner core of the Downtown rather than on the outlying and perimeter areas.” (page 5). 2. The proposed rezoning detracts from character of surrounding neighborhoods by permitting “infill development that is bulkier and more massive than the existing adjacent and immediate homes which would not be compatible nor would it maintain the aesthetics of the neighborhood.” (page 6) 3. The proposed rezoning “would not respect an appropriate density transition. It would enable an abrupt change from the existing low density housing . . .” (page 6) 4. The proposed rezoning “would reduce the required setback requirements . . . from 15 feet to 10 feet . . . [increasing] the appearance of bulkiness and massiveness of the apartment building.” (page 6) 5. The proposed rezoning “would enable multi-family proposal with a parking requirement less than current requirement at a higher parking ratio, resulting in a shortage of adequate parking” which would negatively affect the immediate neighborhood with overflow parking on the adjacent streets. 6. The 13 foot tall fence along eastern side of property “would be out of scale and detract from the character of the single-family homes, where the maximum height of residential fencing is a maximum of seven feet tall . . .” (page 7) 7. The proposed rezoning “would enable a reduced open space requirement in an area not intended for the City’s highest density urban development.” (page 8) 8. The proposed rezoning “would result in development of bulky, large and tall building that would detract and interrupt the architectural character of the existing single-family development.” (page 9) 9. “The placement of outdoor parking stackers adjacent to single family homes presents an audible and visual public nuisance.” (page 10) 10. “The placement of the proposed building, wall, and parking stackers result in altering access to sunlight and views of the sky, detrimental to properties in the vicinity.” (page 10) 11. The proposed project is “outside the limit of a qualifying radius” for the Downtown San Leandro Transit Oriented Development Strategy. (page 10) 12. “The project would exceed the allowable density and would be deficient in open space, parking, and in minimum setback requirements from the current P Profession Office District.” (page 11) 13. “[T]he project density of 58 units per acre would exceed the maximum allowable requirement of 24 units per acre. The 47 to 53 feet height would exceed the P District requirement that permits a maximum height of 30 feet.” (page 11) 14. “With its exceedances of maximum requirements, its shortfall of minimum requirements and with its physical impacts due to its bulky and large size, the project plan is too intensive and overdevelops the property . . .” (page 11) The Planning Commission does not need to agree with every factual finding proposed by City staff. As long as the Planning Commission concludes that substantial evidence exists for one, independent factual finding that supports maintaining the current zoning designation for the property then the Commission should vote to deny the rezoning of 1388 Bancroft Avenue. I can only guess at the amount of time and energy City staff have put into the analysis and review, and consequently the expenditure of our tax dollars, of this project. But it is safe to say it has been extensive. This has gone on for two years. I truly hope that the developer will cease trying to shove a square peg into a circular hole so to speak. Please come back with a project that fits our zoning code or sell the property to another developer who is willing to work within the rules.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Looking Back: Measure B Transformed San Leandro Public Schools

-
Image
Our tax dollars can make a real difference in the lives of our children and prosperity of a community. Twelve years ago San Leandro High School was grossly overcrowded leading to discipline problems and undermining academic performance, no theater in the school district existed for student performances, and many restrooms at schools were in such poor condition that the students would not use them. That all changed in August 2006 when the School Board voted to place Measure  B on the ballot. The largest school construction bond in San Leandro’s history, Measure B received overwhelming support and led to the physical transformation of San Leandro public school (combined with the passage of two subsequent bond measures and one earlier measure). With better public schools, San Leandro has become a more desirable city to live, helping attract and retain families who previously would have never moved to San Leandro or moved away when the children were in middle school. Here is a
Read more

How Juan Gonzalez won the San Leandro Mayor's office at the end of the counting of votes

-
Image
On November 18, 2022, the Alameda County Registrar of Voters released the vote count for nearly all votes cast in the November 2022 general election. After being behind for the entire vote count, Juan Gonzalez effectively won the race.  How did this happen? First, from election night through 11/17, the Registrar had reported a total of 13,746 first choice ballots in the Mayor's race. On 11/18, the number of votes reported increased by 6,436 to 20,185 total votes. That was a nearly 47% jump in the reported votes. Another way of looking at the data is that prior to 11/18, all previous vote counts released by the Registrar did not include roughly one-third of the votes that were cast in the race. Second, Gonzalez  decisively took the lead in the the first choice ballots that were released by the Registrar on 11/18. Gonzalez took these votes by 39% to 33% margin. With the exception of the first vote count released by the Registrar on election night right after the polls closed when Br
Read more

San Leandro's Unsustainable City Budget

-
Yesterday, I attended a meeting of the San Leandro City Council Finance Committee. The committee consists of Mayor Santos and Councilmembers Prola and Gregory. Gregory was absent. In short, if significant action is not taken, the city will burn through all of its reserves, including eventually reserves for natural disasters and other emergencies. By 2015, San Leandro could join the City of Vallejo in declaring bankruptcy. Summary of Finance Committee Presentation Perry Carter, the Interim Finance Director, gave an update on the budget. In analyzing a budget, you need to examine at least three years of data - the previous, current and next fiscal years. Carter first reported on the "preliminary actual" numbers for the fiscal year which just ended on June 30, 2009. Illustrating how quickly the city finances collapsed last year, the original city budget for fiscal year 2008-09 assumed $76.2 million (hereafter simply "M") in revenues and $81.6 M in expenditures.
Read more