8. 22-1257 Public Hearing: Actions on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to High Density Residential, Rezone from General Office (OG) to Planned Development (PD), and density bonus agreement to allow a multifamily affordable housing development with 108 rental units at 1601 Civic Center Drive
(Continued from September 27, 2022)
Triton Ct privacy vs. parking lot security: Triton Ct residents can talk about this point. CH relies on the many windows on the west side of the building to provide visual security of the proposed west parking lot, but this design will impact the privacy of Triton Ct residents. If they don’t have the windows, there will be less security, CH suggested installing cameras, but that won’t deter crimes and we can’t be sure how they are monitored, or will be monitored at all.
our neighborhood is a severely park deficient neighborhood with 1.2 acres of parkland per 1000 residents vs. the standard of 2.6 acres per 1000 residents. This will increase neighborhood population density further and this will negatively impact local residents with lesser space for recreational. We need a park not another high density community to be build here
I support the project because Santa Clara needs workforce housing. Even the City's "affordable housing" requirement only mandates 100% AMI units--far above the incomes of retail workers, teachers, nurses, and entry-level City staff. Expecting them to commute from Fresno harms them, their families, and the climate. Tenants will get transit passes and a dedicated rideshare zone to reduce parking needs. Most opposition is based on fearmongering about "sex offenders near a school" that won't happen.
Triton Ct privacy vs. parking lot security: Triton Ct residents can talk about this point. CH relies on the many windows on the west side of the building to provide visual security of the proposed west parking lot, but this design will impact the privacy of Triton Ct residents. If they don’t have the windows, there will be less security, CH suggested installing cameras, but that won’t deter crimes and we can’t be sure how they are monitored, or will be monitored at all.
our neighborhood is a severely park deficient neighborhood with 1.2 acres of parkland per 1000 residents vs. the standard of 2.6 acres per 1000 residents. This will increase neighborhood population density further and this will negatively impact local residents with lesser space for recreational. We need a park not another high density community to be build here
I oppose it. I live in this neighborhood
I support the project because Santa Clara needs workforce housing. Even the City's "affordable housing" requirement only mandates 100% AMI units--far above the incomes of retail workers, teachers, nurses, and entry-level City staff. Expecting them to commute from Fresno harms them, their families, and the climate. Tenants will get transit passes and a dedicated rideshare zone to reduce parking needs. Most opposition is based on fearmongering about "sex offenders near a school" that won't happen.