HomeMy WebLinkAbout04.1 - CORRESPONDENCE, EYCHNER
January 23, 2024
To: Town of Danville
Danville Planning Commission
RE: Meeting Date 1/24/2024
Agenda Item #4.1
Resolution No. 2024-02
Good morning,
I am writing today regarding Resolution #2024-02, the proposed development by Trumark of the Borel
Property at Fostoria Way.
I am a current property owner on Dubost Court and directly impacted by this proposal. To say the current
proposal presented to you is a disappointment would be an understatement. In my opinion, this
development as presented will have dire consequences to this neighborhood.
General Plan
All of the existing homes along the northern perimeter are single story. The Town of Danville rightly declared
the Borel Property a “Special Concern Area” in the General Plan.
Per the General Plan “Site planning and buffering should ensure that visual impacts on the area to the north
are minimized, and that the Camino Ramon frontage is attractive and inviting. Setbacks and landscaping
should enhance the compatibility of new uses with nearby uses. Development on portions of the site specified
for 25-30 units per acre should be no more 35 feet tall, while residential development along the northern
perimeter should be no more than two stories tall (2-1/2 stories may be acceptable if the units are developed
in a townhouse format).”
The proposal of approx. 37’ tall 3 story structures will tower over the existing homes. I encourage you to drive
to Dubost Court and look southward. The existing homes are approximately 14’ in height.
Trumark is proposing 36’10 ¾ in height. I refer again to the General Plan ..”visual impacts on the area to the
north are minimized”.
The General Plan was the agreement between the Town and the property owners to the North. The fact that
Trumark does not seem to be honoring this agreement is disappointing, disheartening, and ultimately
disrespectful to this Commission, the Board, the neighborhood, and to the many people who worked hours
creating a plan to ensure any development of the Borel property would be an asset to the community.
Request:
Incorporate the General Plan to the development. Increase the use of trees as buffer.
BMR units:
As proposed, Trumark is not building a single low income townhouses. The have passed that responsibility
to another company who will build, and manage a 43 unit apartment complex. The proposal separates the
BMR single family townhouses from the rest of the development. These BMR’s are further separated by
only being apartments.
Request;
The BMR’s and market value units should be dispersed throughout to create an integrated development. If
they are not intertwined, then they should be considered as two separate developments.
Parking:
There is simply not enough parking. Since this area has minimal public transportation, this development
will be car dependent. This proposal will require street parking and put pressure on neighboring business
to regulate parking lot usage. There also seems to be no dedicated guest parking.
There are some parking spots that are labled “EV”. Is this for EV cars only or is this a charging station? If
it is a charging station, is it available to the public?
Request:
Add parking spaces within the development and dedicate specific guest parking areas.
The following comments refer to the Conditions of Approval as included in Resolution
2024-02
Section B: Site Planning
Regarding item #1. Exterior lighting plan should be reviewed PRIOR to approval, especially along the
northern boundary. Compliance must be required, especially with item (b) the source of directional
lighting shall not be directly visible. Special concern to lighting along Private Street C and F, and also
pathway lighting to the north. The potential for lighting to spill into the neighboring property.
Section E) Grading and Soils
Regarding item #10. A rodent control plan should be in place PRIOR to approval. Any disturbance will
send them to the neighboring properties. The Borel property is home to many rodents including rats, mice,
and gophers. This is the food source for the many fox, coyote, crane, hawk, and falcons that frequent the
area.
Section F) Streets
Regarding item #12.
The recommendation is for a right in / right out at the north driveway. How is that to be enforced? To
ensure compliance, a center median should be construction. If not possible, directional curb cuts should be
used to prevent left turns. (There is a right exit only at Circle K at Camino Ramon and Sycamore which is
readily ignored. )
I understand the need to continue to provide housing at both current and below-market rates. The
development needs to be built that will enhance the neighborhood with as little negative impact as
possible.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Craig Eychner
72 Dubost Court