SPECIFIC PLAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT REPORT
SEPTEMBER 21, 2020 Prepared for
Station District Specific Plan Community Engagement Report
September 21, 2020
Prepared for
UNION CITY
Prepared by
Union City Station District Specific Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
- ii - Union City Station District Specific Plan
Table of Contents
1 Stakeholder Interviews ...... 1
2 Community Advisory Committee Meeting 1 ...... 15
3 Community Advisory Committee Meeting 2 ...... 17
4 Community Meeting ...... 20 4.2 Community Meeting – Questions & Answers ...... 20 4.3 Polling Results ...... 27
5 Survey Report ...... 31 5.1 Introduction ...... 31 5.2 Survey Results ...... 35 5.3 Appendix: Open-Ended Responses ...... 47
6 Planning Commission Meeting Summary...... 56
7 City Council Meeting Summary ...... 60
8 Desk Item – Planning Commission Meeting ...... 64
9 Other Correspondence...... 66 9.1 Vision and Guiding Principles, Alternatives - Commissioner Lew’s Comments ...... 66 9.2 Online Survey – Kelsey Camillo Comments ...... 68 9.3 Postcard – Mr. Charles Cameron ...... 71
- iii - Union City Station District Specific Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
- iv - Stakeholder Interviews
1 Stakeholder Interviews
Individual interviews with stakeholders—residents, property owners, developers—were conducted in November 2019. Following are some key findings from these meetings. Findings from these meetings will be supplemented with other broader outreach efforts for the Station District Specific Plan process, to provide a more comprehensive picture of community perspectives in the area.
Key Findings
HOUSING • Demand for housing has been good, and vacancy rates in new housing in the Station District are extremely low. • Building housing is expensive, and construction costs have skyrocketed in recent years. Needed are creative ways to make the developments pencil out. • Leasing commercial spaces at ground level of mixed-use developments has been challenging. Live/work ground-level “lofts” are not serving the intended “work” purpose, and would require City subsidy to fulfill that function. • Prefab technology (which has been used for construction in the Station District) is rapidly evolving, and it is conceivable that in the near future higher densities may be supportable with steel or laminated wood construction modules.
OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL • Potential tenants for office development have found the area, availability of large site, and proximity to BART enticing. However, they have been waiting for the General Plan update effort to be completed to make decisions. • The amount of office space potentially developable is very large. It is virtually impossible to predict how soon space could be developed/leased, as one or two large occupiers can change the entire dynamic. • Some flexibility in terms of parking standards/location, and retail/cafés/ground-level amenities is needed, given the dramatically different space and occupancy needs of potential tenants ranging from software companies to biotech. • Industrial property owner feels like they’re being “pushed out”.
- 1 - Stakeholder Interviews
EXISTING RETAIL DEVELOPMENT • The “Marketplace” is well utilized; however, retail is changing fairly rapidly – e.g. the existing CVS store wants only half as much space as they have. • Better and more direct pedestrian connections from the BART station and new housing to the retail centers is needed. • Marketplace property owner is extremely interested in vertical mixed-use development, with retail at ground level and housing above, and is willing to provide equivalent (to what currently exists) amount of retail space so there is not a loss of retail in the area. Great examples in recent years in Bay Area and East Bay where this is happening. Safeway center owner is also open to having mixed use on site (housing or office over retail). This will take multiple years to realize as leases and site planning would need to be integrated. • Many believe a grocery store would be great at the corner of Decoto Rd. and 7th St. – This would help to alleviate traffic on Decoto Rd. going to Safeway.
OPEN SPACE • Active recreational open spaces in Union City are more utilized than the passive open spaces – Shorty Garcia Park is a great example. City should consider reprogramming/redesigning Kennedy Park so that it is more utilized. • Changing demographics should be considered when designing new open spaces.
TRAFFIC • Decoto Street is backed up in PM commute hours, and traffic conditions there should be looked into. • There is skepticism that Quarry Lakes Parkway will actually be implemented, given how long it has been in the planning stage.
TRANSIT • BART not used frequently by local residents to commute – most people drive to the station • Safe bicycle and walking routes to school are important
PARKING • Developers feel the area could potential have less parking being close to BART. Parking is expensive, and the right balance needs to be achieved. • Residents feel there should be enough parking so that an overflow of parking does not happen in the surrounding neighborhoods.
OTHER • Homeless are living North of BART – issues with safety and robberies in the area
- 2 - Stakeholder Interviews
School Enrollment / Demographics • School enrollment is declining in Union City and the majority of Alameda County. • To attract families Union City needs job opportunities and affordable housing costs.
Interviews were conducted in Union City in November 2019. Participants were:
• A City Council member • Industrial property owner • BART Planner • Commercial property owners • Citizens Advisory Committee member and neighborhood vicinity resident • Housing developer of new housing in Station District • Office developer in Station District
Names are not displayed to preserve comments anonymity.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBER Retail / Food Desert • Retail along Decoto retail is important – that area is food desert – grocery store + restaurants are needed • Decoto Rd has heavy traffic after 3pm – a large amount of people are going to safeway • Foot traffic exists south of BART, need the connection to the North • The Marketplace is at capacity, it’s very well used, Boba is packed • People were using the safeway parking lot for BART
Office • Running out of land • Need to make sure land is not being underutilized • Need jobs for Union City residents • Move manufacturing jobs to other area that has manufacturing – a lot of underutilized areas – Central industrial park • Place R&D higher paying jobs near BART
Core District • Parking lots for BART full, need more parking for BART • Public transportation is not great
- 3 - Stakeholder Interviews
• Make money off parking (4 dollars a day) • Most people drive to the BART • People parking in residential areas • Decoto and Cheeves – put a use on the corner
Housing • Need more housing! • People are sharing homes, multi-generational living • Need more senior housing – one is being built North of the site • People are having less kids • Affordable housing – prioritize people that already live here • Many people have lived here for generations • Track homes going for over 1 Million – need more housing types / options
Gateway • Not a historical site • It’s now a farm
Restoration Site • Would like to see more jobs • Education - Partner with community college have classes there • Some housing • If you leave cap on site – need to put parking on level 1 and housing or educational above • Wants the team to develop multiple ideas for the Restoration site
Open Space • Integral doing a good job adding open space • More walkways and streets with trees • Economic development needs to happen first – need to maintain the parks • Kennedy Park, Old Alvarado well utilized parks in the area • Connections to the parks
Transit • BART need drop off North • Bicycle and scooter share
- 4 - Stakeholder Interviews
Other • Homeless encampment North of BART needs to be regulated
INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY OWNER • Business has been around for 32 years with 22 years at the current location • High-tech industry, serves medical industry, servicing high-tech industries (make the parts that go into the machines) • Allowed to use the land for industrial uses until 2040 • 2 buildings on the site – can’t rent one of them because its designed as an industrial space and the city will not allow for industrial uses
Allowed Uses • The city code has a list of already permitted uses, conditional uses and some prohibited uses. • Would like the uses listed as prohibited to be permitted. They are: Distribution, import/export, wholesale, warehouse, repackaging and storage. • Interest in storage and warehouse uses, but I keep having to turn potential renters away • Curious why the city prohibited these here
Homeless Problem • Constantly on the property • Breaking into the building – stealing tools • 15 / 20 homeless people living in the Station East area • Started fires in the open space
Manufacturing • Like the location – the cost was very low when purchased, good employees (live in Fremont, Hayward, and San Leandro), size of property is great • R&D could be a benefit near the site – could be potential customers • List of permitted uses should be expanded and included industrials • Residential neighbors nearby - only complaint from the residents is that the industrial uses are devaluing the land
BART PLANNER • BART Planner is working with the real estate group on AB2923 • City zoning should be compliant with AB2923
- 5 - Stakeholder Interviews
• Good to have a mix of uses in transit-oriented development • https://www.bart.gov/about/business/tod/ab2923
Station • Promenade to the North of BART is not aligned with the BART station – a cross walk should exist mid-block
Development on BART parcels • City has to comply with AB2923 • General plan requirements will need to change. – DU per acre – General Plan 60 du per acre will need to be 75 du per acre per AB2923 – FAR requirement – General Plan FAR 4.0 will need to be 4.2 FAR per AB2923 – Maximum height 160ft • City has 2 years to rezone the site • City wants an anchor office development in 5-10 years – City would like the Core station district North of the BART to be built first • BART has goals regarding more housing on BART sites – 20,000 new units (by 2040) – 4M sf of office • BART would like to have passengers reverse commute • BART thinks it should be a mix (office, resi, and residential) • BART - TOD guidelines document (2017) - https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/BART_TODGuidelinesFinal2017_compress ed.pdf • How to determine the land use on BART land - Marketability, willingness of local jurisdiction, cities that have money for affordable housing @ 20% minimum, 30% system wide goal, making money (lower agenda for BART) • Frequency of trains at Union City is every 15 minutes other locations along BART are every 7 minutes • El Ceritto, Oakland, Orinda, Berkeley want development now – • Inner core stations want affordable housing however, the parcels are smaller. • Union City has larger parcels and doesn’t want housing
- 6 - Stakeholder Interviews
• Antioch, Dublin, Union City, and Pleasanton – lot sizes are bigger, and all want office – better lots for housing • Warm Springs and Union City - could create true mixed-use development
Broader area • Market Place – needs to be flipped with the retail on the street edge and open to BART • Too much land that is underutilized • Designed for cars not people
Parking • Parking management district – would be great to have a district wide strategy • Parking – plan to replace ½ of the parking that exists today • $65,000 a space for structured parking – not worth it to build • Parking limits hard to enforce
Other • Trail system / water drainage to the south west of the planning area should be included in the Specific Plan
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNER • 15 acres, 190,000sf of retail, 1100 parking spaces • Fully leased • Big spenders tend to go to Union Landing – The retail on the site is more local serving • Safeway & RiteAid have 2 year leases • RiteAid wants to reduce the space to ½ the current space • No plan in place to change the land uses or density • Recently spent ½ million project for new trash enclosures • The center is tenant driven – depends on the future of retail • Developer is very open to creating mixed use on the site (housing above retail or office above retail) • They would partner with a builder that works on mixed-use developments • Concerns regarding traffic along Decoto Rd. • Should be more walkable not so auto-oriented • Homelessness and invasion a problem
- 7 - Stakeholder Interviews
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER AND NEIGHBORHOOD VICINITY RESIDENT • Demographics in the Decoto neighborhood are changing – less Latinos • Asian demographic moving into the new neighborhoods (Pacific Terrace, residential development North of 7th Street. • Mix of rents and homeowners in the Decoto neighborhood
Concerns with new development • Parking needs to be taken into consideration • Visitors can’t visit in the Decoto neighborhood, permit parking only • Neighbors are not informed about what’s going on with the Integral project and Station District Specific Plan • Large scale difference between the Integral development and the community • Future Quarry Lakes Parkway would be a great idea– been in the plan forever – residents don’t believe it will happen • Integral should have a minimum of 141 units affordable – why is the affordable housing across from the fire station (very loud)?
Retail • People fear retail from Integral may also be empty like the new retail space at Union Flats • Most people in the Decoto neighborhood don’t use BART, many work in San Jose • Retail what’s lacking – neighborhood could use another market • The Decoto neighborhood had smaller scale local stores- The retail was the center of the neighborhood at Decoto and E Street near preschool • Now people drive to the “Marketplace” which causes heavy traffic along Decoto Rd. • The Marketplace has changed with the demographic change
Parks • Shorty Garcia Park - Field used every day across 7th street • Recreation is good in public parks • Passive parks are not used as much – Charles F Kennedy Park not well used • Charles Kennedy Park – not well programmed just a green space – used sometimes for events • Restoration site – recreation site, basketball courts etc.
- 8 - Stakeholder Interviews
Parking • Streetscape improvements (traffic calming, bulb outs) – takes up parking spaces • When designing 7th Street we cannot take away parking – people need parking for the Shorty Garcia Park
Bicycle Network • People don’t bike as a commuting option -more recreational • Kids don’t bike as much because to school because the streets are dangerous to bike
Transit • BART used more for weekends recreation less to get to work • BART connection will help retail that was recently built
Other development in the Station District • No hotel in the area – This would depend on the market • Jobs – a big company • Facebook is going to Fremont – why not Union City? (satellite company) • Office uses could give all types of jobs to the local community (janitors, landscaping etc.)
HOUSING DEVELOPER OF NEW HOUSING IN STATION DISTRICT • Existing Union Flats 243 units on 2.4 acres at 100 du per acre
– LEED Platinum including solar panels on roof (this is a good thing – why do we need to hide the solar panels) – Modular – Modeled to fit in with the affordable housing of MidPen • Future Windflower property will contain 500 units market rate housing on 3.5 acres at 142 du per acre – Modular Challenges with developing housing • Not enough labor in the Bay area • Cost of construction • Structured parking is expensive
Modular • 15% savings in cost
- 9 - Stakeholder Interviews
• Savings in time • Ground floor – when the ground floor is retail or live/work and requires a height over 10’ the ground floor cannot be modular – this adds a large cost to the project • Parking also adds costs to the project • Cost may change in the future with Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT)
Retail • Difficult to rent retail spaces • The height of the space – when writing the guidelines for the height of the retail we should also consider the depth • Restaurants that are less than 1000sf work best – more affordable for restaurant owners
Parking • Union Flats is parked at 1 to 1 – we can go lower, we are in a TOD area
OFFICE DEVELOPER IN STATION DISTRICT Properties • Lot 7 occupied (south of BART on the corner of Station Way and Decoto Rd.) • Lot 1, 5, 6 – starting to market to potential users – waiting for the General Plan 2040 update • Park land would be owned by the city – developer would place more recreational amenities • Building 6 – 30,000 fitness center sized for user of all 3, commissary 1 tenant occupying all 3 buildings (goal 1 user) • Facebook would be a great user, they are looking to have offices in other locations • How did you get to 1.2 Million sf? – zoning from general plan update + the amount of parking that fit on the site
Process • Mitigated big deck traffic, circulation, entry /access to park • Drawings are schematic, team has also created detailed parking plans – parking podium underground – 1-1.5 levels down • Met with fire department, public works, city council – made modifications accordingly • Plan to start marketing to potential users in January • ½ building 1 proposal out with a current tenant • Second proposal out
Parking
- 10 - Stakeholder Interviews
• Parking – valet program, stacked parking 2.3 per 1000, based on parking ratios from biotech in south San Francisco 2.2-2.3 per 1000 • Doesn’t make sense to build ½ a level of parking – difficult to build more unless ratio goes down • Connection to BART real amenity • Parking could depend on a user – lab spaces less parking
Flexible users • Buildings specifically designed for flexibility to accommodate bio-tech • Building 1 – utility yard set aside • 15-16’ ceiling height to allow for labs • Study traffic plan that studies more than 2.5 per thousand for flexibility
DECOTO RESIDENT, CHAIR UNION CITY COMMISSION Goals Station District • Priorities for the plan are affordable housing at all levels of affordability, a mix of transportation options, providing community services, and providing a space for events and family-friendly activities. • Consider the Station District as a place for events, weekend activities, and night life that is safe and family-friendly – there is demand for a place to hang out at night, but not always a safe place to do it, as evidenced by the recent late-night shooting in a school parking lot • Encourage local character and local businesses, restaurants, and music
Parking • losing public BART parking if Union 1.2 Office is developed • parking and spillover effect on Decoto neighborhood if station parking is lost • Consider potential for public parking incorporated into future office development • Consider ways to reduce parking provided for apartment residents to accommodate less car use for those living near transit
Transit • Some are opposed to the Quarry Lakes Parkway – Melissa has gotten input from local people that are opposed to the Parkway and believe it is a tactic to encourage development of hillsides and open space. Will be important to be clear about the distinction between the Station District Specific Plan and the Quarry Lakes Parkway. • Local transit such as the AC Transit 99 is unreliable
- 11 - Stakeholder Interviews
• Potential for a shuttle in the Station District • Ensure there’s a high-quality bikeway on Decoto • Encourage a better connection between BART and the Safeway center and nearby businesses – right now connection is just to the back of the center • Make the area more easily walkable and bikeable • Provide more free bike lockers • Provide places for scooters, bikeshare, and other micro-mobility options
Office • Would be ideal to recruit a big-name employer to Station District office space
Housing • Consider a Homeless Navigation Center in the Station District. Hayward and Fremont have one – Union City does not. It would address needs for the unhoused in a location where they already are and which they can easily access • Avoiding displacement of existing residents – and serving and supporting those residents that have been displaced – should be a priority for the area. • Provide affordable housing at all levels – including low and very low – not just at moderate, even if that’s what meeting participants are asking for. Those that actually need low, very low, and extremely low-income affordable housing are less likely to be able to come to community meetings to advocate for themselves. • Allow and encourage taller housing to make more efficient use of land near transit
Open Space & Community Amenities • Loves Kennedy Park, but there is a lot of open space that could be better used and programmed - consider better amenities or programs like a picnic area, recreational facilities, or other design improvements • Support better after-school programs, perhaps in the Station District or associated with Kennedy Youth Center – requires funding • The Decoto Youth Center gets high amount of use, it should be more fully funded and operate more • Happy with Safeway and Marina foods as local grocery stores • Support the many community facilities that already occur in the Station District and surrounding neighborhoods like Decoto. Coordinate with existing organizations and social networks during the planning process, including: – CORE and Our Lady of the Rosary (Mary Schlarb)
- 12 - Stakeholder Interviews
– Centro de Servicios – Filipinos Advocating for Justice – James Logan Student Groups, including LGBTQ student group – Union City Family Center Other • Consider putting all commissions on email list – they can help with publicizing the planning process – Planning Commission – Human Relations Commission – BPAC – Arts Commission – Others
PRINCIPAL - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, RESIDENT OF SAN JOSE Bicycle Network • Safe routes to school are important • Decoto Road is not safe for children to bike on • It would be great to increase biking and walking to school.
School Enrollment / Demographics • Declining enrollment – not many families living in Union City • Enrollment at Elementary school went from 1,000 in 1999 to 600 in 2018. • Alameda County enrollment has also decreased with the exception of Fremont • Housing costs are too high for families • Increase in tech demographic • To attract families Union City needs job opportunities, affordable housing costs
Parks • Kennedy Park - Large homeless population – this is a significant problem for Union City • Shorty Garcia Park is heavily utilized • Types of open spaces may change to accommodate new demographics
- 13 - Stakeholder Interviews
Retail • A market near Decoto Road and 7th Street would be great for easy access to the Elementary School • Safeway and surrounding shopping centers are too far
Traffic • Pick-up and drop off are from 7:45-8:15am and 1:45-2:45pm • Traffic increased during this time along Decoto Road
- 14 - Community Advisory Committee Meeting 1
2 Community Advisory Committee Meeting 1
OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS 03/02/2020
ATTENDEES City • Carmela Campbell • Aaron Welch
Consulting Team • Rajeev Bhatia • Gabriella Folino
CAC Members • Sweety Sharma, Citizen • Jaime Patino, City Council • Lee Guiro, Planning Commission • Mark Lin, Citizen
MEETING NOTES Station East • CAC agrees with General Plan updated uses for Station Area East - Residential (integral site), office to the east on the remaining parcels
The Marketplace • Very low vacancy, heavily used • Like the idea of mixed use in this area – this could be like a Santana Row. • Mixed use would bring people from the nearby high school as well • Great mix of uses (neighborhood serving)
- 15 - Community Advisory Committee Meeting 1
• South of Alvaro Niles Road – could go either way mixed use or commercial • Consider synergies between retail uses (Ex. Indian and Safeway grocery stores should be near each other)
Gateway Site • Agree with residential in this area • If retail is added it should be minimal (café)
Civic Area • Improving connections is important • Skatepark heavily used • Buildings are 40+ years old, City Hall at capacity. Site is underutilized, with landscape between buildings and Alvarado Niles Road not well used.
Open Space • The city should consider that they will need to maintain new open spaces • Flood control area could have trails • Arroyo Park – high homeless in the area • Amenities are important for parks • Existing parks don’t live up to the potential, lack connections, refurbish the existing parks • Trail network
Next Meeting • April 6th or 20th.
- 16 - Community Advisory Committee Meeting 2
3 Community Advisory Committee Meeting 2
VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES, ALTERNATIVES 07/09/2020
ATTENDEES City • Carmela Campbell • Aaron Welch
Consulting Team • Rajeev Bhatia • Gabriella Folino • Devaki Handa
CAC Members • Jamie Patino • Lee Guio • Mark Lin • Ignacio Romero • Sweety Sharma
Community Member • Jason Sumner
AGENDA • Welcome & Introductions • Background & Project Schedule • Alternatives & Key Strategies • Online Survey & Next Steps
- 17 - Community Advisory Committee Meeting 2
• Q&A
MEETING NOTES Draft Vision and Guiding Principles • Concern about community’s reaction to high density housing due to the current pandemic. • Clarification if streets shown in diagram (well-connected neighborhood) include vehicular circulation. The City confirmed that we are still in the process of determining which streets will be pedestrian only. • Concern about the height difference that would be created between single family homes and taller future buildings on either side of Decoto Road. • The CAC members agreed with the draft principles.
Subarea: Core Station District • Comment regarding Union 1.2 and who the jobs would be for. Would certain jobs push existing residents and businesses out of the area? • Clarification about whether Union 1.2 would include any public facilities. The City confirmed that the applicant is considering public retail uses. • Comment regarding existing retail in the subarea being very underutilized. Future uses should include smaller retail (neighborhood scale) within walking distance of surrounding residential areas. The City commented that the core needs a critical mass for the retail along 11th Street. • Comment about adding retail along 7th and 11th streets as well, and not only south of the BART station. • Concern about impact new construction will have on traffic along Decoto Road to the surrounding neighborhood and High School. • The need to take biking into consideration while planning out new connections. • Comment regarding potential gentrification impacts to Decoto neighborhood. Subarea: Station East • Clarification about property ownership of land adjacent to the Integral site. The City confirmed that the existing owners are not interested in selling to Integral at this time. • Most CAC members prefer greenway option over central connector since it seems more feasible. They do believe that a combination of both plans could also work. • Several members agree with converting using along the old rail spurs as open space. • Several members expressed concern regarding walking/biking paths being too close to railway tracks. The paths should be at least 20-40 feet away. • CAC member would like to see a wetland discharge space created along the railway lines. An example of one proposed within the Integral site was brought up. • Discussion about existing contaminated sites within the subarea. • Idea regarding bicycle lanes along 7th Street.
- 18 - Community Advisory Committee Meeting 2
Subarea: The Marketplace • Maximum option will add character to area and make it more walkable. • The existing gas stations at junction of Decoto and Alvarado-Niles Road should not be opportunity sites. • Should consider adding charging stations. • The following concerns were mentioned regarding the maximum buildout option: - El Mercado retail is used by a lot of people and should not be removed. - Older residents find existing Marketplace easy to access. - Small businesses should be retained. - Marketplace has low vacancy rates, should not change anything since it is working. - Concern about impact on gas stations by increasing development in surround area. • Street parking needed to keep area accessible by cars.
Subarea: Gateway • Clarification about whether proposed Parkway would influence Quarry Lakes Drive. City commented that the City is studying multiple options. • Community gardens are a good idea to help engage the community, especially since the area includes agriculture. • Discussion about potential of site north of Alvarado-Niles Road - Concern about contamination on site - Comment about including offices on site instead of residential because of proximity to the BART tracks and concern for noise - Mixed-use might be best solution Subarea: Civic Center • Discussion about potential improvements and programming to civic center subarea - Creating murals on BART track pillars crossing Charles F. Kennedy Park, would add character to area. - Comment regarding exploring green buildings – upgrade library/City Hall. Carmela mentioned that all City buildings must be LEED Certified.
- 19 - Community Meeting
4 Community Meeting
VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES, ALTERNATIVES
4.2 Community Meeting – Questions & Answers
VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES, ALTERANTVES 07/21/2020
AGENDA • Welcome & Introductions • Background & Project Schedule • Alternatives & Key Strategies • Q&A • Online Survey & Next Steps
MEETING NOTES Q&A Session
Q: Is there anywhere that lists the net increase/decrease in each type of land use, under the general plan? - Brittany Ung
A: The general plan is already complete. The Specific Plan will be providing information regarding how much development will result from what we have planned for the area. Our goal is to stay within the overall program of the General Plan although there might be a few adjustments here and there.
For example, the General Plan did not envision mixed use development in the Marketplace subarea. The overall intent will remain the same that it will be a central community. However, we are also exploring the addition of residential and mixed-use residential. The Specific Plan will include the overall numbers and describe any changes from the General Plan.
- 20 - Community Meeting
Q: Will it be possible to have grade separation from the rail lines on the pedestrian spine? Tunnel or bridge? - Andreas Kadavanich
A: The east entrance to the BART Station will be accessed via an at-grade crossing immediately to the east of the station. The crossing further east, to the "Station East" area, has been envisioned as a grade-separated crossing, although the final alignment and design would be determined at a later time.
Q: When is the east side station opening? - Chetan Vangadi
Q: When exactly is the BART east entrance going to open? I've lived here for 4 years and was present for the "grand opening" celebration back in 2017, still waiting. - Victor Kao
Q: BART Board of Directors approved the East entrance station upgrades in spring 2019. The project opening depends on access over the railroad tracks and Union City is leading this effort. I anticipate the project will open in 2022 at the latest! - Liz Ames
Q: When do we expect the east side opening of BART entrance on the 11 street? - Ram Dev
A: The crossing is estimated to open in late 2021.
Q: I’m curious about all the plans to make the central spine more walkable (i.e. how will it be separated from cars, how will it be shaded, how much greenery). - Mandeep Gill
Q: The spine has no destinations and using the existing right-of-way via roads is not ideal. Can we not consider the Quarry Lakes Parkway and use this area as a class one pathway to open space at quarry lakes? - Liz Ames
A: The pedestrian spine is for pedestrians and bicyclists only. It will be separated from cars, both sides will have land uses that buffer it from surrounding streets. In terms of activating the central spine. There are other ways of making sure the buildings (even non-retail) that face the spine activate the street. For example, by providing entry ways from the street to the buildings. If there is a housing development, the front of the buildings should face the spine or the street that runs along with that. Buildings shouldn’t turn their back on the connection.
The spine will be shaded similar to the existing promenade. Similar ideas with be seen throughout the planning area, including the pedestrian spine. It will be a greenway, it will have trees to provide shade so it’s comfortable for people to walk along and will have benches in certain areas
Q: Can we have copies of your slides? - William Yragui
A: Yes! This slide deck, as well as a recording of the presentation, will be available on the project website after the conclusion of our meeting.
- 21 - Community Meeting
Q: Could not be related to what we are discussing: Just a suggestion, 11th street needs more lighting, I feel it’s dark. Thank you. - Chetan Vangadi
A: More lighting on 11th street is certainly a relevant comment and we will share with the project team.
Q: Where is the Greenway Trail on these diagrams and how will it connect to Hayward and Fremont? - William Yragui
A: The Eastbay Greenway project is being led by the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC). The final alignment through Union City has not been finalized, but would likely utilize an alignment along either Decoto Road or Quarry Lakes Parkway, connecting along Mission Boulevard further north to Hayward, and connecting to the Quarry Lakes Trail to the south towards Fremont.
Q: What's the project website URL again? - Victor Kao
A: unioncity.org/SD
Q: When is Windflower 2 construction starting? - Chetan Vangadi
A: The start date for construction of Windflower 2 is not known by the City.
Q: What are there BART parking alternatives once current parking sites are developed? - Ram Dev
A: Future development would include parking for cars and bikes intended for residents, workers, and visitors. Development on the BART-owned parking lots themselves would likely also include public parking for BART patrons, consistent with BART's station access policies and the new state law that governs development on BART stations (AB 2923).
Q: What does it mean that an area has been identified for jobs? Does that mean office space? Retail? - Brittany Ung
A: The term “jobs” is usually associated with office as well as R&D or other non-residential commercial uses with a higher job density.
Q: Will all the housing, including multi-unit dwellings, be required to have solar panels on the roof? I hope the apartment buildings will have them, something to keep in mind during design phase. (e.g. SoHay in Hayward did this) - Mandeep Gill
A: There is a new building code requirement, that went into effect in January 1st 2020, requiring single-family and multi-family residences measuring three stories or less to install solar panels but not for multi-family at this time.
- 22 - Community Meeting
Q: Any addition to social services like schools, roads, sewer, also what about trash and litter pickups and ensuring that all these developments don’t lead to trashing of our communities.
The decision makers should go around the developments on 11th street and see the amount of garbage and litters lining the streets along with a very sharp increase in mail thefts and car burglaries they should take the unintended results into their consideration when deciding. - Ram Dev
A: The topics of services, schools, infrastructure, and other impacts will be fully studied in the Environmental Impact Report that will be prepared for this project. The topic of services, amenities, reducing crime are important issues for the Specific Plan, both for the Station District and surrounding neighborhoods, Suggested comments and ideas around these topics are very relevant and helpful for the project to hear.
Q: How many people are voting on this webinar? - Ram Dev
A: We currently have around 30 attendees - it seems that about 20-25 are voting consistently.
Q: Development close to Warm spring station was very quick, is there any reason why there is delay in doing construction around Union City BART, you guys are doing great job, hope development happens sooner as plan looks beautiful and I am excited about it. - Chetan Vangadi
A: This is one of the reasons we are doing a Specific Plan. While the General Plan provides the overall direction for development, a Specific Plan is a powerful tool and we will be figuring out issues related to building design, location of pedestrian spines, building heights, what buildings look like, etc. Once that is done and we have an EIR for this plan, the City can actually approve a lot of development at a staff level. The City can check to see if the proposal complies with the plan requirements, and this can expedite the process.
Q: Is there any plan or update on Dumbarton bridge train connecting to Union City BART? - Chetan Vangadi
A: There is a group that consists of Facebook, and the Plenary Group, who builds new infrastructure, that have been spearheading the development that we call the Dumbarton Rail. The City is a stakeholder in that process. If there any new information we can share, it will be on the City website.
Q: Can you do online video session to provide updates about progress as it is helpful. Thank you. - Chetan Vangadi
- 23 - Community Meeting
A: Glad you find it helpful. We will be having another community meeting, likely towards the end of this year, once we have gotten more direction from the community, Planning Commission, and City Council. We will likely use a similar format as tonight.
Q: Improving library was not a specific option. - Mandeep Gill
A: We were limited to 10 multiple choice on the live polling questions. All answers are listed on the online survey. We encourage everyone to take the survey, which can be found on the homepage of our project website at unioncity.org/SD
Q: Do you think 1.2 million office space will be in demand for offices? Will it go for lease quickly? – Chetan Vangadi
A: The developer will likely have a tenant before beginning construction.
Q: ACTC has stated in prior face to face meetings that they currently stop planning at the city of Hayward. Linear parks require long term planning with many connections to neighborhoods, businesses, and transit. Where is this planning evident in your plans for a North to South connected path? - William Yragui
Q: The Warm Springs Development originally specified access to the Greenway Trail alongside BART. When completed the Greenway Trail was missing. There is no path for a North South connector. Why would the development being planned here not have the same result? - William Yragui
A: The need for a high-quality north-south connection is a great comment - we will be working to integrate the open space and circulation network with ACTC's plans for the Eastbay Greenway, which is just beginning the planning stages as it connects from Hayward south to Fremont. ACTC is actively working on this project.
Q: Are agricultural and farmable lands considered a resource to protect in Union City given climate change? The hills are difficult to convert to agricultural use given water availability. - Liz Ames
A: This plan does not go into the hillside area. Community gardens seems to be something people favor a lot, it’s not as much about preserving the agricultural land but about reflecting that heritage. It will help provide direction/queues for the future development.
Q: What's the timeline for developing the Specific Plan and when it should be finished? - Brittany Ung
A: Currently we’re in a phase of talking with the community through this meeting here and as well as speaking with the Planning Commission and City Council to get a sense for the overall direction
- 24 - Community Meeting
and some of the alternative where we have to make decisions. Into the Fall and towards the end of the year, we will be working to analyze and consolidate all of the input and create some more detail for each of the subareas as well as the overall plan.
The rough estimate of the timeline is the Internal draft by end of the year, with a Public draft shortly afterwards, this will be followed by a second community meeting and finally adoption of plan later next year after the EIR is completed.
Q: Will you be providing community meetings in other languages, i.e. Spanish? - Ruth Narayan
A: We have the ability to translate some materials and engagement activities into Spanish (or other languages) as needed. Do you have a suggestion for certain materials that should be translated?
Q: I have been promoting jobs at BART so thank you for considering the BART parking lot for jobs! BART has revised their development principles to address the job housing imbalance. Union City has too much housing and should not build on any more potential farmland! - Liz Ames
A: The City has expressed a preference for jobs-oriented uses on the BART parking lots in meetings with BART planning and development staff, and have worked to have these preferences reflected in BART's forthcoming TOD work plan.
Q: Is there a budget/funding associated with these redevelopments? - Brittany Ung
A: All development on privately owned sites will be paid for by the property owner / project proponent. Off-site improvements to serve the new development are also typically paid for by the project proponent.
Q: The city has a parkland deficit over 75 acres, so is the city mandated to meet the standard for parklands noted in their municipal code? Please consider preserving Ramirez farm and historic Peterson farmhouse and build housing/mixed use on parking lots, etc. - Liz Ames
A: The City’s Subdivision Ordinance includes provisions that require developers to set aside land or pay parkland in-lieu fees when a project includes a subdivision. Specifically, the developer must dedicate land at the ratio of 3.0 acres per every 1,000 new residents or pay an equivalent in-lieu fee based on the fair market value of the land. These fees can be used to build new parks or improve existing parks. The City also collects a Park Facilities Fee on new rental housing, which can only be used to build new parks. This provision is not intended to be applied Citywide as an overall goal as many neighborhoods developed prior to the requirement being included in the Subdivision Ordinance.
- 25 - Community Meeting
Q: Can we consider potential housing on the supermarket parking lots and the commercial lands next to Alvarado Niles and not build on the agricultural land and nationally eligible historic Peterson farmhouse complex owned by Caltrans? - Liz Ames
The Gateway Site (i.e. Caltrans Site) has been identified for housing in the last several Housing Elements going back approximately 30 years. Moving into the next Housing Element cycle, it is anticipated that the City will need find additional housing sites to add to the sites that have already been identified for housing.
Q: The BART station is transit oriented and should not locate another expressway like the east west connector/Decoto Road widening that promotes more single occupant vehicles from I-880 to SR 84 to I-680. Can we stop the flow of traffic and promote bus only lanes on our freeways and connect our interstates I- 680 and I-880 to Auto Mall, Mowry in Fremont and Decoto Road given State Route 84 has been relinquished to Fremont? - Liz Ames
Given I-880 and I-680 will have express lanes, will the east west connector and Decoto Road from Mission Boulevard to I-880 be the new highway 84? How can we stop the "pass through" traffic due to the induced demand of vehicles using our freeways? - Liz Ames
A: Thank you for the feedback. The comments regarding the planned Quarry Lakes Parkway will be forwarded to the Public Works Department who is managing the project.
- 26 - Community Meeting
4.3 Polling Results
Poll 1: Introduction Participants – 15/26
What is your connection to the Union City Station District?
(select all that apply)
Other Developer Property Owner Resident of Union City Resident within the Station District
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Poll 2: Vision Participants – 16/26
Which guiding principles are important to you? (select all that apply)
High Quality Design
Open Space Network
Central Pedestrian Spine
Well-Connected Neighborhood
Complete Neighborhood
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
- 27 - Community Meeting
Poll 3: Core Station District Subarea Participants – 15/26
Which of the following would you like to see in the Core Station subarea? (Multiple Choice)
A balance of land uses including high density residential and office uses Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc.)
Network of parks and linear greenways
Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Poll 4: Station East Subarea Participants – 13/26
Which of the following would you like to see in the Station East subarea? (Multiple Choice)
Range of housing types including affordable housing
Creation of a major employment center
Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc.)
Network of parks and linear greenways
Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
- 28 - Community Meeting
Poll 5: Marketplace Subarea Participants – 17/26
Which of the following would you like to see in the Marketplace subarea? (Multiple Choice)
Addition of mixed-use development (i.e. retail on the ground floor with either residential or office above)
Buildings located closer to the street with parking lots located behind or parking in garages
Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc.)
Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Poll 6: Gateway Subarea Participants – 12/26
What types of housing would you like to see developed in the Gateway subarea? (Multiple Choice)
Agrihood
Mixed-Use development
Townhomes
Apartments
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
- 29 - Community Meeting
Participants – 12/26
Which of the following open space types would you like to see in the Gateway subarea? (Multiple Choice)
Sports Fields
Passive Open Spaces near…
Community Gardens
Playgrounds
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Poll 7: Civic Center Subarea Participants – 17/26
What Facility enhancements and programming elements are most important to you? (Multiple Choice)
Public Art
Programming for existing spaces (Youth Center,…
Affordable Supportive Housing
James Logan High School Shared-Use Agreement
Civic Events and Activities
Cultural programming
Better walking and bike connections
New or Improved City Hall
Senior Center
More/Enhanced Public Spaces
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
- 30 - Survey Report
5 Survey Report
5.1 Introduction
SPECIFIC PLAN CONTEXT The Union City Station District is a 471-acre area surrounding the Union City BART station. The City is working with stakeholders and community members to create a Specific Plan for the area. The recently adopted General Plan envisions the area as a dynamic, transit-oriented district with a diversity of uses that create a vibrant atmosphere where people live, work and socialize. The Station District Specific Plan will address in greater detail land use, urban design, transportation, infrastructure, open space, and community amenities to foster creation of a vibrant community.
The Station District consists of several subareas: Core, Station East, The Marketplace, Gateway, and Civic Center.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SURVEY Community engagement is an integral part of the planning process for the Specific Plan. Community input is being sought at various stages in the process to ensure that residents, property owners, employees, and other stakeholders are able to provide feedback on the key issues, strategies, and policies that will affect their future.
An online community survey was available for approximately one month from July 21 to August 19, 2020. The survey was available to the general public and was advertised on the project website, through email lists, and social media posts. The survey focused on key topics that will be addressed in the Specific Plan, and allowed for closed- and open-ended responses.
This report summarizes the analysis and findings from the survey. These findings, together with other outreach, will serve as a valuable reference to guide the formation of recommendations for the Specific Plan.
SURVEY RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS Thirty-eight respondents completed the survey. Of these, the majority were Union City residents who have lived in the City for at least ten years. Most respondents were age 45 or older, and most were white.
- 31 - Survey Report
Eighty-four percent of respondents identified as Union City residents, 39 percent as property owners, and 10 percent as people employed in Union City (Figure 2-1).
Figure 2-1: Question 27 –“What is your connection to Union City (check all the apply)?”
Resident 84%
Property Owner 39%
Employed in Union City 10%
Other 6%
Parent of Student 6%
Property Manager 3%
High School Student 3%
Note: As respondents were able to select multiple descriptors, total percentages exceed 100%.
Nearly half (48 percent) of respondents reported living and/or working in Union City for 20 years or more. Twenty-six percent of respondents living and/or working in the city for between one and five years (Figure 2-2).
- 32 - Survey Report
Figure 2-2: Question 31 –“How long have you lived and/or worked in Union City?”
Less than 1 year 3%
1 to 5 years 26%
6 to 10 years 6%
11 to 15 years 10%
16 to 20 years 6%
More than 20 years 48%
All respondents hailed from the 94587 zip code.
Fifty percent of respondents identified as male, 39 percent as female, and 11 percent either identified as another gender or declined to state their gender identity.
Respondent age exhibited a bell-shape distribution, with most respondents (40 percent) falling between the ages of 45 and 64 (Figure 2-3).
- 33 - Survey Report
Figure 2-3: Question 30 –“What is your age?”
18 or younger 0%
19 to 29 years 16.67%
30 to 44 years 26.67%
45 to 64 years 40%
65 and older 13.33%
I prefer not to answer 3.33%
The age distribution of survey respondents indicates that youth and young adults are underrepresented among respondents. Nineteen percent of Union City residents are younger than 18, and 26 percent are between the age of 18 and 34. In contrast, only 39 percent of Union City residents are 45 years old or older1.
Slightly more than half (52 percent) of respondents identified as white; 23 percent as Asian or Asian American; and 10 percent as of Hispanic, Latinx, or Spanish origin. Other races and ethnic groups represented/identified included Portuguese, Black or African American, and Native American or Alaska Native (Figure 2-4).
1 ACS, 2014-2018
- 34 - Survey Report
Figure 2-4: Question 32 –“Which of the following best represents your race/ethnicity (check all that apply)?”
White or Caucasion 52%
Asian or Asian American 23%
Prefer not to answer 13%
Hispanic, Latinx, or Spanish origin 10%
Portugues(e) 6%
Black or African American 6%
Mixed, more than one 3%
Native American or Alaska Native 3%
Note: As respondents were able to select multiple descriptors, total percentages exceed 100%.
Fifty-five percent of Union City residents identify as Asian Alone on the US census. In contrast, only 20 percent identify as white2. These results indicate that Asians and Asian Americans are underrepresented among survey respondents.
5.2 Survey Results
ANALYSIS OF SURVEY RESPONSES Station District Respondents were first asked their general opinions about the Station District as a whole: what they like most about the District, ways in which they believe it could be improved, and the general principles that they believe should guide its future.
Question 1: What do you like most about the Station District? Respondents were first asked to describe the features of the Station District that they like the most. Major themes included the area’s easy access to various forms of transit, proximity to shopping, overall convenience and access to amenities, and a sense that the area can develop into a vibrant, mixed-use community. Forty-eight percent of responses specifically mentioned the richness of public transit opportunities in the area, including BART and bus services. Twenty-six percent mentioned shopping opportunities. Twenty-six percent of comments alluded to the convenience
2 ACS, 2014-2018
- 35 - Survey Report
that the district’s mixed-use character and proximity to various local destinations affords. Nineteen percent of comments expressed hope for the future of the area and its ability to become a key site for future shopping, housing, and retail development (Figure 2-5). For a full list of comments please reference the appendix.
Figure 2-5: Question 1 –“What do you like most about the Station District?”
Transit 48%
Shopping/retail 26%
Convenience 26%
The area's potential 19%
Other 26%
Note: As respondent comments may have fallen into more than one category, total percentages exceed 100%
Question 2: What would you like to see improved within the Station District? Respondents were next asked to describe any changes they would like to see that would improve the Station District. Responses were diverse and touched on topics such as mobility and connectivity improvements, aesthetic changes, more opportunities for shopping and retail, safety and security improvements, and development of public and green space.
- 36 - Survey Report
Forty-four percent of responses contained references to desired mobility and connectivity improvements. The suggested improvements were diverse and included promoting walkability, particularly across the train tracks; improving BART access and parking; and reducing traffic. Twenty-one percent of responses described desired aesthetic improvements. These comments were diverse but primarily concerned desires to see improved upkeep of the area. Eighteen percent of comments expressed a desire for more shopping, dining, and retail opportunities. Twelve percent of responses concerned public safety and expressed a desire for an increased security presence. Twelve percent of responses suggested public space improvements such as park development and installation of street trees (Figure 2-6). For a full list of comments please reference the appendix.
Figure 2-6: Question 2 –“What would you like to see improved within the Station District?”
Mobility and connectivity 44%
Aesthetic upgrades 21%
Increased shopping/retail 18%
Safety 12%
Public and green space 12%
Other 15%
Note: As respondent comments may have fallen into more than one category, total percentages exceed 100%
Question 3: Which of the following Guiding Principles are important you (check all that apply)?
- 37 - Survey Report
Respondents were asked to review the following Guiding Principles for the district and check all principles they support:
• Well Connected Neighborhood: Create an interconnected network of streets, sidewalks, bicycle lanes and pathways, and multi-use trails; • Complete Neighborhood: Create a complete neighborhood with a mix of housing, businesses, and retail; • High Quality Design: The architecture and landscape reflect Union City’s unique identity and fosters a sense of character for the neighborhood; • Central Pedestrian Spine: Create a pedestrian spine that connects the Marketplace, BART, and the Station District East area; and • Open Space Network: Use public open spaces such as parks and plazas to encourage pedestrian activity, foster connection to the surrounding neighborhoods, and provide open space for exercise and recreation.
All guiding principles received support from at least half of the respondents. Sixty-five percent of respondents expressed support for Well Connected Neighborhoods, 57 percent for High Quality Design, 57 percent for Complete Neighborhood, 51 percent for Open Space Network, and 51 for Central Pedestrian Spine (Figure 2-7).
Figure 2-7: Question 3 –“Which of the following Guiding Principle are important you (check all that apply)?”
Well Connect Neighborhoods 65%
High Quality Design 57%
Complete Neighborhood 57%
Open Space Network 51%
Central Pedestrian Spine 51%
Note: As respondents were able to select multiple Guiding Principles, total percentages exceed 100%
Question 4: Other comments or suggestions for the Vision and Guiding Principles?
- 38 - Survey Report
Respondents were asked if they had any comments or suggested regarding the Vision and Guiding Principles for the Station District. Commentary was diverse, but many alluded to transportation or mobility goals, including increased walkability, safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, and increased opportunities for bicycle and electric vehicle parking. Other topics included in respondent commentary included historic preservation, a desire for more housing, and an interest in green space.
Core Station District Respondents were next asked to consider the Core Station District. Respondents were first asked to score various potential development goals and features for the area on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 indicating high and 1 indicating low levels of support.
Question 5: On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed elements for the Core Station District subarea. Respondents were asked to score the following proposed elements:
• Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities; • Network of parks and linear greenways; • Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc.); and • A balance of land uses including high density residential and office uses.
All proposed elements received a high degree of support, with all receiving a score of 4 or 5 from at least 60 percent of respondents. Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections received a score of 4 or 5 from 83 percent of respondents, parks and linear greenways from 78 percent, public realm improvements from 71 percent, and a balance of land uses from 60 percent (Figure 2-8).
- 39 - Survey Report
Figure 2-8: Question 5 –“On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed elements for the Core Station District subarea.”
Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities
Network of parks and linear greenways
Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc.)
A balance of land uses including high density residential and office uses
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
1 - Strongly Oppose 2 3 4 5 - Strongly Support
Question 9: Other comments or suggestions related to the Core Station District: Respondents were given the opportunity to provide additional commentary regarding the Core Station District. Respondents expressed a diversity of opinions, including commentary in favor of additional dining and retail uses, alternative transportation, and sustainability features. Respondents spoke both for and against additional housing development in the area, with those opposed citing concerns about traffic. Several respondents expressed interest in providing outdoor community gathering spaces such as parks, playgrounds, and food truck events. Some respondents also expressed concerns about excessive office space development occurring in the area.
Station East Respondents were next asked to consider the Station East subarea. Respondents were first asked to score various potential development goals and features for the area on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 indicating high and 1 indicating low levels of support.
Question 10: On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed elements for the Station East subarea. Respondents were asked to score the following proposed elements:
• Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities; • Network of parks and linear greenways; • Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc.); and
- 40 - Survey Report
• Creation of a major employment center; and • Range of housing types including affordable housing.
All proposed elements received a high degree of support, with all receiving a score of 4 or 5 from at least 59 percent of respondents. Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections received a score of 4 or 5 from 91 percent of respondents, parks and linear greenways from 85 percent, public realm improvements from 78 percent, creation of a major employment center 70 from percent, and a range of housing types 59 from percent (Figure 2-9).
Figure 2-9: Question 10 –“On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed elements for the Station East subarea.”
Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities
Network of parks and linear greenways
Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc).
Creation of a major employment center.
Range of housing types including affordable housing.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
1 - Strongly Oppose 2 3 4 5 - Strongly Support
Question 15: Other comments or suggestions related to the Station East subarea: Respondents were given the opportunity to provide additional commentary regarding Station East. Comments touched on a variety of topics including the importance of providing affordable housing and ample shopping and dining opportunities, concerns about the availability of parking, and the importance of improving walkability and connectivity in the area.
The Marketplace Respondents were next asked to consider the Marketplace subarea. Respondents were first asked to score various potential development goals and features for the area on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 indicating high and 1 indicating low levels of support.
- 41 - Survey Report
Question 5: On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed elements for the Station East subarea. Respondents were asked to score the following proposed elements:
• Buildings located closer to the street with parking lots located behind, or parking in garages; • Addition of mixed-used development (i.e. retail on the ground with either residential or office above); • Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc.); and • Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities.
All proposed elements received a high degree of respondent support, with all receiving a score of 4 or 5 from at least 64 percent of respondents. Locating buildings closer to the street with parking behind or in garages received a score of 4 or 5 from 91 percent of respondents, addition of mixed- use development from 81 percent, public realm improvements from 74 percent, and enhanced pedestrian and bicyclist connections from 64 percent of respondents (Figure 2-10).
Figure 2-10: Question 16 –“On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed elements for the Marketplace subarea.”
Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities
Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc).
Addition of mixed-use development (i.e. retail on the ground floor with either residential or office above). Buildings located closer to the street with parking lots located behind, or parking in garages.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
1 - Strongly Oppose 2 3 4 5 - Strongly Support
Question 20: Other comments or suggestions related to the Marketplace subarea: Respondents were given the opportunity to provide additional commentary regarding the Marketplace subarea. Many comments expressed hope that this area will be a vibrant dining and shopping community with ample space to gather and recreate. Respondents made a variety of suggestions with regards to parking in the area, with some emphasizing the importance that parking
- 42 - Survey Report
availability plays in maintaining the accessibility of the area, and others suggesting smaller or alternative locations for parking lots in order to promote walkability. Respondents spoke both for and against developing housing in this area.
Gateway Respondents were next asked to consider the Gateway subarea. Questions for the Gateway subarea concerned open space and housing development preferences.
Question 21: Which of the following potential open spaces would you like to see in the Gateway subarea? Respondents were first asked to score consider different types of open spaces (playgrounds, community gardens, passive open space, and recreational open space) and identify those that they would like to see in the Gateway subarea. Respondents were able to select more than one open space type.
All open space types received support from at least 50 percent of respondents. Recreational open space was favored by 72 percent of respondents, community gardens and passive open space by 56 percent, and playgrounds by 50 percent (Figure 2-11).
Figure 2-11: Question 21 –“Which of the following potential open spaces would you like to see in the Gateway subarea?”
Recreational Open Space 72%
Passive Open Space 56%
Community Gardens 56%
Playgrounds 50%
Note: As respondents were able to select more than one type of open space, total percentages exceed 100%.
Question 22: What types of housing would you like to see developed in the Gateway subarea?
- 43 - Survey Report
Respondents were next asked to identify which types of housing they would prefer to see in the Gateway subarea. Housing type options included mixed-use development (retail on ground floor with residential above), agrihood (residential development with integrated agricultural uses), townhomes, and apartments. Respondents were able to select more than one housing type.
Seventy-two percent of respondents expressed interest in mixed-use development, 48 percent in agrihood development, 34 percent in townhomes, and 28 in apartments (Figure 2-12).
Figure 2-12: Question 21 –“What types of housing would you like to see developed in the Gateway subarea?”
Mixed-use Development 72%
Agrihood 48%
Townhomes 34%
Apartments 28%
Note: As respondents were able to select more than one type of housing development, total percentages exceed 100%.
Respondents were next asked a series of open-ended questions regarding their vision for and overall opinions on the Gateway subarea.
Question 23: What is your vision for the future of the Gateway subarea? Respondents expressed a variety of visions for the Gateway subarea’s future development. Several respondents voiced the desire to see the area remain primarily open or green space. Other respondents expressed an interest in seeing additional housing and mixed-use development in this area.
Question 24: Other comments or suggestions related to the Gateway subarea: When asked for additional comments on the Gateway subarea, respondents expressed a variety of opinions. Several voiced concerns for the effect that development, particularly the Quarry Lakes Parkway, would have on the integrity of green space in the area. Others expressed concerns about
- 44 - Survey Report
housing affordability, the ability of housing development to attract business, and high housing density.
Civic Center Respondents were next asked to consider the Civic Center subarea. Respondents were asked about their preferences for public facilities improvements in the area.
Question 25: What facility enhancements and programming elements are most important to you? Respondents were asked to select from a variety of potential facility enhancements and programming options, including improvements to and additional programming dedicated to public facilities such as the library, senior center, and schools; public space upgrades including skate park improvements and public art; social services; and better walking and biking connections. Respondents were able to select more than one type of enhancement.
Better walking and biking connections received support from 68 percent of respondents. Fifty-five percent of respondents selected library services, 52 percent public art, and 52 percent more and/or enhanced public space (Figure 2-13).
- 45 - Survey Report
Figure 2-13: Question 25 –“What facility enhancements and programming elements are most important to you?”
Better Walking and Bike Connections 68%
Library Improvements 55%
Public Art 52%
More/Enhanced Public Space 52% Programming for existing spaces (Youth Center, 45% Library, City Hall, Senior Center, Public Spaces) James Logan High School Shared-Use Agreement 42%
Civic Events and Activities 42%
Cultural Programming 29%
Affordable Supportive Housing 26%
New or Improved City Hall 26%
Senior Center 16%
Skate Park Improvements 13%
Note: As respondents were able to select more than one type of facility enhancement, total percentages exceed 100%.
- 46 - Survey Report
Question 26: Other comments or suggestions related to the Civic Center: Respondents were then asked to provide any additional suggestions or comments they may have pertaining to the Civic Center subarea. Respondent commentary was diverse. Respondents spoke both for and against the proposed redesign of City Hall and public art. Some respondents requested improvements to parks and nature areas as well as more outdoor public events and recreation opportunities.
NEXT STEPS The findings from this survey, including both aggregated results and specific comments made by community members shown in the Appendix, together with other community feedback and decision-maker direction, will inform development of a Preferred Plan and key strategies
5.3 Appendix: Open-Ended Responses
Responses to open-ended questions are reproduced here as they were written by survey respondents.
Question 1: What do you like most about the Station District? 1 Bart station 2 Nothing Convenient transit, shopping and restaurants. I like the pops of art like the giant flower 3 and the gladiolus on the utility box. Kennedy Park is nice too. There is a lot of potential to put a thriving business/housing area that you can walk or 4 take public transportation to frequent the area-making it more of a destination location It looks good, and I hope that the layout includes plenty of parking close to the shopping 5 and apartments. Union city has too much focus The proposed East West connector -a new 4-lane expressway connection to 6-lane Decoto Road connects I-880 and SR 84 to mission blvd. State Route 238. Let’s create a walkable village with a balance of public transit and class one trails. Union city has dedicated over 80 percent of public space to roadways allowing allowing pass through traffic to SR 84, Niles Canyon. Diverting freeway traffic through town for super commuters With destinations to housing on the I-680 Corridor and 6 beyond-will not provide economic benefits nor promote transit ridership. 7 The BART Station & the shopping convenience. Many bus routes pick up from there, it's a central hub. Also nice that it's near a shopping 8 plaza. 9 Marketplace 10 BART is there. 11 The buses 12 Bart 13 New developments around the station uplifting the neighborhood
- 47 - Survey Report
14 Commuting options for residents 15 Shopping areas. 16 close to my home makes commuting easy This area is all about supporting BART. Easy driving access to the BART station, well timed and organized lights. The housing and shopping are not important to most of the people 17 who live in Union City. 18 Green Space. The access to BART and the potential access to Dumbarton Rail link to the West Bay. And that we can still build high rise class A office space, which would encourage non residents to use BART to get to work as well as provide significant property tax revenue per square 19 foot of the building footprint. 20 Convenience of amenities. The vision of a mixed-use walkable neighborhood where you do not need to drive to take 21 care of your daily needs. 22 Convenience Nothing its UGLY & GENARIC, NO BIG box retail NO restaurants for the peoples that live in the Station District or the city. Everyone SKIPS Union City and gives revenues to other 23 cities because they have what it takes to be a city! 24 The Station District has a lot of potential for affordable housing and workplaces. 25 Bart station and stores. 26 Safe community, quiet, close to BART. 27 Location, close to a lot of amenities 28 connectivity from 7th &mission It's an area of the city that the city government is focusing on developing. It's exciting thinking about what the future could hold. Also conveniently located near shopping and 29 public transportation. 30 I like everything 31 The Bart Station itself looks nice, although only half-finished. 32 I love lay way the district is layed out and how close is to bart and shopping. 33 Its diversity 34 Center of town Question 2: What would you like to see improved within the Station District? 1 road access Jobs, not new amenities that out-of-work people already can't afford to utilize. That area 2 needs a park. Sometimes I see homeless or people using. I was surprised at the amount of trash in a kids 3 play space recently. Some of the restaurants are not clean or well kept. Businesses that are "connected" that you can park ONCE and walk to for multiple reasons- shop, eat, etc. Also, there is the undeveloped parts-Gateway, and parts of Station East 4 that need something to happen to make Union City a destination for fun A walk way over the current railroad tracks east of the Bart Station. When the new station 5 was in the planning stage there was a bridge from the parking lot to the Bart station. I do
- 48 - Survey Report
not see any bridge and people have to go out of there way to enter the Bart station. What happened to that plan? Housing needs relocated from Ramirez farm and historic peterson farmhouse located beyond the 1/2 mile walkable distance from transit stations. Provide housing skates on 6 open suave to mixed use and housing on shopping center parking lots. More public transportation to the location from various locations especially near, but also far, throughout Union City. Bring back "the flea." Also, create better parking convenience 7 at BART...a "next-to-the-station" multiple level parking garage. More restrooms. Access from the back parking lot. More booths to purchase tickets or 8 refill clippers 9 Traffic flow on Decoto between Perry Rd and 7th Street 10 Security and appeal. 11 Definitely more officers patrolling the area 12 Open the connection to the back side, to access the city parking lots. 13 more options for shopping, food eateries, parks Retail, restaurants, cleaning up undeveloped areas (ie end of 11th st at the turn), better 14 walk ability through wider sidewalks and under/over passes. 15 More shops and restaurants. access from both sides or a way to pass from the north side parking lot without having to 16 walk all the wa around it. More parking lots, definitely vertical. Too often after about 800 there is no where to park, except to go to surrounding streets and business lots that can't support the overflow. The cars are all parked too close together in the existing lots. Because there is no eating food in BART stations and on BART trains, there isn't much need for market support of the 17 BART commuters. 18 More water fountains. Why does Union City Bart Station not have one? Build two to four million square feet of class A office space plus a hundred thousand or more square feet of meeting space close to BART that can be rented out for large 19 meetings and conventions. 20 Walkability, more dense housing Circulation. We really need the new roadway to provide access in and around the area. 21 We have been waiting a long time. 22 We have to do something about crime and security in the area 23 Higher buildings at least 10 stories, BIG box retail, Fox Tale palm trees! I would like to see a cohesive design that focuses on the BART station being a 24 transportation hub. 25 Walking from one side of the station to the other. Homelessnes. Solutions for Decoto car congestion, open park space, young child playgrounds (the pyramid is only good for big kids), better maintained playgrounds and public space (e.g., 26 pyramid and fountain). 27 More new construction housing 28 mobility across the railroad tracks
- 49 - Survey Report
Clean up the shopping centers a bit. Opening up the throughway (ie opening up the BART 29 east entrance) is a must, and has been delayed for far too long. 30 11 th street should have more light The Marketplace shopping plaza looks awful. The signs are faded, its dirty, and overall not a nice shopping center for a place that is supposed to be the city center. It is not walkable. On the other side of the BART tracks, the connection from the station is still unfinished years later. There are no stores in the bottom of the apartments near BART. It is not a "destination" at all. Look at other Bay Area cities for inspiration please. Wealthy cities like Palo Alto obviously have beautiful downtowns, but even smaller or more "middle class" cities like Albany, Walnut Creek, and San Mateo were able to invest and make lively 31 downtown districts. The connect between bart and 11 th street.Also want see some resturants and fine 32 dinning down 11 street.Also some tall hotels and bars. Lots of open land, want to see more development happenning, I see the plans made by city are really good, want to see it growing. On 11 th street I want to see more lights, its 33 scary to walk in night. 34 Santana Row type development, but maintain local shopping also. Question 9: Other comments or suggestions related to the Core Station District: 1 Square away your existing city financial dilemmas, then go on ot develop this area. I high density residential and office use is in the planning, the support of restaurants to 2 keep people in the area are important If this is the actual plan on the drawing board there is to many buildings for commercial use. If these buildings include shops, resturants, community rooms for events, etc. then 3 build them, but housing for low income families is more important for everyone. Promoting a walkable Communty requires less roadway infrastructure dedicated to single occupant vehicles. Consider bus shuttles to job centers and bus only lanes during peak periods. Transit ridership is at an all time low, so incentivizing transit, walking and cycling 4 must be promoted to combat climate change. I have a major concern that increased residential, especially high density, will only add to the nearly impossible traffic flow issues we experience along both Decoto & Alvarado- 5 Niles now during peak commute times. Prefer public art to commission local artists and have space for weekly or monthly food truck gatherings. Highly prefer usage of clean energy: solar panels, wind turbine, etc. 6 Visible and plentiful trash depositories: landfill, composte, recycle 7 Too much high density will increase traffic on Alvarado-Niles Rd and Decoto Rd The proposal has too much office space. Given the possibility that companies will allow more employees working from home even after the pandemic, the city does not want to end up with a bunch of empty office buildings. More retail and restaurants should also be around the housing and business areas to support those living and working there. And where is the parking??? Thinking no one will use cars and need to park is wishful thinking and a mistake that other areas have made. It also makes it difficult for those who want to utilize the area from nearby without the ability or desire to utilize other modes of 8 transport.
- 50 - Survey Report
"public realm improvements". Most public art is pointless. trees, green space for kids. Make it more usable for people and don't waste time on expensive things to just look at one and then ignore for years. Definitely more outdoor dining and bars, space for food trucks. "balance of land use" should be more focused on residential than office. Office requires more parking and the area is already strained. We need more housing to reduce 9 the demand and price. We need to maximize the the property tax value of what we put on that land or this city will not be able pay for the city service needed. Remember we need about 1.2 police officers per 1,000 residents at over $300,000 total cost per officer, plus one fire company per 15,000 residents at about $3.2 million per company (9 firefighters per comany on 3 per shift and 3 shifts). Pus we need a minimum city staff and corp yard operation. All this currently can't be paid for. We need to maximize what revenue (the 17 cents of every 10 $1.00 of assessed value) we get per square foot of land. Why put 1.2 million sq ft of office, how is that a Downtown? Most downtown's offer BIG box retail, tons of restaurants, this idea proposed by the city is hopeless thats why Union 11 City always gets skipped and people shop else where haha 12 Let's get started! Right now there are huge empty lots of dirt and parking lots. Other downtowns have 13 parking garages to conserve space and make it more walkable. Question 15: Other comments or suggestions related to the Station East subarea: Will there be a height limit on these new buildings? Having the area look like a project is 1 not what citizens of Union City would want. The development should include building a pedestrian /cyclist connection over or under 2 the railroad tracks leading to BART 3 Same as previously stated. Highly prefer emphasis on affordable housing. Middle to low income households heavily rely on public transit and would greatly benefit from living near accessible modes of transportation. Prefer business spaces to prioritize renting out to local small businesses. 4 Union city does not need another starbucks or mcdonalds. Where is parking for community park areas? Street parking should never be assumed for community parking and residents outside of the immediate area will want to utilize the 5 spaces as well. If by major employment center you mean services that will draw people into the area, sure. Enough office workers to support those services at lunch time. Make sure there is more than enough parking to handle 30+ years of growth. More people will come if they 6 know parking won't be a hassle. If the Capitol Corridor moves to the tracks on the west side of Union City ,we need to 7 consider a station on their current tracks near the PG&E power station of Decoto Road. the connection to bart and surrounding areas is a requirement for station east. This neighborhood will not take off ~ without lots of needless car traffic ~ unless the railroad 8 tracks can be crossed by bicycle & pedestrian.
- 51 - Survey Report
Please encourage stores that will bring in money to the district and make it a real destination. Nail salons, hairdressers, and other strip-mall type stores will not bring in 9 business the way that cafes and restaurants will. And a major employer would be great! 10 I like see Station district has a major downtown area with shops,resturants and bars. Question 20: Other comments or suggestions related to the Marketplace subarea: How will the current business be effected in all of this building? Will these current 1 business lose business during these changes and how long will all this take? Use this site to meet our housing goals and remove housing on proposed open spaces and 2 farmlands essential for climate adaption strategies! 3 Same as before. Prefer an emphasis on local, small businesses. Maybe a shop/dine at these 5 businesses this month, get $7 added to your clipper card. Additionally, have an open air shaded area for people to sit and eat or gather with plentiful nearby trash receptacles so easy to clean after yourself. Employ homeless or low income people needing job training/skill development to maintain area. Involve local schools. Different school every month sponsors the communal area with posters reminding people to recycle, shop local, be 4 kind, etc. Disruption of the use of current services during construction. This is the only major 5 grocery store in the area. 6 Increase security. Can be very dangerous after dark. 7 Open space needs to be larger and useful for large public festivals and events. large parking lots anywhere make walking to and from more difficult. use smaller parking 8 lots in more numerous places instead First, do not punish even one of the existing businesses in the two malls along DeCoto by reducing parking. There needs to be more driving access, not less. This is a central shopping and business area for people well beyond the BART station area. That said, there are a lot of places in both malls that could use some refreshed green spaces and walkways. Again, don't waste time and money on forgettable street art, but places to eat lunch, dinner, and enjoy a drink outside, supporting the existing local restaurants would be very welcome. This market area very much does not need to add vertical housing. If you want to preserve the character of Union City, do not add housing in this part of the 9 city. Add vertical housing in places that are not already developed. Consider purking on top of a two or three story structure(s) like Hayward did above the 10 grocery store between A and B street near City Hall. We need to protect retail sales and services for the residents, otherwise people will need 11 to drive to other Fremont for these services. I would be strongly opposed to the second drawing. It would make it difficult for our seniors that drive to get around. For many, driving is their last piece of independence. It 12 would be too dense there. 13 rebuilt the shopping center and make into a attractive shopping center . 14 If we can have like a mall with more retail it would be good for one stop shop.
- 52 - Survey Report
Question 23: What is your vision for the future of the Gateway subarea? I have a vision for the city to be financially viable. I cannot see a future of the Gateway 1 subarea when the city cannot afford to hire people and maintain its buildings. With established housing and Quarry Lakes Park, the area should complement the existing area. Retail (more eating establishments) could service this area and tie into the other 2 subareas that are in the development area. Why make all these changes? Looking at these plans how many current residents will lose 3 property or are they willing to sell their property for these changes? Retain this area as a park and historical site. Union city has an urban parkland deficit of 75 plus acres. Our community needs farmland to combat climate change and promote food 4 security. There are beautiful areas in and around Stanford and in Campbell that I think are good 5 models. 6 Affordable housing, emphasis on clean energy and responsible waste disposal 7 Develop a safe area for recreation and leisure. 8 a great place for families This is an area that doesn't need new giant roads or any development other than opening up a lot of green space. I would not waste this already visible part of Union City with anything other than green space, trees, or some way of celebrating the agricultural past of the area, but not more housing to get that. Even though we are desperate for more housing with the rental prices rapidly rising out of control in the area, this green space 9 should be protected. 10 less dense residential housing We need to maximize residential opportunities for the city. There is such a housing 11 shortage. A real looking downtown not a Genaric one with 4 storie buildings, BIG box retail with 12 FoxTale Palm trees with string lights!!!! I would like to see a self-contained living area where transportation, shopping and entertainment are within walking distance or close enough to ride a bicycle if there are 13 safe places to leave bicycles. Residential, with some parks and small retail so residents can get some quick items like 14 milk, bread or a snack. I'm sadened by the loss of the existing agri use, but it's required to move forward. Something that ties to the ag past to modern use. Plenty of greenway/bike path, hidden 15 parking(sub level) under the mixed use dev. I don't want to see cars. Question 24: Other comments or suggestions related to the Gateway subarea: What is wrong with Union City as it currently is? Who's bright ideas was/is it to make all 1 these changes? Why does Union City want to look like San Jose and Santa Row? The East-west connector proposal will be used as a reroute if state route 84 leading to Niles Canyon, the tri-cities watershed. This Proposed road will be maintained by the fiscally compromised city and traffic will worsen with the I-880 express lanes. Express lanes increase vehicle volume on interstates and yet cities are forced to receive more 2 traffic through town. With roads and interstates at capacity, a regional bus transportation
- 53 - Survey Report
system is necessary. Consider fixing the 2- lane bottleneck at Mowry in Fremont Near Niles Canyon as an arterial route along Mowry has ample space, 6-lanes from I-880 once the bottleneck is removed. Consider bus-on -shoulder on interstates to promote public transit in freeways. Why would Union city promote more traffic along Decoto Road to Union city BART and beyond? I remain concerned that housing density should not be too high. Open spaces are 3 beautiful and reflect a community that values a quality environment. My fear is that the improvement of gateway and surrounding bart area will entice too many high income earners and further push out middle to low income families. High income households usually have a car and can afford to live on the city's outskirt and drive in to experience union city activities. Middle to low income families would greatly 4 benefit to living near accessible transportation, safe clean neighborhoods, local shops. 5 A large green space split by a major parkway running through it is a terrible idea. Please reconsider the Quarry Lakes Parkway. Union City does not need another major 6 road cutting it apart. If anything, update DeCoto to support the existing traffic. We need to protect the creek habitat and improve open space trails and links. The setting 7 is very special. Really need to consider cleaning up area and reducing crime before construction begins. 8 Make UC a desirable city to work and live 9 do people want to live next to ag use land? MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PLEASE with restaurants people actually like. Plain apartments 10 and townhomes will not bring in business. Question 26: Other comments or suggestions related to the Civic Center: Will all the current buildings and school stay, be improved or torn down? Why did UC build a skate park just to tear it down later? The library has been improved so why change it if it does not need changing? I like UC the way it is, if it isn't broke why fix it or change 1 it? This passive park and city hall has incredible landscape snd Design. Changing this setting is another poor choice in civic architecture. Why is the city not focusing on housing in outdated warehousing sites near strip malls. This idea to convert warehouse which had large parking lots and wasted space is a choice location for redevelopment. City hall 2 redesign and redevelopment proposal is a shocking mistake in city planning! 3 Would any consideration be given to an off leash dog walking/playing/swimming area? JAMES Logan programs are already extensive and diverse and shouldn’t be limited due to the city using their facilities. For example, the band program already pays a lot to the school district to use the facilities and it could get more expensive for them if the city also 4 has control of those facilities. We can’t even get the existing problems at the Kennedy playground fixed. The library is small and outdated. Move the police dept and expand the library to include community resource offices like those at the old Bernard white schools site. Having a police dept next 5 to city hall is the wrong image to project. Please don't waste time or money on forgettable street art, unless it is also some kind of 6 play are for local kids. It would be amazing to have some kind of public pool supported
- 54 - Survey Report
like the pool at James Logan for residents to enjoy free play, laps, and swimming lessons without the restrictions at the James Logan Pool. Either that or more public access to the James Logan Pool for city residents. This is a huge hole in the Union City service. I would like to see more events at Kennedy park. Perhaps cultural festival, more car shows, art and wine shows. Also much better advertising around the events that do happen. Even for folks who do live in the immediate area, it is sometime hard to know what is scheduled. Kennedy park has a huge space for such events, even if there is a serious lack of parking in the area. Crime between Decoto, Alvarod Niles and 11th street is unbelievable. Crime Free program is weak at best and the police department and local business does not have a 7 working relationship 8 Please clean up the lagoon! 9 We need more public art at Kennedy Park. There is none. Our "central park" by the city hall is not nice. It is small, and full of duck poop and trash. San Mateo has an amazing central park. Fremont has Lake Elizabeth (although that is full of duck poop too). Please improve this park. I took my dog here for a walk a while back and it was sad and disappointing to look at. Kennedy Park and the Youth Center area is nice though! As this is the last text box, I just want to say: I hope Union City succeeds in this effort. I know even the larger and wealthier town of Fremont has struggled to make a real downtown district. Growing up in this area, and then seeing other nicer places, Union City is just a generic cookie-cutter suburb right now. Nothing unique to set it apart or make it a destination. Union City's property values will continue to be more volatile than 10 established cities if it has nothing to offer for itself. Rebuild the City hall building and remove all that ugly boston ivy covering the building 11 and cut some branches back so you can see the building.
- 55 - Survey Report
6 Planning Commission Meeting Summary
VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES, ALTERNATIVES
08/20/2020
ATTENDEES City • Carmela Campbell • Aaron Welch Consulting Team • Rajeev Bhatia • Gabriella Folino Planning Commission Members • Raymond Gonzales, Commissioner • Lee (Presley) Guio, Commissioner • Jo Ann Lew, Commissioner • Harpal Mann, Commissioner
AGENDA • Welcome & Introductions • Background & Project Schedule • Community Engagement • Vision & Guiding Principles • Subarea Alternatives
MEETING SUMMARY Draft Vision and Guiding Principles • Question regarding the Pedestrian Spine allowing free access through the BART station.
o Staff Comment - The BART station will include a free pass through for pedestrians. o Recommendation to call it just “Spine” or reflect that it would also be for bicyclists.
- 56 - Survey Report
• A recommendation to add retail along the pedestrian spine.
o Staff Comment - The goal of the pedestrian spine is to have retail and other active uses along the spine. • Comment regarding if the connection over the UPRR tracks east of BART would be an overpass or underpass.
o Staff Comment – Previously (some years ago when last studied), this was envisioned as an overpass. There are some other examples of underpasses as well in the Bay Area now, and both options will be looked at. • The Station District is too larger to be considered a “neighborhood”. Reconsider the word “neighborhood” as applied to the entire area as part of the guiding principles.
o Staff Comment – The team will refine all vision statements and guiding principles, potentially replacing neighborhood with district when discussing the entire area, and referring to what are called “sub-areas” as neighborhoods. • High Quality Design is an important principle to follow through with, Additional principles pertaining to sustainability and economic development could be considered.
Subarea: Core Station District • Union 1.2 is a great opportunity for the area. • Concern regarding retail along 11th Street being viable. • Given the density of housing and office space in this area Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP) needs to be part of this vision. Carmela confirmed QLP is a mitigating factor in the future based on the General Plan EIR. Several other mitigation measures are also used. The City Manager’s office will be presenting the QLP proposal in the upcoming months. • Replacement parking for BART is something that BART will need to speak to. The 3D massing model is for illustrative purposes only. Comment from commissioner that we need to include parking for BART.
Subarea: Station East • Will Bradford Way be enough of a buffer between residential and industrial uses that are there presently? Should housing be set back further.
o Staff Comment – Developer (Integral) is aware of this issues and setting development back along Bradford. IThe Specific Plan and the EIR will be include policies that address noise and other compatibility between uses. • Will existing businesses be forced to move?
o Staff comment - No existing businesses would not be forced to move. The plan is market driven. • Green pedestrian walkways should extend to QLP.
- 57 - Survey Report
o Staff comment – QLP will have a trail (both pedestrian and cycling) along it that will connect to 7th Street, 11th Street and Alvarado Niles Road. • Any further communication with Union Pacific to close down the railroad to be used as a walkway?
o UPRR does not support the closure of the railroad. The City does not have control for how UPRR uses the railway.
Subarea: The Marketplace • To increase connectivity, more crosswalks need to be added across Decoto Road. This would allow the two shopping centers to be connected and feel unified.
o Staff comment – We will work with the traffic engineers to determine the location of potential additional crossings. • The development reminds the commissioner of Santana Row, but with access to BART, so we have more positives here. The commissioner is supportive-mixed use development as part of the Marketplace. • Question regarding who is responsible for managing parking for BART
o BART would make a recommendation for the amount of replacement parking needed. o Parking for replacement uses (such as office) on BART property would need to be market driven for these to be developed/built.
o City would strongly recommend replacement parking of 1:1.
Subarea: Gateway • The QLP would be built to relieve the traffic off Decoto Road and as an emergency route for the Fire Department and EMT to get past the railroad tracks.
o Staff comment - QLP will go under the railroad tracks and the BART track. This will provide critical access for the City and the Station District. • Supportive of the community gardens and agrihood. • Because the property is State owned, under State law, the property would first need to be offered for affordable housing. Would agrihood be viable financially for an affordable housing area?
o The development will most likely be mixed affordable housing and market-rate housing, and it’s very hard to finance just standalone affordable housing. 25% of housing would need to be affordable under City requirements, and would be deed restricted.
o The minimum density is 30 units per acre if property is transferred for affordable housing use. Therefore, if an affordable housing developer wants the property, more affordable housing could be developed.
- 58 - Survey Report
Subarea: Civic Center • Commission supportive of adding Civic Center as a subarea to the Station District. Its important for people to know where to go for City services. • When thinking about new possibilities for open spaces, keep in mind that passive parks are not very well utilized in Union City. Need more walking, biking, jogging, playfield, and similar open spaces. • Improvements to the Library and City Hall area would be important to include. • Create more walkability within Kennedy Park. • Create an arrangement with Logan Highschool to share the fields.
- 59 - Survey Report
7 City Council Meeting Summary
VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES, ALTERNATIVES
09/08/2020
ATTENDEES City • Carmela Campbell • Aaron Welch Consulting Team • Rajeev Bhatia • Gabriella Folino City Council Members • Mayor Carol Dutra-Vernaci • Vice Mayor Emily Duncan • Councilmember Jamie Patino • Councilmember Gacoscos • Councilmember Gary Singh Public Comment • David Whatley
AGENDA • Welcome & Introductions • Background & Project Schedule • Community Engagement • Vision & Guiding Principles • Subarea Alternatives
- 60 - Survey Report
MEETING SUMMARY Draft Vision and Guiding Principles • Question regarding the creation of a bicycle plan for the Station District
o The city is working on two parallel efforts that will influence the bicycle network in the Station District. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and the Integral project bicycle network will be presented to council in the fall.
o The preferred plan will include greater detail on the bicycle and pedestrian network.
Subarea: Core Station District • Clarification regarding the vacancy along 11th street
o City staff believes that with increased density and connection to BART the vacancy along 11th street will be occupied.
o MidPen office will occupy a portion of the vacant retail spaces. • Could the restoration site be used as a parking lot for interim uses? Is the site contaminated?
o Yes, the restoration site was looked at for parking as an interim use in the past. o The site is 16 acres if you dispose the slag. It needs to be disposed of in an approved landfill (most likely in Utah) and the most cost-effective way to remove the slag is to utilize the adjacent rail line. • Will a signalized intersection be added to Decoto Road?
th o As part of the Integral development a signalized intersection will be added to 9 and Decoto Road • Question regarding BART’s vision for individuals that drive to BART
o The BART document (not finalized) identifies this station as needing some replacement parking. BART acknowledges that it is more of a suburban location and some replacement parking is needed. • What land uses are planned for the restoration site?
o The general plan identifies the site having potential for both office and residential. • Residential uses would be more problematic for the restoration site since it is on contaminated land. More regulations would need to be considered. • The Plan will need to address first mile and last mile from the intermodal station.
- 61 - Survey Report
Subarea: Station East • Comment regarding the limited amount of on-street parking provided along 8th and 9th Street • Question of where the parking is located for the office, residential and retail users
o All streets in the integral development have on-street parking. o The bioretention areas are required by the state. All future developments will use the new standard detail for bioretention along the streets.
o Parking for the residential parking are wrapped structured parking • Question regarding the spine and the nature of the street - will it include bicycle lanes
o This will be studied in the next round. The idea is to create a spine from Alvarado to 7th Street. • Clarification regarding community concern on industries being replaced
o Businesses will not be forced to leave o We will be conducting additional have industrial owner outreach in the area • How will we buffer the land uses in the area from the existing industrial uses?
o During the next phase we will study adequate setbacks, design of roadways and other types of screening • Need to disclose to the residents and business owners that move into the Station District that the industrial uses may stay and noise, smell etc. may be a factor
Subarea: The Marketplace • Supportive of mixed use development – reference to the project along Union City Blvd. • Supportive of increased connectivity • How many owners are in this area?
o Minimum of 6
Subarea: Gateway • Question – question regarding budget for QLP
o If all goes well by November the City should have the next round of funding (mayor response)
o We are working with Fremont to complete the vision (mayor response) • Question regarding the need of a park – Where will it be? How much land will it occupy?
o The City would like to work with the future developer on the exact location of the park.
- 62 - Survey Report
o The amount of land devoted to park land will depend on the amount of density added to the development. • Is the plan contingent on the QLP developing?
o The City is moving forward with the RFP process as in anticipation of the QLP moving forward.
o Have adequate of information for QLP to move forward with the sale of the property. • Question regarding the link between the community gardens and Agri-hood
o Yes, community gardens will be part of the concept. The concept will also include other aspects of the agri-hood concept including educational classes and other amenities. Subarea: Civic Center • No comments or questions
Public Comment - David Whatley • The guiding principles are values that’s guide the plan. The guiding principles should include a commitment to equity and things that are deficient in this area. Equity needs to be a guiding principle or the overarching principle. • In the staff report, it is noted that less Latinos live in the Decoto area. Could you please provide a source for this statement? • Pastor’s alliance – why were they not included in the stakeholder interviews • The plan should be ADA compliant. • The plan should include a commitment to build veteran’s housing.
- 63 - Survey Report
8 Desk Item – Planning Commission Meeting
DATE: AUGUST 20, 2020
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ALEX MOG, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: DESK ITEM, STATION DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING ALTERNATIVES
Staff received comments and questions from Commissioner Lew regarding the proposed Guiding Principles and subarea concepts proposed for consideration by the Planning Commission. The following are the questions and staff’s responses (in italics).
1. Principles 1 and 2 provide guidance in regards to circulation within the station district, so I recommend they be combined into one principle that addresses the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers. In addition, I recommend the principle be expanded to include efficient connections in and out of the station district and the importance of public transit.
We will work to include this suggested language, either through the combination of Principles 1 and 2 or the refinement of the language included in Principles 1 and 2.
2. Principle 4 refers to a “complete neighborhood.” I believe the station district is too large and has too many diverse and potentially conflicting uses to be considered a “neighborhood.” I recommend the guiding principle be revised to consider good neighbor policies, buffers for residential developments, and avoiding environmental and neighborhood impacts.
We will work to revise the guiding principle as recommended, and avoid suggesting or implying that the station district is a single “complete neighborhood,” while still seeking to encourage a range of services, amenities, and land uses.
- 64 - Survey Report
3. Principle 5 refers to the station district as a “neighborhood.” Again, I believe the station district is too large and its planned uses too diverse to be considered a ‘neighborhood.” If the city desires the station district to be built up as a city center or downtown, then I recommend refocusing this principle.
We will work to revise the guiding principle as recommended, and avoid suggesting or implying that the station district is a single “neighborhood.”
4. The Civic Center Area is not one of the five subareas described in the General Plan (pg. 287). For consistency with the General Plan, will the Civic Center Area be added as a sixth subarea?
Yes, the General Plan would be updated to reflect the addition of the Civic Center Area, as well as any other sub-area boundary refinements that may be identified during the Specific Plan process.
5. The figures throughout the staff report are illegible making it difficult for me to fully comprehend the information contained therein and, subsequently, to rely on that information. In the future, please provide legible and factually correct figures and diagrams in staff reports.
We will work to ensure larger figures and better legibility for future staff reports.
6. The staff report uses both the hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of “subarea.” For consistency, please use one version throughout future documents. By the way, the word does not require a hyphen.
We will be sure to use the term “subarea” in future materials.
- 65 - Survey Report
9 Other Correspondence
9.1 Vision and Guiding Principles, Alternatives - Commissioner Lew’s Comments
1. Keeping in mind that guiding principles are intended to influence the City’s decision-making in regards to future development and that they help to establish a shared culture between the stakeholders (residents, businesses, City staff, and developers), I recommend the draft guiding principles be revised to align with the goals for the subareas described on pages 11 through 18 of the staff report.
2. A guiding principle should be added to address economic growth, sustainability and vitality.
3. A guiding principle should be added to address serving the needs of local residents and businesses. These needs include, but are not limited to, retail stores, health and wellness services, jobs, public safety services, public transit, and City services.
4. A guiding principle is needed to address safe streets for pedestrians and bicyclists and sufficient parking for visitors and shoppers, particularly in and around the marketplace subarea, which is identified as a “community-serving retail center.”
5. A guiding principle is needed to ensure future development appeals to those currently living and working outside the Greater Station District, whether they are looking for business or job opportunities, planning to move to Union City, or shopping/visiting.
6. The goal for the Core Station District (pg. 11) was copied verbatim from the City’s 2040 General Plan. Therefore, it seems misleading to refer to this goal as “the draft proposed goal for the Core Station District.” I recommend retaining the goal and identifying its source as the 2040 General Plan.
7. The goal for the Station East subarea (pg. 12) was also copied verbatim from the City’s 2040 General Plan. Again, it seems misleading to refer to this goal as a “draft proposed goal.” I recommend retaining the goal and identifying its source as the 2040 General Plan.
8. The goal for the Marketplace subarea (pg. 14) was also copied verbatim from the City’s 2040 General Plan. Again, it seems misleading to refer to this goal as a “draft goal.” I recommend retaining the goal and identifying its source as the 2040 General Plan.
- 66 - Survey Report
9. For consistency with the previous pages of the staff report, please remove Figure 16 from page 17 and insert it in the section describing the Gateway Area (before the section describing the Civic Center). Also, for consistency with the format of the figures on page 15, please move the titles of Figures 16 and 17 from the top to the bottom of each.
10. Please ensure that Figure 9 accurately delineates the Greater Station District and all of its subareas, and that Figures 10 through 14, 16, and 17 accurately represent the named subareas. Also, there is no Figure 15, so please consider renumbering Figures 16 and 17 to 15 and 16.
11. Is the Station District and the Greater Station District one and the same? The General Plan refers to the area shown in Figure 9 as the “Greater Station District”, but the specific plan refers to the area as the “Station District.” Please confirm whether the correct name of this area is “Station District” or “Greater Station District.”
12. Figure 9 is intended to show the subareas in the Greater Station District. Two of the subareas contain “district” in their names: the Core Station District and the Civic District. Is this intentional? To avoid confusion, I recommend removing “district” from their names. Also, if these subareas will retain their status as subareas for the long term, I recommend all of the subareas be named as follows:
• Core Station Subarea or Station Core Subarea • Station East Subarea • Marketplace Subarea • Gateway Subarea • Civic Center Subarea
Finally, Figure 9 does not show the Restoration Site, which is a separate subarea in the General Plan, and the staff report appears to have included the Restoration Site in the Core Station Subarea, as shown in Figure 10. Will the General Plan be amended to show this change? Is the residential development that is east of the Restoration Site a part of the Core Station Subarea with regard to the Specific Plan?
13. It is always a good idea to proofread documents and correct errors before releasing them to the public and meeting attendees. There are two sentences on page 14 that I consider to be awkwardly worded: 1) 3rd para. 1st sentence and 2) 4th para., 2nd sentence. Regarding the former, is it really a strong City priority, as stated therein, to retain the existing stores and services? The City’s highest priority should be to redevelop the Marketplace subarea to the extent feasible based on market conditions and public comments.
- 67 - Survey Report
9.2 Online Survey – Kelsey Camillo Comments
What do you like most about the Station District? I like that I can walk from my house to BART, or the grocery store, a beautiful park and playground, a sports park, my child's school, the library, the skate park, city hall, the senior center, the high school, Quarry Lakes, Meyer Cottage and Gardens (Dry Creek), or just stroll along Decoto or Mission Blvd on wide pedestrian paths.
What would you like to see improved within the Station District? I would like to see more green space, more open space, and more history. I would like to see the history of this place represented in public through photographs and artwork. Do not paint over the history of Decoto and its people by building high rises. Please do not ignore the needs of this large population of people.
Guiding Principles Which of the following Principles are important to you? Checked all principles - • Central Pedestrian Spine • Well Connected Neighborhood • Open Space Network • Complete Neighborhood • High Quality Design
Other comments or suggestions for the vision and Guiding Principles? Show and tell the history of Decoto, which goes back to 1867. Hey, I can help with that! Visit www.museumoflocalhistory.org
Core Station District On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed enhancements for the Core Station District subarea. • Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the surrounding communities. – 5 • Network of parks and linear greenways. – 5 • Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc). – 5 • A balance of land uses including high density residential and office uses. – 5
Other comments or suggestions related to the Core Station District: I am all for live/work dual use spaces. However, high rise buildings are not in keeping with the greater look and feel of the Station District and surrounding areas.
- 68 - Survey Report
Station East On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed enhancements for the Station East subarea.
• Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the • surrounding communities. – 5 • Network of parks and linear greenways. – 5 • Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc). – 5 • Creation of a major employment center. – 3 • Range of housing types including affordable housing. – 5
Other comments or suggestions related to the Station East Subarea: I am not sure what is meant by "major employment center". I would like to see the reuse of old railway land and the integration of green space into the existing rail line. Please see, for example: Jean Sweeney Open Space Park in Alameda.
The Marketplace On a scale from 1 (strongly oppose) to 5 (strongly support), please score the following proposed enhancements for the Marketplace subarea. • Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections to BART and the • surrounding communities. – 5 • Public realm improvements (e.g. plazas, seating, public art, etc). – 5 • Buildings located closer to the street with parking lots located • behind, or parking in garages. – 3 • Addition of mixed-use development (i.e. retail on the ground floor • with either residential or office above). - 4
Other comments or suggestions related to the Marketplace: We need another grocery store, so we need to plan for a building that house something that large. Most homes in Decoto house 2x the "normal" occupancy rate. ONE grocery store is not enough. I do like mixed-used development.
Gateway Which of the following potential open spaces would you like to see in the Gateway subarea? Playgrounds – Yes Community Gardens – No Passive Open Space – Yes Recreation Open Spaces – No
What types of housing would you like to see developed in the Gateway subarea? Apartments – No
- 69 - Survey Report
Townhomes – No Mixed-use development – No Agrihood – Yes
What is your vision for the future of the Gateway subarea? Open space, yes. Meld well with Quarry Lakes and flow into the overpass to Niles, yes. Remove Ramirez Farm and the Peterson Farmhouse? NO! If you live here then you know that people who live here actually like the current agricultural use of the land, and it's the ONLY piece of our LONG agricultural history that is left. We like meandering along the road from Fremont to Union City.
Other comments or suggestions related to the Gateway subarea: Please include open space everywhere possible.
Civic Center What Facility enhancements & programming elements are most important to you? Checked the following: • Better walking and bike connections • Civic events and activities • Public art
Other comments or suggestions related to the Civic Center: The library building is old, yet functional and beautiful in its own way. The pond nearby is great. Kennedy Park is perfect as is. Except, can someone please fix the bridge? It's been YEARS. Yes, I have e-mailed public works. Nothing gets done. The skate park is great. All 3 parks in the Tri-City serve different groups of skaters. It's awesome! Please focus on public art and connecting all of these places together - make it walkable!
- 70 - Survey Report
9.3 Postcard – Mr. Charles Cameron
- 71 -