Comments on: Council backs Patterson Ranch Development

By: Dan Ondrasek

Dan Ondrasek — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:37:43 +0000

Thanks Gus.

By: Gus Morrison

Gus Morrison — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 22:06:31 +0000

Just to be clear (#27), Fremont has assigned a General Plan designation of Industial to the 92 acre Cargill property. They have not approved any development on that property. In order to develop anything, they must comply with all regulatory agency requirements. I know that much of that property is constrained by wetlands, regulated by the US Army Corps of Engineers. Any estimate of how much development would be allowed on the site is pure speculation, until an official delineation is established.

By: Dan Ondrasek

Dan Ondrasek — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 17:02:07 +0000

#26
…or industrial.

Did you know that Fremont has allowed up to 900,000 square feet of Industrial development to be built in front of the Southern part of the Coyote Hills? That is the size of the old Sun campus in Newark (now almost empty).

A reminder from the Fremont C of C:

Cargill’s property is an undeveloped, 92 acre parcel zoned as Restricted Industrial (biotechnology, high-technology), the same zoning as to what is across Paseo Padre Parkway at the Ardenwood Technology Park. Fremont’s current General Plan allows for Cargill to develop at least 900,000 square feet of restricted industrial space (as estimated by the city) and for a number of years Cargill has been a part of Local Improvement District #25 (LID #25). A LID is a public finance mechanism used by local jurisdictions to build the infrastructure needed (public streets, water, gas, NOT on-site improvements) to accommodate future development and financing by assessing a fee to those parties who are creating the need for the additional infrastructure.

By: Mike Wright

Mike Wright — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 05:51:31 +0000

Fremont is overcrowded and traffic is terrible, the ranch land should be made into parks for recreational use, not more homes and condo’s.

By: VOR

VOR — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 22:25:03 +0000

So who is going to build 500 new homes when foreclosures have risen in California since this summer. I can’t imagine any bank would be willing to fund a development of single family homes at this point time or in the foreseeable future.

http://www.realtytrac.com/trendcenter/ca-trend.html

By: californiaguy

californiaguy — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:13:48 +0000

I am tired about what is said about measure K the ballot measure that would have preseved Coyote Hills Wld Life Area.
Everyone talks about it losing. Here is why. Cargill spent $1.4 million dollars against a organization that had only $20k.
They threatened Fremont Homeowners a $500 dollar assement on the lawsuit they were going to file. it became a pocket book issue and they rarely pass.
Dispite this over 15,000 Fremont residents voted for it measure K.
I thought The Fremont City Council were acting like petty politicians by stating misinformation about measure K.
With that said it is not over!

By: Dan Ondrasek

Dan Ondrasek — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 00:02:07 +0000

….it ain’t over

By: WCG123

WCG123 — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 23:13:35 +0000

In 27 years in Fremont…I listen to all of the candidates at various forums, vinie will agrue against anything and everything whether he is trying to convince himself or others I don’t know, kathy will stumble and go in circles trying to remember what vinnie told her to say and think, Khan is fussing about nothing, the purple man is more a civil rights activist than anything else, Anu is not trying to rock the boat and bill is speaking with his pockets for the day to be mayor. You and I know the issues, argue back and forth and at the end of the day we do nothing but wait around for another blog to vent!!! If none of these are right for the seats, then who is the question and if it is you why didn’t you stand up and come forward? If we don’t offer solutions then we are apart of the problem!

By: Marty

Marty — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:41:20 +0000

Jenny, just stop -with the votes we just gained from Chinmoy’s “unsubstantiated inference at election time” and Matt Artz’s savvy electioneering, I think we have this one in the bag. You simply don’t have the votes now.

By: Jenny

Jenny — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:33:41 +0000

What you wrote implies that she was against the Patterson Ranch development when she actually voted for it – this seems kind of important for those who do not want to see this development happen which is more than 50 people!