I would like to express to you my thoughts and concerns regarding a development proposal in our neighborhood. I was recently made aware of the resurrection of an old project that appears that the City is allowing the developer to try to slip into our neighborhood unnoticed. I speak of the proposed development on the old Mary Anne Bakery site. As envisioned then it was bad development and it is still bad development. I sincerely hope city leaders such as you can see that.

I have lived one block from the site of the proposed redevelopment for over 40 years. My house is very modest. I could have moved to a much bigger home further out but I chose to be close to my job where I could and did bike to work for my entire career. I love this neighborhood and all it represents. I regularly walk East Sacramento's neighborhoods. I have seen where good development has occurred and where bad has occurred. When you destroy neighborhoods like these with improper development you destroy what makes Sacramento a great city.

Yes, we need more housing but this isn't it, not here, not this big, ugly and and this poorly planned project. It is totally out of character with the neighborhood of mostly small one story homes that make the McKinley Park neighborhood of which Casa Loma Terrace is a part and also of which, makes it so special.

I think it is truly ironic that the developers take pictures of these single family homes and other very well designed apartment complexes and new housing that do fit into the character of their respective neighborhoods. The developers hope you will believe the lie that their project, which is totally out of character with the neighborhood, will somehow fit in by association. It will not and if built will remain an eyesore, not just to our neighborhood, but to the city as a whole for many years to come.

It is inconsistent with goals of the Alhambra Corridor of which I participated. It is way too high, too upscale, too reliant on the automobile and will have a very detrimental impact on already too much parking congestion in the neighborhood.

I am reminded of the way the developers of California Forever tried to sneak their inappropriate project into Solano County rather than working with the existing cities and the County and using their respective plans that are supposed to guide development there. Sacramento should be better than that. Its elected leaders should be better than that.
This project, as envisioned, would be far more appropriate down by the corner of Folsom and Alhambra Boulevard among buildings of similar character or better yet next to the light rail system the City supposedly supports, not destroying the existing neighborhoods that make Sacramento so special.

The developer along with the City need to revise this inappropriate project by reducing its size, particularly its height and providing better setbacks from the street. Our fellow neighbors would like to offer suggestions on how that can be done. I sincerely hope the City leaders listen.

Jim Conant
332 32nd Street

Additional eComments received by the Office of City Clerk.

I would like to express my opposition to this development as currently proposed. While I am absolutely in favor of converting the site to more affordable housing, this 6-story, 68-foot tall, high-density project holding up to 870 residents is massively out of scale with the surrounding neighborhood, is oriented around car use, and is not on a light rail line. This results in a variety of permanent, damaging, major impacts on the existing neighborhoods, especially traffic, parking, pedestrian and bicycle safety, air quality, and livability.

The debate over this project ultimately comes down to whether Sacramento intends to honor the planning principles it has spent decades developing. Scale is not an abstract concern; it is a core component of responsible land use planning. When a building dramatically exceeds the height and massing of its surroundings, it creates a physical imbalance that affects everything from sunlight to privacy to the psychological sense of enclosure on the street. In established residential areas, transitions matter. They are the mechanism by which cities accommodate growth without sacrificing livability. A six story structure placed directly across from small historic homes is not a transition — it is a rupture. It signals that the city is willing to disregard its own planning tools in pursuit of density at any cost.

Traffic impacts reveal a similar disconnect between planning theory and on the ground reality. A project that introduces hundreds of residents and hundreds of parking spaces into a low transit area will inevitably generate significant vehicle trips. When those trips funnel onto narrow residential streets, the consequences are predictable: congestion, safety hazards, and increased conflict between drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists.

I’m not against new housing, but this project is way out of proportion for our neighborhood. It’s too tall, too dense, and funnels too many cars into streets that already feel tight. What makes East Sac special is its human scale and sense of community. A building this large would overshadow that — literally and figuratively.

This project is just too big! Not only will it dwarf the surrounding neighborhood, it will also exceed the height limit for this area. There are not enough parking places for the number of units, impacting on-street parking in the neighborhood, there will be a loss of the tree canopy, and it is BIG!!!

1) The proposed project referenced above is requires an amendment to the city’s general plan and specifically the Alhambra special planning district.
Please don’t give a special/conditional use permit for this project. Some kind of housing can be built to fit within these parameters.

2) This proposed project is vastly out of scale to surrounding homes which are single story and approx. 1000 sq. ft. or less in size.
It is also vastly out of character to surrounding turn of the century, vintage bungalows in Casa Loma Terrace.
Please be sensitive to the surrounding neighbor’s homes.

3) While we need housing, many more options could satisfy that need with a two-story structure or building of individual town homes much like the ones found two blocks away
on Alhambra Blvd. Please build something that has integrity and adds to rather than detracts to our neighborhood.

4) See pictures attached: Adding hundreds of toilets to this area’s frail sewer system will impact everyone around this area.
Adding the “vault” under McKinley Park – while it helped – it did not solve the flooding issue upon heavy or sustained rains. The antiquated, combined sewer system found in this area impacts surrounding property and homes when it overflows with raw sewage onto our streets, yards and park. While flooding occurred shortly after the vault was completed, flooding occurred. When asking a maintenance worker - who was nearby adding caution blocks to the flooded street - to “open the new vault” when the rain water rose, he exclaimed “the vault is already open”.
This is and continues to be a problem in our area of McKinley Park as the city does not have the resources to split the sewer system.
Please don’t add to that impact.

As a Sacramento County resident since 1993, I have seen the City of Sacramento grow. In the old days we only had Centro's and the Spaghetti Factory. Originally from Tulelake, California and the Los Angeles area, we are proud to call Sacramento our home. We love Sacramento and are not against growth. Our concern is the size of this proposed building complex formerly called Mary Ann's Bakery.
Included below are pictures of the neighborhood directly across from this building. Please keep this building within the 35 foot height limit and not to approve the Conditional Use Permit on P24-007.
"Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not." -Edward T. MacMahon

Our neighborhood is meant for neighbors. Our neighborhood is meant to be lived in. The Alhambra project will open the doors to 300+ new families with whom we can all share the joys and beauty of this place. More people should have the chance to make East Sac their home, and this development will give them that chance.

Thank you for your time.

As a community member and resident in close proximity to the site, I value thoughtful investment that strengthens our neighborhood while making productive use of underutilized properties. The proposal to redevelop this location into a mixed-use residential and commercial space reflects a forward-looking approach to growth that aligns with the needs of a changing and growing community.

The project’s plan to transform a largely vacant and underused site into a six-story mixed-use development with new multi-unit housing and ground-floor commercial space will help build a more active and thriving neighborhood. By introducing hundreds of new homes along with neighborhood-serving retail space, the development will support local businesses, increase walkability, and improve access to nearby amenities such as transit routes, parks, schools, and services. This type of infill development supports a more connected community where residents can live closer to daily resources and contribute to a vibrant local economy. The thoughtful reuse of existing structures where feasible and the creation of new housing on an underutilized site will help revitalize the corridor while making efficient use of existing infrastructure.

As someone who lives nearby, I believe this project will contribute positively to the long-term vitality of the neighborhood by expanding housing options, encouraging investment, and supporting a more walkable and connected community. I respectfully submit this public comment in support of the Alhambra Redevelopment Project and appreciate the opportunity to provide input as part of the review process.

This proposed Alhambra Redevelopment project at the former Mary Ann’s Bakery site (D Street and Alhambra Blvd.) should not be approved for several key reasons:

1. It is incompatible with the neighborhood’s historic character.
The surrounding area is defined by long established architectural patterns and a human scale streetscape that this project would disrupt.

2. The scale is dramatically out of proportion.
A six story, 332 unit, 440,000 square foot building would tower over adjacent single and two story homes, creating a massive and intrusive presence.

3. The location lacks high frequency transit service.
With the potential for up to 870 new residents relying on cars, this project would significantly worsen congestion and heighten existing safety concerns on already overburdened streets.

PLEASE see the ATTACHED DOCUMENT for a more detailed explanation of these and other issues.

This project does not belong in this area of East Sacramento - it is TOO LARGE, and creates too much traffic. This complex belongs next to the light rail corridor not in a corner of East Sacramento where the streets are narrow and traffic is already very congested.

My name is Joseph Haft. I have lived, raised children and owned property in the vicinity of this project since 1977, almost 50 years. I have stayed and enjoyed life here as have many of my neighbors precisely for the reasons that approval of this project contemplates obliterating. While we have abided other large development projects over the years such as the Cannery Business Park, McKinley Village and Sutter Square Galleria, the proposed project pales in comparison to these others in terms of its size, scale and deviation from the character and codified protections of the immediate neighborhood. This fact is highlighted for all to see in the very Notice of Public Hearing description of the Project when it specifically relies on a questionable exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an absolute requirement to “exceed height standards of the residential preservation transition buffer zone of the Alhambra Corridor Special Planning District and a “Tree Permit for the removal of seven city trees, two private protected trees, and the non-standard pruning of two city trees. These items are, of course, in addition to the crass disregard for existing infrastructure, barely compliant parking and traffic concerns that such a building would bring to our quaint and quiet neighbor environment.

I apologize if my comments are harsh regarding the project but I find it very difficult to find anything substantially positive that couldn’t be accomplished with a scaled down version as has been suggested, even encouraged by a number of East Sacramento neighborhood groups. In addition, while I am not personally able to site the technicalities and specifications of codes and standards that apply to a project like this, I have always believed that I could rely on the City Planning and Design Commission staff and members to be bound to diligently apply them with one overriding mandate: A commitment to adhere to existing and longstanding protections designed to preserve and enhance the quality of life in one of the oldest and yet more modest neighborhoods in the central city.

That said, I have to say I find it hard to believe and heartbreaking that it appears the Commission has already made up its mind, by including in its agenda for this item, the following: “Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, pass a Motion to approve.” Many of the homes in the Alhambra Corridor Special Planning District are approaching, if not more than, 100 years old. This is no “Fabulous 40’s” neighborhood which is why it may have been vulnerable to a development like this, where the parcel acquisition cost was actually feasible for an overscale, oversized, overcrowded but, potentially, immensely profitable undertaking IF an approval as applied for were obtained. So, again, in closing, I want to appeal to this Commission not to sell out this mature, peaceful, accessible neighborhood anchored by the 150 year-old McKinley Park for the benefit of a handful of developers. No civic good will come from casting a shadow, literally, over hundreds of homes while cramming 870 potential residents into 332 apartments right next to a heavily traveled freeway with only 322 parking stalls for their own cars.

Please do not go to Sun Spa, located at 6804 Fruitridge Rd #A
Sacramento, CA, 95820, as well as q spa, located at 4215 Norwood avenue, suite #12, sacramento, ca, 95838, They will all claim that they are too busy for you.