Planning Commission

City of Sunnyvale Meeting Minutes - Final Planning Commission Monday, March 24, 2014 7:00 PM Chambers and West Conference Room, City Hall, 456 Council W. Olive Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION - STUDY SESSION - WEST CONFERENCE ROOM 1 Training: A Landscaping Plans: Appropriate Species B Pedestrian and Bicycle Standards: City/VTA 2 Public Comment on Study Session Agenda Items 3 Comments from the Chair 4 Adjourn Study Session 8:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION - PUBLIC HEARING - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Chair Melton called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Present: 7 - Commissioner Ralph Durham Commissioner Sue Harrison Commissioner Larry Klein Chair Russell Melton Vice Chair Ken Olevson Commissioner Ken Rheaume Commissioner David Simons PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS/PUBLIC COMMENTS CONSENT CALENDAR 1.A 14-0334 Approval of Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of March 10, 2014 MOTION: Comm. Simons moved to approve the draft minutes. Comm. Klein seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: City of Sunnyvale Page 1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 Yes: 6 - Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 Abstained: 1 - Commissioner Durham 1.B 14-0313 File #: 2014-7096 Location: 822 Ponderosa (APN: 213-39-123) Zoning: R-0 Low Density Residential Proposed Project: DESIGN REVIEW for a first-story addition of 115 square feet to an existing two-story single family home resulting in 2,798 square feet (2,366 square feet living area and 432 square feet garage) and a Floor Area Ratio of 45.8%. Applicant / Owner: Frank Eveleno (applicant/owner) Environmental Review: A Class 1 Categorical Exemption relieves this project from California Environmental Quality Act provisions and City Guidelines. Project Planner: Elise Lieberman, (408) 730-7443, elieberman@sunnyvale.ca.gov 1.C 14-0311 File #: 2014-7088 Location: 1349 Elsona Court (APN: 320-08-037) Zoning: R-1Low Density Residential Proposed Project: DESIGN REVIEW for a first-story addition of 375 square feet and an attached open garden feature to an existing two-story single family home resulting in 3,905 square feet (3,275 square feet living area and 630 square feet garage) and a Floor Area Ratio of 47.2%. Applicant / Owner: Michelle Miner (applicant) / Kevin Martang (owner) Environmental Review: A Class 1 Categorical Exemption relieves this project from California Environmental Quality Act provisions and City Guidelines. Project Planner: Elise Lieberman, (408) 730-7443, elieberman@sunnyvale.ca.gov City of Sunnyvale Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 1.D 14-0356 File #: 2013-8029 Location: 523 E. Homestead Rd. (APNs: 309-44-003, -049, -050) Zoning: Low-Medium Density Residential / Planned Development (R-2/PD) Zoning District Proposed Project: SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT to allow 9 single-family homes VESTING TENTATIVE MAP to create 9 ownership lots. Applicant / Owner: S & S Construction / Louis Mariani Trustee Environmental Review: Mitigated Negative Declaration Project Planner: Noren Caliva-Lepe, (408) 730-7659, ncaliva-lepe@sunnyvale.ca.gov NOTE: No action required. Project has been re-advertised for April 14, 2014. MOTION: Comm. Simons moved to approve the remaining items on the Consent Calendar. Comm. Klein seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 7 - Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS PUBLIC HEARINGS/GENERAL BUSINESS City of Sunnyvale Page 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 2 14-0068 File #: 2013-7951 Location: 904 Primrose Avenue (APN: 213-25-012) Proposed Project: An application on a 6,072 sq. ft. site: DESIGN REVIEW: to allow first and second floor additions of 1,547 square feet, for a total of 3,334 square feet and 54.9% floor area ratio. Applicant/Owner: Dennis Shafer (applicant), Saumil and Jesika Gandhi (owner) Environmental Review: A Class 1 Categorical Exemption relieves this project from California Environmental Quality Act provisions and City Guidelines. Project Planner: Timothy Maier, (408) 730-7257, tmaier@sunnyvale.ca.gov Timothy Maier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Comm. Simons discussed with Mr. Maier the requirement for removal of the bay windows from the design and how that would address the neighbor's privacy concerns. Comm. Simons discussed with Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, the second story setback, and how removal of the bay windows would leave the rear of the building a flat surface. Comm. Rheaume discussed with Mr. Maier the Condition of Approval (COA) regarding symmetry and window placement, and said he would support making the changes on all sides of the home except for the north. Comm. Harrison confirmed with Mr. Maier that the increased size of the front entry was a collaborative proposal by the applicant and staff. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Ms. Ryan that two-story homes are consistent with other homes in the immediate area. Comm. Durham confirmed with Mr. Maier that there is no plan to remove any trees. Comm. Klein clarified with Mr. Maier the direction the proposed balcony would face. Chair Melton confirmed with Mr. Maier that the proposed home would have the biggest Floor Area Ratio (FAR) on Primrose. Chair Melton discussed with Ms. Ryan the zoning of the development to the south, and said he is not comfortable with the FAR. Chair Melton and Ms. Ryan discussed procedures to continue this item. City of Sunnyvale Page 4 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 Chair Melton opened the public hearing. Jesika Gandhi, the project applicant, gave a presentation outlining the reason for remodeling her family's home and discussed the proposed home's features. Comm. Harrison discussed with Ms. Gandhi the size of the front entry, and confirmed with Ms. Gandhi that the utility room would be on the second floor and that Ms. Gandhi would be amenable to upgrading all water fixtures to meet the new CALGreen standards. Comm. Simons confirmed with Ms. Gandhi that she is comfortable with the COA requiring side windows to have more obscured vision to address privacy concerns. Comm. Simons commented on the rear wall appearing as one flat panel without the bay windows, and discussed with Dennis Schafer, the project architect, options for breaking it up. Comm. Simons confirmed with Mr. Schafer that a second story offset would add substantially to the cost of the remodel, and confirmed with the applicants that they would be amenable to adding more landscaping. Chair Melton discussed with the applicants options for reducing the size of the home if the Planning Commission made overall reduction a requirement, and discussed the applicants' preference for continuing the item over a denial. Kjevd Svendsen, the applicant's neighbor, said he objects to the proposed project because of the privacy issue it would create. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Mr. Svendsen that he lives in a two-story home and that Mr. Svendsen's objection to the project is primarily based on privacy concerns. Chair Melton closed the public hearing. Comm. Rheaume moved Alternative 1 to approve the Design Review with the attached conditions. Comm. Durham seconded. Comm. Rheaume said the other Commissioners were concerned with the FAR of 54.9% and that he would feel the same if the home were not backing up to the Mangrove Villa homes. He said he understands the neighbor's concerns about privacy but he thinks it will be alleviated by reducing the size of the windows. He City of Sunnyvale Page 5 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 said it is hard to buy property in Sunnyvale and that we are going to see more people wanting to build up their existing homes. He said he was asked to reduce the size of an addition to his home and that it is difficult when one has a particular configuration, and to take off 100 square feet to look good in terms of the FAR does not make much sense. He said he would not want to jeopardize the overall design of the home, and that he likes the idea of adding the trellis and wood siding with less stucco. He said the applicants have met all of the setback requirements, including the second story even though it is bulky, and said he was able to make the findings. Comm. Durham said he also had concerns with the FAR and with how bland the back of the building could be. He said when he looked at the property, the views people will be getting in back are at more of an acute angle and that other nearby two-story homes may have more issues with privacy. He said he thinks it is a pretty decent plan, and thinks it makes sense to block in the front of the house to allow access to the driveway and stairwell. He said taking a few square feet out of the entryway to reduce the FAR will not make a major impact and is not worth doing, and said he can make the findings for this project. Comm. Simons offered as a friendly amendment that City staff and the applicants' architect coordinate design elements that would break up the flatness of the rear wall. Comms. Rheaume and Durham accepted. Comm. Simons offered as another friendly amendment the removal of the requirement for the window reductions in the front. Comms. Rheaume and Durham accepted. Comm. Simons offered as a final friendly amendment that staff review any added landscaping that would improve privacy. Comms. Rheaume and Durham accepted. Comm. Simons said he understands the neighbor's concern with expanding a single-story house which may potentially create privacy issues. He said years ago the City modified the potential for square footage in houses to allow smaller lots to have the same expansion capability as larger lots, and the City did not want to restrict smaller lots to having really small houses. He said he remembers the purpose was to allow people who needed more square footage to expand rather City of Sunnyvale Page 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 than requiring them to move. He said even though he understands the concern with increased density, the goal is also to allow people to stay and improve their homes, and he said he believes that is the intent with this application. He said he is sensitive to the privacy issues and that there will be window changes and the removal of bay windows to address them. He said he thinks the look of house will be better with some of the recommended changes. Vice Chair Olevson said he will be supporting the motion, and that the neighborhood is very mature but undergoing change. He said he is concerned that a large ratio of home to lot will dramatically change the property, but thinks that it is in Sunnyvale's best interest to encourage upgrading and continuous improvemnt of the neighborhood. He said while the ratio is wrong with this home, it is sitting on a small lot and this needs to be taken into account. He said he ran the numbers on how many square feet would need to be lost and noted that if the lot was slightly larger there would be no problem. He said that it is in Sunnyvale's best interest to encourage upgrading rather than having residents go elsewhere while leaving the problem for someone else. Comm. Klein said he will be supporting the motion, and also had some concerns about the FAR, but that during a site visit he found multiple two-story homes that did not have the setbacks that are now in place which would change the characteristics of the neighborhood. He said he understands the privacy issues raised by the neighbor, and that with the friendly amendment to review the lines-of-sight, the COAs in place to reduce the window sizes on the second story and the applicants' willingness to add more landscaping, the privacy issues are handled in many ways. He said this neighborhood, as with all of Sunnyvale, is in transition, and that this home is a good addition. He said that the size of the lot is the real problem, and that keeping additions from going on does not make sense. Comm. Harrison said she will be supporting the motion and is persuaded by reduction in cost of structurally putting one wall over another and keeping the lines straight on the side and back. She offered a friendly amendment to have the other water fixtures not proposed to be touched to be upgraded to meet CALGreen standards. Comms. Rheaume and Durham accepted. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion, and that he too had concerns that the proposed property and overall FAR were just too big, but that he is convinced by the applicants' testimony and comments from the Commissioners that this is the right thing to do for a neighborhood in transition. He said this is also the City of Sunnyvale Page 7 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 right thing to do for the City of Sunnyvale and provides a great opportunity to redevelop and inject capital into the neighborhood. He said a year ago the Planning Commission was reviewing a similar application, that the Planning Commission had three public hearings and Council had two public hearings on the topic. He said former Mayor Spitaleri stated that one really important thing to consider when making a decision is families, the definition of which continuously evolves even since the single-family homes design standards were adopted. He said we can hold ourselves to those standards, but the fact is that families have been growing and the definition may include parents and grandparents coming to live with families and we need to adjust and evolve as well. He said he can make the findings, and that while he understands the financial argument made by the applicant, he is not persuaded by it. He said he was taught as a Planning Commissioner to not take into account the financial considerations of the applicants and that Commissioners have to do what is best for the City. He said the privacy concerns will be mitigated and addressed, that this will be a nice addition to the neighborhood, and that he looks foward to the project's completion. MOTION: Comm. Rheaume moved Alternative 2 to approve the Design Review with modified conditions: 1) City staff and the applicant’s architect coordinate a design to break up the flatness of the rear wall; 2) The condition for the windows in the front of the home does not require a reduction in size; 3) Staff review any potential landscaping added to improve privacy; and 4) Upgrade all water fixtures to meet CALGreen standards. Comm. Durham seconded. Motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 7 - Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 8 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 3 14-0221 File #: 2014-7087 Location: 1604 Vireo Avenue (APNs: 313-42-031 ) Zoning: R-0 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District Proposed Project: DESIGN REVIEW to allow an 837-square foot first and second story addition to a single family home resulting in 3,017 square feet (2,617 square feet of living area and a 400 square foot garage) and 48.1% Floor Area Ratio. Applicant / Owner: Dan Fritschen Environmental Review: Categorically Exempt Class 1 Project Planner: Momoko Ishijima, (408) 730-7532, mishijima@sunnyvale.ca.gov Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, presented the staff report. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Ms. Ryan that this item has come to the Planning Commission because the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) exceeds the 45% threshold. Chair Melton opened the public hearing, and upon seeing no speakers for the item, Chair Melton closed the public hearing. Comm. Klein moved Alternative 1 to approve the Design Review with the conditions in Attachment 4. Comm. Durham seconded. Comm. Klein said he was able to make the findings, and that the design looks like it will fit in well with the neighborhood. He said as opposed to the previous project heard, which had a larger FAR, this project barely exceeds requirements from a review standpoint. He said he was able to make the findings and looks forward to the project moving forward. Comm. Durham said he thinks the project will be a good addition, and sees no essential changes in the basic footprint. He said this is a fairly small addition to the second floor in a neighborhood that looks like it is going that way. He said he may have had some objections if some of the rear yard was lost, but he will be supporting the motion. Vice Chair Olevson said he can support the project which is in an area of Sunnyvale that has a variety of styles and sizes of homes. He said it looks like the applicant has done a good job of staying within the parameters, except for the FAR, which is just 200 square feet larger than it would have been if it had just gone City of Sunnyvale Page 9 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 through staff and not the Planning Commission. He said he can support the project easily. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion and can make the findings. He said when he visited the site he bumped into the applicant who was on the roof showing his daughters what the second story addition might look like. He said what we have here is a great neighbor in a great neighborhood and that this is going to be a fantastic addition. He said he wishes the applicant the best and looks forward to seeing the project come about. MOTION: Comm. Klein moved Alternative 1 to approve the Design Review with the conditions in Attachment 4. Comm. Durham seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 7 - Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 10 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 4 14-0154 Introduce an Ordinance to Create Chapter 19.47 (Off-Site Stadium Event Parking) of Title 19 of the Sunnyvale Municipal Code to Add Off-Site Parking Standards and Regulations Related to Levi’s (49ers) Stadium (2014-7021) Amber El-Hajj, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Comm. Klein clarified with staff the zoning district that this ordinance would apply to, and discussed with Ms. El-Hajj prohibiting both tailgating and the sale of food in the offsite parking lots. Comm. Klein and staff discussed the permit appeal process. Comm. Klein confirmed with Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, that there are no other use permits that cannot be appealed. Ms. El-Hajj discussed the response from the community. Comm. Klein confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that San Francisco does not currently have an offsite parking ordinance. Comm. Durham discussed with Ms. El-Hajj whether the number of parking spaces needed for the stadium includes the staff who will work there, and confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the stadium did not include bike parking data. Comm. Durham and Ms. El-Hajj also discussed the number of lots potentially affected that are adjacent to residential properties, and confirmed that the Department of Public Safety is working on having road block signs and limited access areas. Vice Chair Olevson discussed with staff the rationale behind prohibiting valet parking. Vice Chair Olevson noted that the elimination of tailgating may encourage people to wait until the last minute to arrive, thereby creating traffic chaos. Ms. El-Hajj said Santa Clara is allowing tailgating in all of their lots. Vice Chair Olevson said he would like to see a process of appeal. Comm. Rheaume confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that the standard Miscellaneous Plan Permit (MPP) application review fee would apply to those wanting to offer parking in private lots. Comm. Rheaume confirmed with Ms. Ryan that offsite signage for the lots would not be allowed and that parking in the lots would have to be advertised another way. Comm. Rheaume confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that the City of San Jose is not considering a similar ordinance, and Ms. El-Hajj added that the concern stems from people not wanting to pay $40 for parking and attempting to park in Sunnyvale for free and then walking to Tasman to get to the stadium. Ms. Ryan displayed the City zoning map and demonstrated the proximity of the stadium to City boundaries. Comm. Simons commented on the lack of sidewalks on Tasman, and said evaluating this during the first year will not cut it because the worst case will occur City of Sunnyvale Page 11 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 during the Superbowl. He discussed alternatives for the tailgating prohibition which could potentially produce funding for City programs. Comm. Simons and Ms. El-Hajj discussed the ordinance that the Department of Public Works is working on and Ms. El-Hajj said it would include security in the neighborhoods. Comm. Simons confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that permits would not be approved for parking in private lots if proposed to occur during regular business hours. Comm. Harrison confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that the final draft of Santa Clara's transportation operational plan is not yet complete. Comm. Harrison commented on Santa Clara contracting out for the additional parking spaces. Ms. Ryan noted that Santa Clara should take care of parking for their stadium, but that the City of Sunnyvale should be prepared for the first event. Comm. Harrison confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that Santa Clara would not be adding a sidewalk on Tasman in Sunnyvale and that the City is not asking business owners to set up a new business to manage parking, but is giving them the opportunity to do so. Comm. Durham confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that the 49ers have agreed to have no weekday events for the first year. Comm. Klein confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that after a permit is revoked, the standard time for approval of the reapplication would be two weeks. Chair Melton opened the public hearing and upon seeing no speakers for the item, closed the public hearing. Comm. Klein discussed the lack of funding for improvements to the Woods neighborhood and Tasman Drive, and asked if there is a potential program for application fees to create funding. Ms. Ryan clarified that for a development review the City can only charge for the cost of reviewing the permit. Comm. Simons and staff discussed developing a list of those who have permits and will be providing parking, and Ms. El-Hajj said where to post the information would be up to the Communications Division. Comm. Klein moved Alternatives: 2) Direct staff to monitor the ordinance and parking and return to Council in one year (or sooner if necessary) to discuss the regulations and provide suggested modifications as needed; and 3) Introduce an ordinance with modifications: a. That the revocation of the permit be appealable to the Planning Commission. City of Sunnyvale Page 12 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 Vice Chair Olevson seconded. Comm. Klein said he understands that staff is trying to deal with all possible issues in an unknown situation, and said he is surprised that neither San Francisco nor Oakland has had to deal with an offsite parking ordinance. He said before this goes to City Council, he suggests staff look around for a similar ordinance. He said he has some issues with the tailgating limitation as tailgating spreads out fan arrival times and said that it is one thing to prohibit cooking and barbecuing and another to prohibit loitering in a parking lot where multiple caravans meet. He said encouraging people to gather is a good thing in terms of the camaraderie and that many times friends have to sit in different areas of the stadium. Comm. Klein reiterated that the tailgating portion is very restrictive and hopes it will be revisited as a priority in one year. He said looking into having tailgating with food trucks may reduce the likelihood of people cooking, and that lessening the tailgating wording so people could congregate and spread time out makes sense. He said it is heavy handed to say one person makes the decision regarding an appeal and would prefer the option to have the revocation of a permit to be appealable to the Planning Commission so permit holders can make their case to a wider audience. He said he worries about the lack of signage and direction for people to find parking, and that free street parking will be a common location. He said charging $40-50 for a parking spot will encourage people to find free parking, and he hopes staff will look into notification of where parking can be found on event days on the City website. He said he also worries that there may not be a good ordinance in place to deal with the impact of people parking on the street, of shuttle buses not having a direct path to light rail stations or other public transit. He said staff should look into funding improvements to the Woods and Tasman areas regardless of whether or not Santa Clara responds. He said people will be walking in the street, which will become an issue very quickly, and as much as having the stadium nearby will be a boon for local hotels and business, we will also have the nightmare of trying to handle game day in the community. He said this is a good first attempt and looks forward to its development over the next year. Vice Chair Olevson said he will be supporting the motion for the ordinance with the modification to allow the appeal for revocation to the Planning Commission. He said he has concerns with planning for the future via guess work, but that we do not know the impact this will have. He said Santa Clara has 21,000 spaces and is negotiating 30,000 spaces, and all of this will be moot by the time the first game comes along. He said he is willing to support the modified ordinance because we need to be cautious, and that because Santa Clara is paying us for enforcement but not traffic control, we need to make this work. City of Sunnyvale Page 13 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 Comm. Rheaume said he is having trouble supporting the motion, and that while he appreciates staff's work and concern, he thinks we can keep this simple by waiting a year and seeing how Santa Clara responds. He said if word gets out to fans that you cannot park in Sunnyvale now it may set precedence that you cannot park in Sunnyvale ever, and that while it is hard to control that, it could put pressure on Santa Clara to meet their responsibilities for this stadium. Comm. Rheaume offered a friendly amendment to limit this to include just the Woods neighborhood to see how this would impact the City for the first year. Comm. Klein declined the friendly amendment and said he thinks those neighborhoods are key to understanding how they will be affected because they are so close, and that the biggest issue is people who plan ahead will park in Moffett and people who do not will find the Woods. Comm. Durham said he can find for this potential ordinance, and that there will be people who will arrive late and want to find parking quickly. He said if people are allowed to park in Sunnyvale for half or three quarters of the cost of parking in Santa Clara they may do the math and decide it is better to arrive early and park in Santa Clara. He said he is hoping there will not be a lot of overflow into Sunnyvale, and that he thinks this is a proactive step. He said he would hate to see that after the first few games we have a flood of parking and no plan to deal with it. He said we have a good start here with plans to fine tune the limitation and definition of tailgating later, so he will be supporting the motion. Comm. Simons thanked staff for a great effort, and said he will be voting against this because of his one major concern that we may be creating businesses that are invisible unless one is driving around looking for signs. He said he would like to see funding so that people who are looking for parking can find a list of companies, which may not always be open but can be called to confirm availability. He said this should be built into any process like this so we are not creating hidden businesses. Comm. Harrison confirmed with Ms. El-Hajj that if staff denies a permit it is appealable under normal MPP rules. Comm. Harrison said she will be supporting the motion and appreciates staff's time and dedication. She said this is a good first step, and that she also really questions the tailgating and valet prohibitions and hopes they will be looked at after a period of evaluation. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion and thanked staff for a really well thought out report. He said we have heard Ms. El-Hajj say repeatedly that the primary mission is to protect Sunnyvale, and that we have a massive thing going on City of Sunnyvale Page 14 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 in the next city and we need to look at what is best for Sunnyvale. He said he is not as concerned with the tailgating issue and has faith that it will be addressed in the subsequent iteration. He said it was a close call with regard to the appealability of permit revocation, and that while his preference would have been to leave it as a unilateral decision for the Director of the Community Development Department, he was convinced by Comm. Klein's comments that this is a good way to go. He said we will be looking at this again in 12 months anyway, so it is not as though any decision made now will have major, long-term effects. MOTION: Comm. Klein moved Alternatives: 3) Introduce an ordinance with modifications: a. That the revocation of the permit be appealable to the Planning Commission; and 2) Direct staff to monitor the ordinance and parking and return to Council in one year (or sooner if necessary) to discuss the regulations and provide suggested modifications as needed. Vice Chair Olevson seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 5 - Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson No: 2 - Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons City of Sunnyvale Page 15 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 5 14-0369 Nomination of Planning Commission Representative to the Lawrence Station Area Plan (LSAP) Community Advisory Group (CAG) Comm. Simons nominated Comm. Harrison who accepted. Chair Melton said he would also have nominated Comm. Harrison as she served previously as the Sustainability Commission representative to the Community Advisory Group. VOTE: YES: 7 - Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons NO: 0 6 14-0367 2014 Planning Commission Work Plan Trudi Ryan, Planning Offier, described the work plan purpose and process. Comm. Harrison and Ms. Ryan discussed the purpose of a General Plan Amendment initiation (GPI) and the upcoming GPI review for the Watts Spansion site. Chair Melton opened the public hearing and upon seeing no speakers for this item, closed the public hearing. MOTION: Vice Chair Olevson moved to approve the work plan. Comm. Durham seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: YES: 7 - Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons NO: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 16 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final March 24, 2014 7 14-0357 Standing Item: Potential Study Issues for 2015 No potential study issues for 2015 were suggested. NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND COMMENTS COMMISSIONER ORAL COMMENTS Comm. Harrison said she thought it was interesting that every design review application heard had to do with having multi-generational families living in one home, and noted that the housing and jobs balance information the Commissioners receive demonstrates that our population has already exceeded the planned designation, yet our housing units are far behind. STAFF ORAL COMMENTS Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, discussed future Planning items that the City Council will consider, and said that Council will have a study session on April 8 to learn about the Landbank property. INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS ADJOURNMENT With no further business the Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 10:48 p.m. City of Sunnyvale Page 17