Planning Commission

City of Sunnyvale Meeting Minutes - Final Planning Commission Monday, July 14, 2014 7:00 PM Council Chambers and West Conference Room, City Hall, 456 W. Olive Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION - STUDY SESSION - WEST CONFERENCE ROOM 1 14-0671 Training: Discussion on City Reclaimed Water Efforts Staff Contact: John Stufflebean, Environmental Services Department Director 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 Chair Melton led the salute to the flag. ROLL CALL Present: 7 - Chair Russell Melton Vice Chair Ken Olevson Commissioner Ralph Durham Commissioner Sue Harrison Commissioner Larry Klein Commissioner Ken Rheaume Commissioner David Simons PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS / PUBLIC COMMENTS CONSENT CALENDAR City of Sunnyvale Page 1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 1.A 14-0687 Approval of the Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 23, 2014 Vice Chair Olevson moved to approve the draft minutes. Comm. Harrison seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 Abstained: 1 - Commissioner Durham PUBLIC HEARINGS/GENERAL BUSINESS City of Sunnyvale Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 2 14-0661 File #: 2014-7216 Location: 1138 Pimento Avenue (APN: 202-18-016) Zoning: R1 (Low Density Residential) Proposed Project: APPEAL by neighbors of a decision of the Director of Community Development approving a Design Review to allow a first- and second-story addition of 897 square feet to an existing single-story, single-family residence resulting in a floor area ratio (FAR) of 42.2% and 3,121 square feet (application was noticed/advertised as 43.4% FAR totaling 3,209 square feet). Applicant / Owner: Hometec Architecture (applicant) / Madeline M. Gamble Trustee (owner) 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. Comm. Simons confirmed with Ms. Ryan that staff had discussed with neighbors the option for a single-story combining district. Comm. Harrison discussed with Ms. Ryan the definition of, and process to achieve, a single-story combining district, and confirmed that the process to initiate a single-story combining district in this neighborhood has not been started. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Ms. Ryan that the first floor rearyard setback is legal conforming. Chair Melton opened the public hearing. Richard Kao, the project appellant, gave a presentation on the rationale behind appealing the approval of the application. Comm. Simons confirmed with Mr. Kao that the application requiring 55% of nearby homeowners has not yet been submitted, and that the collection of neighbors' signatures has not started. Comm. Durham verified the location of nearby Eichler and ranch-style homes with Mr. Kao. Rob Gamble, the project applicant, gave a presentation on the project and addressed the neighbors' concerns. City of Sunnyvale Page 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Comm. Harrison discussed with Mr. Gamble his family's decision to house several generations in their home. Comm. Rheaume verified with Mr. Gamble that he is amenable to adding hedging or shading to address privacy issues. Manish Doshi, a neighbor of the applicant, discussed his opposition to the addition and submitted images of the views from his home that demonstrate the privacy concerns. Jan Steichen, a nearby Sunnyvale resident, discussed her support of the project. Julie Rippentrop, a nearby Sunnyvale resident, discussed her support of the addition. Julie Stone Lopez, a nearby Sunnyvale resident, said a mixed neighborhood of one-story and two-story homes is more attractive. Grant, a nearby Sunnyvale resident, said one does not just buy a house, but buys a neighborhood, and added that a similar application was reviewed recently in Mountain View and that their City Council made a mistake in their decision. Rafal Bolinski, a nearby Sunnyvale resident, discussed his opposition to the addition. Mr. Kao suggested the applicant build out his single-story home to get the space his family requires, and reiterated the importance of preserving privacy. Mr. Gamble addressed the neighbors' concerns, and said his family does not want to build out because they would like to preserve the large front yard and the return of the porch. Chair Melton closed the public hearing. Comm. Durham confirmed with Ms. Ryan that the City does not have data that supports changes in property values of homes near houses with newly-built, second story additions. Comm. Harrison discussed with Ms. Ryan the suggestion of building the existing single-story home outward. City of Sunnyvale Page 4 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Comm. Simons moved Alternative 1 to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Directory of Community Development to approve the Design Review with the recommended Conditions of Approval. Vice Chair Olevson seconded. Comm. Simons said he understands the neighbors' concerns about privacy as he lives in a similar neighborhood on the other side of Fremont. He said the purpose for having a single-story combining district is to change neighborhoods, which has not been done here, and is lot of work to get the required 55%. He noted that the neighborhood has been this style of mostly single-story homes, and that a lot of the privacy concerns are met with the applicant following the design guidelines which has features such as setbacks on second stories and obscured glass so that privacy concerns are minimized. He said that years ago we would be seeing houses that met our requirements basically lorded over Eichlers. He added that this is a Brown and Kaufman (B&K) neighborhood and that there are two-story original B&K homes. He recommended to the appellant and neighbors to push for a single-story overlay, and added that the rules for what you can build have been in place for a long time, and that with an increase in housing values people may want to make their homes look like million dollar homes so there may be more pressure to achieve the overlay. He said the applicant has done a great job meeting all of the design guidelines so he will be supporting the motion. Vice Chair Olevson said he will be supporting the motion to deny the appeal because the applicant has complied with current codes and design guidelines that the City has had in place for some time, and because the homeowner is interested in enhancing the neighborhood with an addition to his current home rather than moving to another. He said he appreciates the neighbors who feel things are changing and do not want them to, but that often the Commission hears from those who want to change the zoning after an applicant has gone through all of the work to meet the requirements. He said at that point it is too late to put things on hold while neighbors and other interested parties work to change the zoning regulations or code. Comm. Durham said he will be supporting the motion to deny the appeal, and that he has not seen any evidence that valuations drop due to adjusting sizes of houses, and it does not appear that anyone has any real data. He said that he appreciates the privacy issues, and added that he lives in a tight neighborhood but has managed to address privacy issues with screening. He said this is a much better design than the original B&K, and that the applicant has met all of the design City of Sunnyvale Page 5 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 guidelines and he does not think the Commission can make it impossible for an applicant to go through all of the steps and have the Commission say last minute that we do not like it. Comm. Rheaume said he will be supporting the motion to deny the appeal, and that he appreciates seeing neighbors here who are passionate about their neighborhood. He said the neighborhood is beautiful and this is a nice, quality design that will add to the value of the neighborhood. He said the job of Commissioners is to enforce policy, and that we finally have a project where someone is following all the rules and all of the guidelines have been met. He added that they have the authority to have a two-story home in an R-1 zoning district, and that when too many restrictions are imposed upon property it starts to impinge on what we can do on our own land. Comm. Klein said he will be supporting the motion and was able to make the original findings and agree with the original decision of the Director of Community Development. He noted that he was on the Planning Commission when previous single-story combining districts were approved, and that as Comm. Simons said, it is a difficult process and there are mixed feelings within this neighborhood. He said having exceptions in the neighborhood does not restrict the capability of making single-story combining districts, and that this project meets the design guidelines. He said privacy issues are addressed via the Conditions of Approval that reduce the size of the windows on the second story, and that this is a quality design that fits well in the neighborhood. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion, and that this is a bunch of fantastic Sunnyvale neighbors who may not see eye-to-eye on something going on, but are respectful of each other and the process and are able to speak passionately and clearly what is on their minds. He reiterated Comm. Rheaume's comments that the Commission has a job to look at City policy and make findings on projects. He noted that there are a number of recommended findings that talk about respecting the scale bulk of other neighborhoods and designing homes to respect neighbors and that he can make all of these findings. MOTION: Comm. Simons moved Alternative 1 to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Director of Community Development to approve the Design Review with the recommended Conditions of Approval. Vice Chair Olevson seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: City of Sunnyvale Page 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Yes: 7 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 7 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 3 14-0544 File #: 2014-7117 Location: 815 W. Maude Ave. (APN: 165-41-033): Zoning: M-S (Industrial and Service) Zoning District Proposed Project: Consideration of an application for a 0.97-acre site: USE PERMIT to allow a new 23,340 square foot, three-story office/R&D building resulting in approximately 55% Floor Area Ratio, and VARIANCE to allow a 25-foot front setback along Maude Avenue, where 35 feet minimum is required. Applicant / Owner: ArchiRender Architects / Fregida, LLC Environmental Review: Mitigated Negative Declaration Staff Contact: Noren Caliva-Lepe, 408-730-7659, ncaliva-lepe@sunnyvale.ca.gov Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, presented the staff report. Comm. Rheaume discussed with Ms. Ryan the age and number of protected trees proposed for removal. Comm. Rheaume asked which trees are proposed for removal due to poor health, to which Ms. Ryan responded that she would need to look up the information and return with an answer. Comm. Durham verified with Ms. Ryan that all approved square footage above 35% would come out of the Citywide development pool, and discussed the option of making the exit from the project onto Maude right-turn only. In response to Comm. Rheaume's earlier question, Ms. Ryan said two trees are recommended for removal due to their poor condition. Vice Chair Olevson and Ms. Ryan discussed the interaction of having greater setbacks for buildings on wider streets and its affect on motorist speeds and pedestrian environments. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Ms. Ryan that Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plans are not mandatory for projects with a Use Permit, but are highly recommended. The also discussed the reason staff wants a written agreement from the neighbor to the north regarding the shared driveway, and the estimate of additional vehicle trips and current and future sidewalk construction in that area. Comm. Klein verified with Ms. Ryan the setbacks of the recently developed properties on the corner of Maude and discussed undergrounding utilities in the project area. Comm. Harrison confirmed with Ms. Ryan that preserving more of the mature, City of Sunnyvale Page 8 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 healthy trees requires a redesign of the sidewalk, and Comm. Harrison asked which of these are redwoods, to which Ms. Ryan responded that she would look up the information. Comm. Harrison and Ms. Ryan also discussed the intent of reduced setbacks of other specific plans to create a more urban atmosphere. Chair Melton asked how many square feet would have to be trimmed from the first floor to hit the 35 foot setback requirement, to which Ms. Ryan responded that the applicant could answer, and added that the building may need to be relocated making parking more visible and potentially impacting more trees. Comm. Rheaume verified with Ms. Ryan the specific trees deemed in poor health. Chair Melton opened the public hearing. Huiwen Hsiao, the project architect, presented illustrations of the proposed project while discussing project details. Comm. Klein and Mr. Hsiao discussed the location of parking and tree removal if the building was compliant with the 35 foot front setback. Comm. Rheaume and Mr. Hsiao discussed the reasons why a Variance is being requested. Comm. Durham confirmed with Mr. Hsiao that bike parking and shower facilities would be provided on site. Chair Melton verified with Mr. Hsiao that 80 square feet of the first floor goes over the required setback and that because the building shape is unique it would be hard to trim. No speaker cards were submitted. Mr. Hsiao gave a final presentation and said that pushing the building back weakens the pedestrian/urban experience. Chair Melton closed the public hearing. Ms. Ryan noted the number of trees that conflict with the proposed project and discussed the number that would be preserved by meandering the sidewalk around them. City of Sunnyvale Page 9 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Comm. Klein confirmed with Ms. Ryan that the two trees closest to the existing building are in good condition. Comm. Harrison moved to recommend Alternative 1 to City Council to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Use Permit and Variance with the recommended Conditions of Approval. Vice Chair Olevson seconded. Comm. Harrison said she can make the findings with regard to all of the different criteria provided by staff and with regard to the Variance, including that it is an extraordinary circumstance regarding the size, shape, topography and location of the surroundings. She said the requested setback deviation is minimal and not detrimental to the streetscape. Vice Chair Olevson said he can make the findings and can appreciate the challenges of a triangular lot and trying to meet all of the City's requirements. He said the setback Variance is minimal, and rather than trying to move the parking lot around and negatively impacting the appearance of the project from Maude or Pastoria, leaving it as proposed and granting the Variance is a positive thing for the City and this area of the City. Comm. Rheaume said he will not be supporting the motion, and that during the study session the Commission was specific about preserving the protected trees. He noted that all of the landscaping is along Pastoria and Maude, and said that it is not as if the trees are in the middle of the lot and the Commission is asking the applicant to build around them. He noted that the applicant said this design builds around the existing landscape, but he is removing 60% of the protected trees, and that keeping all of the trees that are in good health only makes a better project. He said this is a really nice design that integrates into the landscape, but that he does not think replacing these more than 50 year-old redwood trees with popsicle sticks is sufficient. He said the Commission also talked with the applicant about designing the walksways around the trees in a manner similar to the old post office, and because staff is still asking the applicant to do that shows that what was asked of the applicant to review has not been considered. He said taking away protected trees to accommodate a sidewalk is concerning, and he cited Citywide Design Guidelines policy 4.A.2, which says "preserve and incorporate existing features, particularly trees, on a site into the landscape design of the project," and is not being met. He also noted that policy 6.4 discusses being environmentally responsible, and he said he does not believe taking out old trees to put a sidewalk in and not meandering around them is irresponsible. City of Sunnyvale Page 10 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Comm. Durham offered a friendly amendment to have the applicant work with staff on trying to save some of the trees located where the sidewalks can meander around and dealing with any ADA requirements. Comm. Harrison confirmed with Ms. Ryan that these items are covered in the Conditions of Approval (COA). Comm. Durham withdrew the friendly amendment, and said he can find for the Variance, and that even with some of the trees being removed there will still be a large amount of tree coverage. He noted that if the full setbacks are taken they comprise 30% of the property and fire access takes away space at the back so the site is limited. He said this is a great design to get around that, but that he is not sure how trees will be saved near the building and that four-to-five of them will have to come out just because of construction itself. He said that based on the fact that 30% of the property is set aside and cannot be developed, he will be supporting the motion. Comm. Klein said he will not be supporting the motion, and that while he likes the design, the granting of a Variance from the Sunnyvale Municipal Code (SMC) should be an exceptional reason. He said this site has a slightly odd shape, and that the developer has come up with a possible alternative to move the building which would save two of the blue atlas cedars that are in good condition. He noted that changing five parking spots from universal to compact stalls to reduce parking is a possibility, and that there is already ample parking required and far more than the existing building. He said moving the building to comply with City code makes it a good project and that, depending on the landscaping, would not appear noticeably different. He said while the project looks nice, there is no specific reason to grant a Variance even if it is only 80 feet into that zone, and added that to do so would be setting precedence. He said the older buildings in the area have been there for a long time, many of which are not meeting current zoning and that as we redevelop an area we try to bring it into compliance which he was hoping could be done with this project. He said that a minor movement could bring the site within City code, so he will not be supporting the motion. Comm. Simons said he will not be supporting the motion, and said Variances are for exceptional cases. He said creating an urban example of a building is not justification for accepting changes in setbacks and that the only one would be an odd shape. He said this site has a slight bulb out, but is still close to a rhombus and not that different from a rectangle. He said there are options for this site, that the building could be moved back and could save more of the trees. He said the kind of City of Sunnyvale Page 11 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 landscaping coming into Sunnyvale is sub-standard compared to what is being removed and that the landscaping of this project is not much different. He said granting Variances could result in another LinkedIn controversy and that this is a useful example for why we should not grant a Variance for this project. Chair Melton said he will not be supporting the motion, and that if the motion was broken up into three separate motions he would say yes to adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and he might say yes to the Use Permit, but he appreciates Comm. Rheaume's leadership on the protected trees, which made him rethink the Use Permit. He said the reason he is pressing the no button is because he cannot get there on the Variance, and that during the Study Session, the Planning Commission expressed concern about the requested setback deviation, and it appears as though nothing has moved on this project. He said the basis for approving the Variance seems to be the existing legacy building, which has a legal nonconforming setback and that it is some kind of precedence. He said the applicant just does not want to trim 80 square feet off of the project or to move it, and that he cannot say a Variance is justified because there is no extraordinary or exceptional circumstance. He said this is a nice, contemporary design, and the MND is no problem, but that he just cannot get there on the Variance. MOTION: Comm. Harrison moved to recommend Alternative 1 to City Council to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Use Permit and Variance with the recommended Conditions of Approval. Vice Chair Olevson seconded. The motion failed by the following vote: YES: 3 - Commissioner Harrison Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham NO: 4 - Commissioner Rheaume Chair Melton Commissioner Klein Commissioner Simons Comm. Klein moved to recommend to City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, approval of the Use Permit and denial of the Variance with modified Conditions of Approval to comply with the 35 foot setback requirement off of Maude. Comm. Simons seconded. City of Sunnyvale Page 12 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Comm. Klein said this project has a nice design, fits in with the community and that the building design is very unique and sets a tone as far as the Peery Park Specific Plan is concerned. He added that the requirements for a Variance should be very high and he cannot say that the site location is dramatically different or not rectangular enough to require the setback to be altered accordingly. He said since the study session the developer has come up with the possibility of moving the building to comply with the SMC. He said working with staff they can deal with the parking and come up with COAs to save as many trees as possible and that getting the sidewalk to meander through the area will create a much better project than what is currently on the site. He said he looks forward to the project moving forward. Comm. Simons said he will be supporting the motion and thinks there has been enough discussion about what can be done to make this project better. He said the urban, on-street presence will be lost, but that with the redwoods and cedars in front this will be a nice place to walk from one building to another. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion and can make the findings. He said that he thinks there is something in this motion for all seven Planning Commissioners and he hopes everyone can consider pressing the yes button. He said the main difference between the first and second motion is 80 square feet and the concept of adhering to the SMC and allowing Variances in only the most extreme circumstances. Comm. Rheaume said he will be supporting the motion, and that he spent too much time on the trees in the last motion, and that he could not make the findings for the Variance with the first motion but now he can. He said he trusts staff will work with the applicant to save as many trees as possible and thanked staff for listing out the specific trees to be saved Vice Chair Olevson said he will be supporting the motion with some reluctance and is hoping the new design is not identical to the one presented here. He said he hopes the applicant can come up with a way to keep the parking away from the areas along Maude and Pastoria so that the visual appearance from the street makes maximum use of the visual component rather than just moving the building and putting the parking out in front. He said he will be relying on staff and the applicant to come up with a better location or even a different size of this shifted oval design. He noted that the applicant can get the 80 square feet by making the ellipsoid a little bit smaller. Comm. Harrison said she will be reluctantly supporting the motion, and that the City of Sunnyvale Page 13 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 current rules are as such and she anticipates that they will change in the near future. She said the project might be easy to approve if presented a year from now, and that she appreciates the design and pulling the building toward street, which she thinks will be the character of the area in the future. FINAL MOTION: Comm. Klein moved to recommend to City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, approval of the Use Permit and denial of the Variance with modified Conditions of Approval to comply with the 35 foot setback requirement off of Maude. Comm. Simons seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 7 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 14 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 4 14-0198 2014 2nd Quarterly Consideration of GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT INITIATION REQUESTS File #: 2014-7357 Location: 539 E. Weddell Drive (APN: 110-14-158) Proposed Project: Request to study a General Plan designation change from Industrial to Public Facility or other designation that would accommodate a child care center use (pre-school). Study may include other properties in the vicinity and evaluate other General Plan designations. Applicant / Owner: New Hope International Church File #: 2014-7364 Location: 210 W. Ahwanee Ave. (APN: 204-03-003) Proposed Project: Request to study a General Plan designation change from Industrial to Medium Density Residential (14-27 d.u. per acre). Study may include other properties in the vicinity and evaluate a range of General Plan residential designations. Applicant / Owner: Saeed Erfan File #: 2014-7304 Location: 1024-1078 W. Evelyn Ave. (161-35-002 through 008) Proposed Project: Request to study a General Plan designation change from Industrial to Medium Density Residential (14-27 d.u. per acre). Study may include other properties in the vicinity and evaluate a range of General Plan residential designations. Applicant / Owner: Alto View Properties/John Travis Environmental Review: Environmental Review is not required to initiate a General Plan study. The individual studies and potential future projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Chair Melton said the Planning Commission will hold a separate public hearing for each General Plan Amendment Initiation request (GPI). Gerri Caruso, Principal Planner, provided information on the GPI for 539 E. Weddell Drive (GPI A), and said staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend City Council initiate a study for this application. She said staff is also recommending the study area be expanded to include the entire block City of Sunnyvale Page 15 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 and the City's park immediately to the north of the project site, and that the study should consider the Civic Center (CC) and Commercial Neighborhood Shopping (CNS) General Plan designations and not residential in this area. Comm. Rheaume verified with Ms. Caruso the definition of Sense of Place fees. Vice Chair Olevson noted that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was recently completed for a site in the general area, and confirmed with Ms. Caruso that the expanded study area would not be covered by this EIR. Comm. Durham verified with Ms. Caruso that there are several undeveloped industrial-to-residential (ITR) properties north of the site. Comm. Harrison discussed with Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, the length of time a study typically takes and the process of analysis, and confirmed that the study would include an environmental impact study. Chair Melton opened the public hearing for GPI A. Jorge Marsal, New Hope International Church pastor, gave a presentation on his request for a GPI and said that with the surrounding residential growth, the church felt daycare and preschool should be services they offer. Upon seeing no other speakers for this item, Chair Melton closed the public hearing for GPI A. Vice Chair Olevson moved to recommend that City Council initiate the General Plan Amendment study for the expanded area including an analysis of CC- Civic Center and CNS- Commercial Neighborhood Shopping General Plan designations. Comm. Rheaume seconded. Vice Chair Olevson said he initially did not think this was a good place for child care based on the information learned from the prior EIR, but that staff is recommending an expanded study area which may develop alternatives to the initial proposal. He said that because of growth in the area and neighbors' comments in prior sessions about nearby properties, he thinks this is a prime opportunity to initiate a study to see how best to use the remaining land. Comm. Rheaume said he will be supporting the initiation of a study, and agrees with staff concerns about placing a child care center near the freeway, but noted City of Sunnyvale Page 16 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 that staff is recommending that air quality be the first part of the study that is prepared, so he believes things are covered. Comm. Klein said he will be supporting the motion, and was on the Planning Commission when the church was initially approved in this area and when it was mainly industrial. He said the land is now transitioning to residential and thinks reevaluating the frontage along Highway 101 and conceivably creating a barrier and addressing air pollution at this site and others along Weddell would be beneficial for the City. Chair Melton said he will be enthusiastically supporting the motion and that this is a great thing to study. MOTION: Vice Chair Olevson moved to recommend that City Council initiate the General Plan Amendment study for the expanded area including an analysis of CC- Civic Center and CNS- Commercial Neighborhood Shopping General Plan designations. Comm. Rheaume seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 7 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 17 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Gerri Caruso, Principal Planner, presented information on the GPI for 210 W. Ahwanee Avenue (GPI B), and said that in addition to the staff recommendation that City Council initiate a study for this application, she said staff is also recommending the study area be expanded to include the three adjacent industrial sites and the remaining parcels to the ends of each block. Comm. Durham discussed with staff the general difference in number of vehicle trips between industrial and residential zoning designations. Chair Melton opened the public hearing for GPI B. Saeed Erfan, the applicant, and Kate Holden, Mr. Erfan's colleague, discussed their reasoning for submitting the GPI request. Tom Donahue, a Sunnyvale property owner, said he supports the GPI and asked about the scope of the analysis and whether the study area includes San Aleso. Lisa Korff, a Sunnyvale resident, said she supports the idea of medium density residential for this site and asked if the study would look at how the parcel would interact with the existing homes behind it. Chair Melton closed the public hearing for GPI B. Comm. Klein verified with Ms. Caruso that the industrial properties on San Aleso are considered part of the Peery Park Specific Plan, and that Council has indicated it would consider them for residential. Comm. Durham moved to recommend that City Council initiate the General Plan Amendment study for the expanded area including an analysis of CNS- Commercial Neighborhood Shopping, Residential Low Medium Density (RLM 7-14 dwelling units per acre), Residential Medium Density (RMED 14-27 dwelling units per acre) and Residential High Density (RHI 27-45 dwelling units per acre). Comm. Klein seconded. Comm. Durham said it is a good idea to study this area, which has three industrial properties surrounded by housing. He also said that studying this issue is the best thing to do to determine the best use of the property in the future. Comm. Klein said these three properties are sandwiched between high-density City of Sunnyvale Page 18 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 residential and that it only makes sense to evaluate whether industrial is the best use, or whether residential or commercial uses are viable options, and that it is best to let the study figure it out. Comm. Harrison said she will be supporting the motion and that it seems the usefulness of an industrial designation may have reached its end and doing a study to determine the best alternative is a good idea. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion and thanked the speakers who participated in the public hearing. MOTION: Comm. Durham moved to recommend that City Council initiate the General Plan Amendment study for the expanded area including an analysis of CNS- Commercial Neighborhood Shopping, Residential Low Medium Density (RLM 7-14 dwelling units per acre), Residential Medium Density (RMED 14-27 dwelling units per acre) and Residential High Density (RHI 27-45 dwelling units per acre). Comm. Klein seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 7 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 19 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Comm. Rheaume recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest. Gerri Caruso, Principal Planner, presented information on the GPI for 1024-1078 W. Evelyn Avenue (GPI C), and said that in addition to the staff recommendation that City Council initiate a study for this application, staff is also recommending the study area be expanded to include the entire industrial block between Mary Avenue and Bernardo. She said staff is also recommending that the study area be expanded further to include the two remaining commercial service blocks to the east of Mary Avenue to complete a study of Evelyn Avenue and its remaining industrial uses. Comm. Harrison clarified with Ms. Caruso that the study would look at what zoning designations would be most appropriate for this area. Comm. Durham discussed with Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, whether zoning changes affect property values and how General Plan Amendments (GPA) affect property owners who may not want to rezone their property. Comm. Klein confirmed with Ms. Caruso the location of the only blocks designated C-4 remaining within the City and that the study would look at the impact of rezoning these properties. Chair Melton opened the public hearing for GPI C. John Travis, the applicant, said he is not looking to change the zoning right away, but wants to look at what would be more beneficial for him in the future. David and Marie Hamilton, owners of a business at the subject site, discussed their concern with where in the City the many small business tenants at this site will go if the zoning is changed. Rick Marchetti and Ron Gates, owners of property at the site, discussed their concerns for how the property can be used if the area is rezoned, and said that they would like the GPI go forward to see their future options. James Bond, a business owner at the site, said he thinks rezoning the area would be detrimental to businesses. Daniel Bohannon, son of a property owner at the site, said their property has been completely refurbished, is fully occupied, and that they are unsure about the impacts of rezoning. City of Sunnyvale Page 20 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Chair Melton closed the public hearing for GPI C. Comm. Durham confirmed with Ms. Caruso that if the area is zoned residential and existing industrial uses remained, they would become legal but nonconforming. Comm. Durham and Ms. Caruso also discussed the potential standards the existing businesses would be subject to if they border newly-designated residential properties. Comm. Klein discussed with Ms. Ryan whether the Use Permit process would be affected if properties become legal nonconforming, and Ms. Ryan discussed what uses and development would be allowed if the site is zoned industrial-to-residential (ITR) or just residential. Comm. Simons moved to recommend that City Council not initiate a General Plan Amendment study for GPI C. Comm. Klein seconded. Comm. Simons said this area has an extremely successful grouping of businesses and he cannot pick a better strip of higher-performing, nice looking businesses that serve a funciton in City. He said these services are all over the place in the City and it is useful to have different types of businesses in this one spot. He said if a change is initiated he is concerned that it would cause a great deal of business uncertainty, which makes it very difficult for businesses to get loans and make improvements that might be desired. He said in the future this may be desireable, but to study it now is premature, and that services in this pocket would not be benefitted by study initiation at this time. Comm. Klein said after hearing the public comments and feedback from the applicant regarding rezoning the sites as residential being a long-term goal, he thinks evaluating this site for conversion right now does not seem like a good use of City funds. He said he sees a dwindling resource of this type of zoning and that says to him this is needed zoning, which is appropriately sandwiched between larger office space in Perry Park and a large amount of residential to the south. He said in the future this might be considered, but that in the short term initiating a study is not the best plan, so he will be supporting the motion. Comm. Durham said he will be supporting the motion, and that there is no real reason to do this now as businesses seem happy and are doing well in the neighborhood. He said trying to get auto body shops located elsewhere in the City City of Sunnyvale Page 21 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 will be impossible, that this is a good location with one side bounded by train tracks and a through street, and that it is close to transit for workers who may not want to drive. Comm. Harrison said she will be supporting the motion, and that this application is different than the others in these are a contiguous set of uses, not a tiny pocket of land completely surrounded by residential. She said we need that kind of land use in the City to maintain the General Plan goals of having diversity of uses. Vice Chair Olevson said he will be supporting the motion and that there is limited space available for the current designation. He said once we get the study going and if an ITR designation is applied, the City may end up without space for small, successful businesses. He said we have heard from business owners that this area works and they are putting money back into their businesses for success in the future. He also said he is sensitive to the idea that once a study is initiated and a business asks for a loan, the uncertaintly would make lenders less likely to loan, so he does not see the need for a study at this time. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion, and that typically with GPIs he is usually in favor of initiating them based on the concept that studying things and creating more options for the City is a good thing. He said sometimes an argument is made that initiating a study means not necessarily committing to the decision in the future, and that he was on fence going into this but was persuaded by Comm. Simons' argument that this is a great business pocket and that doing something that might tip over the apple cart without a compelling argument is a reason to support the motion. MOTION: Comm. Simons moved to recommend to City Council to not initiate a General Plan Amendment study for GPI C. Comm. Klein seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Simons No: 0 Recused: 1 - Commissioner Rheaume City of Sunnyvale Page 22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 5 14-0688 Standing Item: Potential Study Issues for 2015 Comm. Durham asked if it would be advisable to initiate a potential study issue regarding coordination between Sunnyvale City staff and that of Mountain View and Santa Clara on regional housing and jobs issues, primarily along CalTrain and El Camino corridors. Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, said a study issue is not required and could discuss coordination efforts with Comm. Durham offline. Vice Chair Olevson suggested a study issue to develop formulas for quantifying the transportation, utilities and park capacity line items on the Balanced Growth Profile. Ms. Ryan said she would bring information on this suggestion back to the Planning Commission. 6 14-0689 Selection of Chair Vice Chair Olevson nominated Russell Melton as Chair for the current year. Chair Melton accepted the nomination. Comm. Simons nominated Ken Olevson as Chair. Vice Chair Olevson declined the nomination. Chair Melton thanked Vice Chair Olevson for nominating him to continue as Chair for a full year term, and said it was 12 months ago that Planning Commissioners elected him Vice Chair and there was much turnover on the Commission. He said he is pleased and honored to serve as the presiding officer of the Planning Commisssion, that he serves at the behest of this body and would love to carry on for a full term as chairperson. The nomination of Russell Melton as Planning Commission Chair resulted in the following vote: Yes: 7 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 City of Sunnyvale Page 23 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 7 14-0690 Selection of Vice Chair Comm. Simons said he loves the idea of maintaining Chairs for multiple years, but that when it comes to Vice Chairs, rotating them is a good idea to give exposure to those who have not yet served as Vice Chair. Chair Melton nominated Ken Olevson as Vice Chair. Vice Chair Olevson accepted the nomination. Comm. Klein nominated Sue Harrison as Vice Chair. Comm. Harrison declined. The nomination of Ken Olevson as Planning Commission Vice Chair resulted in the following vote: Yes: 7 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Klein Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 8 14-0691 Selection of Seats Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, explained that the order of the selection of seats would be determined by seniority. Selection of seats resulted in the following seating arrangement (from left to right facing the dais): Comm. Durham Comm. Rheaume Vice Chair Olevson Chair Melton Comm. Klein Comm. Harrison Comm. Simons NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND COMMENTS City of Sunnyvale Page 24 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final July 14, 2014 Commissioner Comments Chair Melton verified with Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, that there are two more of the applications pending completion in Peery Park that were identified when the Perry Park District was created. Staff Comments Kathy Berry, Senior Assistant City Attorney, discussed new rules enacted by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and a new case that challenged the way the City of Stockton conducts their air quality analyses. Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, discussed upcoming Planning items and those recently heard by City Council. INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS Comm. Harrison verified with Ms. Ryan that the application for a Special Development Permit at 523 E. Homestead is scheduled to be heard by City Council on July 29 and that the decision of the Planning Commission had been appealed by two City Council members. ADJOURNMENT With no further business Chair Melton adjourned the meeting at 11:57 p.m. City of Sunnyvale Page 25