Planning Commission

City of Sunnyvale Meeting Minutes - Final Planning Commission Monday, January 26, 2015 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 15-0140 Subject: Overview of School Enrollment and Development within the Sunnyvale School District Staff Contact: Trudi Ryan, (408) 730-7435, tryan@sunnyvale.ca.gov 2 15-0144 File #: 2014-7584 Location: 215 Moffett Park Drive (APN: 110-34-006) Zoning: MP-I (Moffett Park - Industrial) Zoning District Proposed Project: MAJOR MOFFETT PARK DESIGN REVIEW to allow a second 86,400 square foot office R&D building and a new 5,000 square foot restaurant resulting in total of 248,460 square feet of building area on the site (59.9% FAR with LEED Gold incentive); and a new 3-level parking structure Applicant / Owner: Gensler / Dan Baroni Staff Contact: Shétal Divatia, (408) 730-7637, sdivatia@sunnyvale.ca.gov Note: Project was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission at the study session of November 10, 2014; it has since been modified. 3 Public Comment on Study Session Agenda Items 4 Comments from the Chair 5 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. City of Sunnyvale Page 1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 ROLL CALL Present: 6 - Chair Russell Melton Vice Chair Ken Olevson Commissioner Ralph Durham Commissioner Sue Harrison Commissioner Ken Rheaume Commissioner David Simons Absent: 1 - Commissioner Larry Klein PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS/PUBLIC COMMENTS None. CONSENT CALENDAR 1.A 15-0138 Approval of the Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 12, 2015 Vice Chair Olevson moved to approve the draft minutes. Simons seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 5 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 Absent: 1 - Commissioner Klein Abstained: 1 - Commissioner Durham City of Sunnyvale Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 1.B 15-0125 File #: 2014-8075 Location: 1348 Norman Drive (APN: 313-11-010 ) Zoning: R1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District Proposed Project: DESIGN REVIEW: to allow the addition of a 395-square foot recreation room on the first floor of an existing two-story, single-family residence for a total building size of 3,933 square feet and a floor area ratio of 41.2% for the lot. Applicant / Owner: David Orozco Associates (applicant) / Jesus Guzman (owner) Environmental Review: Categorically Exempt Class 1 Project Planner: Momoko Ishijima, (408) 730-7532, mishijima@sunnyvale.ca.gov Vice Chair Olevson moved to approve this item on the Consent Calendar. Comm. Simons seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 5 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 Absent: 1 - Commissioner Klein Abstained: 1 - Commissioner Harrison PUBLIC HEARINGS/GENERAL BUSINESS City of Sunnyvale Page 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 2 15-0047 File #: 2014-7955 Location: 1525 Barton Drive (APN: 320-03-029) Zoning: R-1 (Low-Density Residential) Proposed Project: Appeal of a decision by the Director of Community Development denying a TREE REMOVAL PERMIT for one Canary Island Pine Tree located in the front yard of a single-family home. Applicant / Owner: Qiqi Zhu (applicant/owner) Environmental Review: A Class 4 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 Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, presented the staff report. Comm. Durham inquired about the age of the tree and how fast Canary Island Pines grow, to which Ms. Ryan replied that she would look for the information in the City arborist's report, and noted that the tree is approximately 40 feet tall. Comm. Harrison discussed with Ms. Ryan the frequency with which Tree Removal Permits (TRP) are denied and how often denials are appealed. Comm. Rheaume and Ms. Ryan discussed tree replacement or in lieu fee options for the homeowner if the appeal is granted, and confirmed that the tree is not native to California but grows well in this climate. Comm. Simons discussed whether the TRP process includes information on the economic value of the tree with Ms. Ryan, and confirmed that there is a potential study issue that may look at TRP requirements, but that staff is suggesting that single-family homes are not included in the analysis. Comm. Simons also noted several Canary Island Pine features. Comm. Harrison commented on different species of trees at different ages sequestering carbon dioxide at variable rates, and Ms. Ryan said she cannot comment on where this tree lies on that hierarchy. Chair Melton opened the public hearing. Mathew Dahl and Qiqi Zhu, the property owners, discussed their reasons for submitting the application to remove the tree and their suggestions for replacing it. Comm. Simons commented on the intent of the TRP process and noted that the City of Sunnyvale Page 4 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 City has seen a great loss of trees over the years. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Mr. Dahl that proposed replacement trees would be planted in the backyard, and the area from which the tree was removed would have pavers installed. Comm. Harrison and Ms. Zhu discussed the species, life spans and sizes of the replacement trees proposed. Comm. Durham confirmed with Ms. Zhu that the propsed hardscape would be a permeable surface. Chair Melton and Ms. Zhu discussed whether the roots of the tree have caused any damage to the driveway. Mr. Dahl noted that there is an empty area on the sidewalk where a replacement tree can be planted. Chair Melton closed the public hearing. Following up on previous questions, Ms. Ryan noted that nothing in the file indicated the age of the tree, but that it likely has a number of additional years of life left. She also noted that the Commission could prescribe a location and species for a replacement tree, and that oleanders can be trained as trees. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Ms. Ryan that a 24-inch box tree could be made a requirement and typically become established faster than a 36-inch box tree. Comm. Rheaume confirmed with Ms. Ryan that the suggestion to plant a replacement tree in the parking strip would need to be reviewed by the Trees Division of the Public Works Department. Comm. Simons moved Alternative 1 to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Director of Community Development to deny the Tree Removal Permit. Comm. Rheaume seconded. Comm. Simons said he is sensitive to tree removals for people who have difficult situations, and that he has supported the removal of healthy trees when there are many on a lot and it is nicely landscaped, but that it then becomes a service of thinning out the trees and leaving those likely to survive. He said he has seen trees with marginal health issues that would not make it to Planning Commission review if staff agrees with the applicant, and that these situations are mostly regarding City of Sunnyvale Page 5 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 specific species or matters of life span. He said oftentimes the trees are coming up on the end of their lives, and that he does not see that here. He said one reason he recommends support of the staff recommendation is that the applicant has brick work that can be pulled up if the roots surface, and that putting root barriers around the house to prevent lifting is a good idea. He said he is concerned with justifying the removal of this tree because it was once topped, and that in that situation anyone who tops a tree would have the right to remove it because it is damaged. He said the City does nothing to stop people from topping trees except require maintenance, and some claim hardship because a healthy, topped tree requires more work, and he does not support removal based on that. Comm. Rheaume said he will be supporting the motion, and appreciates the applicants going through the appeal process which shows that it is very important to them. He said it was a hard decision for him, and t seems like we remove mature trees at a much quicker rate than he would like to see happen, and he struggles with removing a 40-feet tree that is 50 years old and replacing it with a tree that will take many years to reach 20 feet. He said he also struggles with the fact that this is a drought tolerant tree which is good for the environment, and that he agrees with the staff comment about the tree being an asset to the neighborhood and not a liability. He said that is one's opinion about the value of trees and how they impact the neighborhood and City, and that he appreciates the proposal to plant two additional trees in the backyard, but that it does not change the impact to the streetscape. Vice Chair Olevson said he will be supporting the motion, and that he has not heard anything that specifically overrides the decision of the Planning Department. He said he appreciates the concern of potential future liability, but that inspection by the City has determined that no damage has been seen yet and that the tree is firmly rooted and not in danger of toppling over or causing damage in a high storm. He added that the City has established a policy protecting trees larger than a certain circumference and a specific height and that this tree clearly falls into that. Comm. Harrison said she will be supporting the motion, and that although she understands the concern about wanting better access to storage, she cannot make any finding or find hard data supporting the request. She reiterated the applicant's comment about a limb potentially falling off and said that if the arborist determined that limbs fall off at 60 years of age she could have supported the finding. She said the applicant proposed to plant bushes or trees that she understands to be short lived and small compared to the canopy cover currently there, and that the reason the City has a policy like this is because it provides cooling, carbon dioxide capturing and value to the neighborhood and City. She added that the City asks City of Sunnyvale Page 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 developers to move buildings that cost millions of dollars because it would save five redwood trees, and that the City values it because the community does. She said she would have been torn if the applicant proposed planting five trees, species of which would replace the canopy cover of this tree in 20 years. Comm. Durham said that initially this tree may have been poor choice to put in that location and that people make mistakes putting in a larger tree that must be tolerated long term. He said now we are stuck with a large tree that is of value to the neighborhood, and that he is disappointed with the options provided for replacing the tree. He said better and aggressive pruning at the lower levels will increase access to the sideyard, and he will be supporting the motion. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion to deny the appeal, and thanked the appellants for availing themselves of the appeal process. He said it has been his pleasure to look at the facts and circumstances and help reach the best decision for the City, and thanked the appellants for what seems a nice redevelopment of the property and a good capital injection into the neighborhood. He said he welcomes the appellants to the City of Sunnyvale and their new house, and he hopes they enjoy the use of their property for years to come. He said he cannot make the findings necessary to approve the appeal, and that what struck him when he visited the property is that this is beautiful tree and that nearby trees look in distress. He said he hopes the appellant learns to love the tree, to work with arborist to prune it, and to teach their kids about value of this tree, and that he hopes it works out for them in the years ahead. MOTION: Comm. Simons moved Alternative 1 to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Director of Community Development to deny the Tree Removal Permit. Comm. Rheaume seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons No: 0 Absent: 1 - Commissioner Klein City of Sunnyvale Page 7 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 3 15-0042 FILE #: 2014-8099 Location: 1111 Lockheed Martin Way, Lots 2 and 4 (APN 110- 01-036 and 110-01-038) Proposed Project: MOFFETT PARK SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT INITIATION Request to study a land use change in the Moffett Park Specific Plan from Moffett Park General Industrial (MP-I) to Moffett Park Transit Oriented Development (MP-TOD) to increase the allowable development intensity from maximum 60 percent Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to maximum 80 percent FAR with green building incentives. Applicant/Owner: Jay Paul Company/Lockheed Martin Corporation Project Planner: Hanson Hom (408) 730-7450, hhom@sunnyvale.ca.gov Hanson Hom, Director of Community Development, presented the staff report. Comm. Harrison noted that potential project approval would use half of the remaining development reserve, and discussed with Mr. Hom whether this would impact projects in the future. Comm. Harrison confirmed with Mr. Hom that within Moffett Park there is 1.2 million square feet of unclaimed development reserve that includes pending and approved projects not yet built. Vice Chair Olevson confirmed with Mr. Hom that the applicant has proposed a consolidated master plan for the entire 47 acres, and that a property outside of the quarter mile radius of a transit station can be considered for the Moffett Park - Transit Oriented Development (MP-TOD) designation if it is consolidated via a campus master plan, or if a portion of the area is within that quarter mile. Comm. Durham confirmed with Mr. Hom that two parcels combined could be considered for the MP-TOD designation if a portion of the parcel fell within the quarter mile radius of a transit station or if they are consolidated via a campus master plan. Chair Melton confirmed with Mr. Hom that the applicant would pay for the study, and that a General Plan Amendment Initiation request (GPI) heard at a previous public hearing was taken out of the quarterly review cycle due to legal issues. Chair Melton also confirmed with Mr. Hom that the applicant wants to construct a denser project than current zoning allows. City of Sunnyvale Page 8 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 Chair Melton opened the public hearing. Jay Paul, with Jay Paul Company, discussed reasons for submitting the GPI and features of the envisioned project. Chair Melton closed the public hearing. Chair Melton confirmed with Mr. Hom that a recommendation to initiate a study does not indicate support of a future project. Vice Chair Olevson moved to recommend to City Council Alternative 1 to initiate a study to amend the Moffett Park Specific Plan (MPSP) to change the land use designation for a 47.4-acre site at 1111 Lockheed Martin Way, Lots 2 and 4, from Moffett Park General Industrial (MP-I) to Moffett Park Transit Oriented Development (MP-TOD). Comm. Simons seconded and offered a friendly amendment to add an analysis to the study that would look at variations in congestion management levels up to no transportation impact for the additional square footage and higher levels of employees. Vice Chair Olevson asked if this analysis would be more appropriate as part of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Comm. Simons cited several City policies and said the additional analysis fits nicely into the transportation goals and policies used to recommend the study. Vice Chair Olevson and Mr. Hom requested further clarification on the friendly amendment. Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, interjected that Comm. Simons may be suggesting the analysis look at higher levels of trip reduction, and Comm. Simons added the higher levels should include up to the level of no road impact. Mr. Hom restated that the request is to analyze the level at which there are no net new trips over the existing number. Vice Chair Olevson accepted the friendly amendment, and said he continues to voice support for the process that separates a project from potential zoning changes, and that in this case we are building out an area the City has previously designated as the primary area for putting high-rise and high-density office use. He said it is entirely appropriate that as opportunities become available and when developers see an opportunity to fill out our General Plan that we take a look at the minor modifications necessary to meet our current conditions. He said he is very supportive of doing the study and that once it is done we can then evaluate any City of Sunnyvale Page 9 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 potential project that may fit the zoning if changed or not. Comm. Simons said his interest in the study increased because of the additional analysis at higher levels of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) mitigation. He said the outcome would be potentially in line with City goals, which include development paying for itself, and impacts on the community that people worry about, like road congestion and pollution from single-occupancy vehicles, and that it would be nice to know if small changes or even large changes would allow us to do things differently and have a higher density of use at this site and whether it works well long term. Comm. Harrison said she will be supporting the motion, and is always interested in studying different possible land use changes. She said she appreciates the applicant statement about having a lot of green space and creating greater access to the light rail system, which is not adjacent to the immediate parcel, and will make it easier for everyone in the MPSP to use alternate transportation. Comm. Durham said he will be supporting the motion, and is interested to see how close to net zero we can get for single car usage into this space with this number of workers. He said we need to study the effects that will go on before making a real decision on the area. Chair Melton said he will be supporting the motion, and thanked the applicant for coming out and assembling the parcels. He said this is an area with Lockheed Martin in transition, and he would like to channel Mayor Griffith, who often says he loves studying things, especially when the City is not paying for it. He added that he looks forward to study completion and drawing from its conclusions. MOTION: Vice Chair Olevson moved to recommend to City Council Alternative 2 to initiate a study to amend the Moffett Park Specific Plan for the subject property with a modified scope: 1) Incorporate into the study an analysis of different levels of Transportation Demand Management, including up to the level at which there are no net trips over existing vehicle trips Comm. Simons seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Chair Melton Vice Chair Olevson Commissioner Durham Commissioner Harrison Commissioner Rheaume Commissioner Simons City of Sunnyvale Page 10 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Final January 26, 2015 No: 0 Absent: 1 - Commissioner Klein 4 15-0139 Standing Item: Potential Study Issues for 2016 Comm. Durham said he would like to flesh out a potential study issue that would examine speeding up the process of development within the City, and commented that while the Lawrence Station Area Plan (LSAP) is being developed and would be a master plan for the area, it may take 20-40 years before anything is done. Ms. Ryan said that she would discuss with Comm. Durham efforts used to affect the rate of plan implementation. NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND COMMENTS -Commissioner Comments Chair Melton welcomed former Planning Commissioner and City Council member Chris Moylan to the public hearing. Comm. Simons confirmed with Ms. Ryan that the Planning Commission meeting that would fall on Memorial Day will be pushed to the following Wednesday, May 27, 2015. -Staff Comments Ms. Ryan announced several upcoming joint study sessions with City Council, the City Council Study Issues Workshop and the meeting during which the Horizon 2035 committee would reconvene. INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS None. ADJOURNMENT With no further business Chair Melton adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:24 p.m. City of Sunnyvale Page 11