HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-14 City Council (3)TO:
FROM:
City of
C ty Ma ager s ep rt
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
CMR: 239:03
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APRIL 14, 2003
SCHEDULE FOR PHASE 2 OF THE SOUTH OF FOREST AVENUE
COORDINATED AREA PLAN AND IMPACTS ON OTHER
PLANNING DIVISION WORK ITEMS AND RELATED 800 HIGH
STREET REFERENDUM ISSUES.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council consider the information presented in this staff
report and the impacts on the Planning Division work pro~am and time lines before
deciding whether or not to direct staff to complete Phase 2 of the South of Forest Avenue
(SOFA) Coordinated Area Plan (CAP) prior to August 2003.
BACKGROUND
Phase 2 of the SoFA CAP includes the nine blocks bounded by Forest Avenue, Addison
Avenue, Alma Street and Ramona Street. The area is located south of downtown and
includes approximately 26 acres of land developed with service, retail, small office and
multiple and single family uses.
Two versions of the Phase 2 SoFA CAP were presented to the City Council for review
and discussion on October 7, 2002. One included the Working Group recommendations
and one included the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC)/staff
recommendations. Both plans address the same topic areas. There are notable similarities
between the plans regarding the vision and the goals and policies for the area including:
the desire to preserve and enhance the eclectic, walkable character of the area; the need to
develop strong historic preservation requirements; the need to develop a transfer of
development rights (TDR) pro~am; and the need to establish limitations on new office
use.
. . .Pa~elof6CMR:229.0_,-
The differences between the two plans are found within the Development Standards
section of the documents. The differences include: maximum floor area ratio (FAR);
height; parking standards; type of office limitations; whether planned community (PC)
zones should be allowed; and how to address nonconforming uses.
After discussing the two sets of recommendations on October 7, 2002, the City Council
directed staff to have a traditional massing model prepared for the area and to return to
the Historic Resources Board (HRB), Architectural Review Board (ARB) and Planning
and Transportation Commission for review of the model and any follow up
recommendations the Boards and Commission may have on the areas of difference
between the two sets of recommendations.
The model was prepared during October and early November 2002 and was reviewed by
the Boards and Commission along with final recommendations during January and
February 2003. At the February 4, 2003 PTC hearing, a representative of several property
owners in the area presented concerns about both sets of recommendations regarding:
parking, potential office limitations; height calculations, transfer of development rights
programs; and nonconforming uses. As a result of these comments, the PTC
recommended that staff meet with interested property owners as a group to discuss their
concerns and to return to the Working Group for one last review of the additional
information that had been presented since it had made its final recommendations. The
information needed for those meetings is being prepared and the meeting dates are being
established (see Discussion section of this report).
The SoFA 2 area includes several sites that are proposed for private redevelopment. One
of these sites contains three parcels located along the west siele of High Street between
Homer and Channing Avenues. These three parcels have two street addresses: 800 High
Street and 140 Homer Avenue. The proposed project is commonly referred to as the "800
High Street" proposal. Other sites in the area are also undergoing private redevelopment
including 901 High Street. The 901 High Street project is developing under the existing
commercial zoning (CD-P) while the 800 High Street project is proposing to change the
zoning to a Planned Community zone, which would exceed FAR maximums allowed in
the existing commercial district. The additional FAR would be used to accommodate
more housing on the site than would ordinarily be allowed.
In February 2003, the City Council approved a project at the 800 High Street site for up
to 61 residential units, a small amount of ground floor retail space, two public open areas,
parking for the project, and additional parking for use by the general public.
Residents opposed to the project collected signatures during late February and March
2003 to place the project on the ballot for voters to decide whether or not it should
CMR:239:03 Page 2 of 6
ultimately be approved. Santa Clara County validated the signatures and the item
returned to the City Council on March 31, 2003 to determine whether the project
approval should be rescinded, a special election held or the item placed on the regular
November 2003 election. After rejecting the idea of a special election, the City Council
directed staff to prepare a timeline for completing the SoFA 2 study prior to August 2003
and to present how accomplishing that task would effect the other work items in the
Planning Division. Completing the SoFA 2 CAP prior to August would help inform the
public and the City Council about whether or not the 800 High Street project would be in
conformance with the goals and development standards for the area.
I)ISCUSSION
Coordinated Area Plans are produced by the long-range or advance planning section of
the Planning Division because they are generated by the Comprehensive Plan
(Comprehensive Plan Program L-22 in this case). The following eight major activity
areas are underway in the advance planning section currently: 1) area studies including
development of the E1 Camino Real Study, development of the Baylands Design
Guidelines, and coordination of the Baylands Master Plan; 2) review and comment on
outside agency projects such as the new Open Space and Field Research zoning district
for Santa Clara County on Stanford lands; 3) Housing Program implementation including
development of affordable housing projects, below market rate (BMR) agreements for
development proposals and analysis of BMR program modifications; 4) Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) fund allocation and program administration; 5) data
collection, management and reporting including the Downtown and housing monitoring
reports; 6) Comprehensive Plan implementation including a proposal for adoption of
significance thresholds for environmental review; 7) Historic Preservation; and 8)
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) development.
The projects within the advance planning section that would be delayed as a result of
accelerating the SoFA 2 CAP timeline would be the coordination of the Baylands Master
Plan and data management. The reasons for the delay are outlined below.
The senior planner assigned to the SoFA CAP is also responsible for overseeing the E1
Camino Real (ECR) Study, the Baylands Design Guidelines and coordinating the
Baylands Master Plan. The ECR Study is at a critical stage and to delay it would result in
jeopardizing the memorandum of understanding that is being developed with Caltrans
and the potential implementation of the project. The Study is scheduled for a study
session in May with the City Council and it is very important to maintain coordination
with the general public, the Trees for E1 Camino group, Stanford, and other City
departments prior to and immediately after that study session. Final staff reports and
plans will need to be prepared after the study session and staff estimates it will take half
of the senior planner’s time to prepare and oversee that work. Delaying the completion of
the Study or the follow-up items would negate many months of citizen volunteer hours as
CMR:239:03 Page 3 of 6
well as staff and other agency time. Staff does not recommend changing the timeline for
the ECR Study.
The coordination of the Baylands Master Plan cannot occur until background information
regarding past City actions in the Baylands can be compiled for the consultant. The
project involves coordinating the Plan that governs use of environmentally sensitive areas
and the senior planner and management staff will need to oversee the consultant’s work
very carefully. Although the consultant has been hired, a schedule has not been
developed for the project and therefore staff suggests that this project could be delayed
until after completion of the SoFA 2 CAP.
In addition, staff time allocated to data management tasks will be reduced so that some of
the Associate Planner’s time usually allocated to those tasks can be reas;igned to assist
the Senior Planner with drafting the final version of the SoFA 2 CAP.
In addition to the long-range planning activities that will be affected, there are fifteen
development proposals that may be effected because they may not be able to be
scheduled for PTC or City Council meetings because the SoFA 2 CAP preempts them.
These proposals include:
3445 Alma Street (Planned Community rezone request for Alma Plaza)
440 Pepper Street (Extension of an existing nonconforming use amortization
period)
2825/2865 E1 Camino Real (Rezoning request for the site currently occupied by
the Old Pro)
3201 E. Bayshore Blvd. (Site and Design request for a Santa Clara County Valley
Water District flood control project)
4261 E1 Camino Real (Rezoning request for a portion of the Dinah’s hotel site
from Multiple-Family Residential to Commercial)
610 Los Trancos Road (Site and Design request for a single-family house in the
Open Space district)
5061 Skyline Blvd. (Site and Design request for a single-family house in the Open
Space district)
1901 Embarcadero Road (Site and Design request for additional square footage at
the airport)
2701 E1 Camino Real (Prescreening for a potential Planned Community rezone for
an 80-unit assisted-care senior housing project)
901 San Antonio Road (Prescreening for a potential private community center and
housing project on the former site of Sun Microsystems)
797 Matadero Road (Subdivision request for a five-lot subdivision)
346 Colorado Avenue (Appeal of a home improvement exception approval)
4291 Wilkie Way (Appeal of a home improvement exception denial)
CMR:239:03 Page 4 of 6
3114 David Way (potential appeal of an Individual Review application)
Clifton Avenue (potential appeal of an Individual Review application)
The exact schedule for each of the above projects is not set because many.of them depend
upon the availability of time on PTC or City Council agendas or information being
submitted by the Project applicants prior to the item being ready for scheduling.
Scheduling the SoFA 2 CAP on PTC and City Council agendas will further reduce the
availability of those agendas for development proposals.
Three other current planning projects have already been scheduled for City Council
hearing dates and therefore would not be affected by the SoFA 2 CAP schedule.
SoFA 2 CAP Work Plan
The following tasks need to be completed by the noted dates in order to complete the
CAP by the end of July or early August 2003:
3)
4)
5)
6)
Late April 2003 - Completion of a discussion paper responding to property owner
concerns about the SoFA 2 CAP recommendations (commonly referred to as a
"Frequently Asked Questions" document);
Mid-May 2003 - Property owner meeting to discuss concerns and the Working
Group and PTC CAP recommendations (other interested parties would also be
invited);
Late May 2003 - Working Group final meeting;
Late May to Mid June 2003 - Preparation of final Working Group
recommendations - if different than current recommendations;
Mid June 2003 - PTC final meeting;
Mid June to Early July 2003 - Preparation of final PTC recommendations - if
different than current recommendations;
Mid to Late July 2003 - City Council final consideration and action.
These dates depend upon each group having one meeting only. There would not be an
opportunity for property o~vners, the Working Group or the PTC to meet more than once.
Any concerns that are not addressed at any of the meetings would need to be brought to
the attention of the City Council when it considers the final recommendations.
ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Council may decide whether or not to place the 800 High Street referendum on the
November ballot independently of the completion of the SoFA 2 CAP, thereby not
effecting long-range planning projects or development proposals.
CMR:239:03 Page 5 of 6
RESOURCE IMPACT
Completing the SoFA 2 CAP before August 2003 will require reallocating half of a
Senior Planner’s time and approximately one quarter to one half of an Associate Planner’s
time. It will result in delaying the coordination of the Baylands Master Plan and reducing
the amount of data monitoring and reporting that can be completed prior to August.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Completion of the SoFA CAP conforms to Program L-22
Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
in the Land Use and
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Scheduling the completion of a coordinated area plan is not a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The SoFA CAP has its own environmental analysis,
which is being reviewed along with the Plan itself.
COURTESY COPIES:
SoFA Working Group
Interested Parties
PREPARED BY:
LISA GROTE, Chief Planning Official
/
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
STEVE EMSI
Director of Planning and Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL.’~~~. ~
EMIR HARRISON "
Assistant City Manager
CMR:239:03 Page 6 of 6