2004-0166 – City of Sunnyvale Study Issue – To consider modifications to the height and story limit within the R-3 (Medium Residential) Zoning (Negative Declaration) RK (Also to City Council on 03/08/05)

Trudi Ryan, Planning Officer, presented the staff report.  She stated that the study was a result of an experience Planning Commission and City Council had with R-3 type developments where increasingly height and number of stories associated with projects was in excess of the 30-foot that the zoning code allows.  Ms. Ryan summarized the staff report and noted that as part of the outreach they notified R-3 property owners, posted the affected areas and spoke to neighbors who have expressed concern with the potential increase in height. Ms. Ryan recommended introducing an ordinance to modify the Municipal Code to allow greater height in R-3 zones.     

Comm. Babcock referred to the charts in the staff report and asked Ms. Ryan if she knew how many of those projects had partial underground parking.  Ms. Ryan responded that the ones listed with 3 stories and around the 30 feet height.  She also mentioned two additional projects that were 32.5 feet high and 32’9” and she believed that both of those were submerged.  Ms. Ryan spoke about grading and measurements and mentioned that with single story single-family homes there are regulations that limit it to 20-feet in height for the first 75 feet of the property.  She stated that they were not recommending any changes to that and stated that the Commission recently considered a project through the Special Development Permit and considered whether or not increased height was appropriate but would still have to come forward as a deviation for consideration.  Comm. Babcock asked Ms. Ryan about that rule and if she could explain a project on Evelyn Avenue that abuts to single family homes.  Ms. Ryan responded that it was approved for the greater height in accordance with the density that was allowed and for the greater height that was otherwise permitted in that zone.

Vice Chair Hungerford asked Ms. Ryan if the R-3 Districts were scattered throughout Sunnyvale or concentrated in a couple of areas.  Ms. Ryan responded that they were a bit scattered and mentioned an area on the West end of town north of El Camino and West of El Camino Real.  She also noted an area over on Wolfe Avenue and on Maria Lane. 

Chair Moylan opened the public hearing.

Doug Werner, resident, spoke in opposition to the 40-foot height restriction and stated that there is a possibility that some of the areas are incorrectly zoned.  He then added he is directly impacted by a structure that is adjacent to him and also directly across from him. He stated that in the past he has expressed concerns to the Planning Commission and City Council regarding height issues.  He presented a slide that showed an adjustment by Classic Communities to change the height of the end units to change the height to 31 feet as opposed to 37 feet.  Mr. Werner referred to page 5 of the staff report and stated that projects have been pretty consistent to the 30 foot restriction and then gradually increasing in height.  He stated that he felt there were conditions in place that would have oversight for something of that scale.

Chair Moylan referred to page 5 of the staff report and stated that even though there is a nominal height requirement of 30-feet all the projects coming in are above that height and the Planning Commission and City Council have been approving the projects consistently.  He asked Mr. Werner if he felt the Commission should not be approving the heights.  Mr. Werner responded that if the height is changed to 40-feet you are not going to see heights at 32 or 33 feet but heights in 39 and 40 feet.  He stated that developers are going to want to go to the maximum height.  He added that he has been directly impacted and is trying to help other members of the City and make a difference in terms of letting them know what is happening. 

Chair Moylan thanked Mr. Werner for expressing his concerns.  He asked Mr. Werner if he felt that if they raise the height limit to just above what they have been approving then all the projects coming in will be asking for additional height.  Mr. Werner stated that he did not see a developer who will want to retain the 30-foot height when he can go higher. 

Ms. Ryan stated that the projects listed on page 5 most likely have gone to the Planning Commission with or without a deviation in height.  She stated that any project with 3 or more units requires a Use Permit or Special Development Permit depending upon the zoning.  She added that if the project includes more than 4 units it would go to the Planning Commission because it would require environmental review. Ms. Ryan then noted that it potentially clarifies what is acceptable height in the community and the developer is not requesting a deviation if the standard is changed. 

Comm. Simons asked Mr. Werner if he preferred a greater variety of architecture in the City or would he prefer having flatter design roof that fit the 30-foot requirement.  Mr. Werner stated that the structures that are currently being built in Sunnyvale are simple stacked clumps of 4 and 5 and used the corner of Old San Francisco and Fair Oaks as an example.  He then referred to Ms. Ryan’s comment and stated that the City Council and Planning Commission already have oversight on the projects and stated that the restriction on the height gives it the opportunity to have review by the Council and Commission.  He stated that the height should be something that is looked at and not taken for granted. 

Harriet B. Rowe, member of the public, referred to the staff report and expressed some concerns with the various heights in previously approved projects.  She referred to page 6 of the staff report and stated that she agreed with the idea of submerging the garage to make more room then do it.  Ms. Rowe expressed concerns on the degradation of Sunnyvale and its attractiveness.  She then referred to page 7 of the staff report and asked why they had to provide a niche between the lowest and the highest when she feels that the highest is not good for Sunnyvale and felt it was poor reasoning.  She stated that she understands that she lives in the golden triangle and housing has to be provided but asked why the standards of Sunnyvale have to be lowered to give it to them. 

Chair Moylan closed the public hearing. 

Comm. Babcock stated that the first speaker summarized what she was feeling and stated “If you allow it they will build it” and agreed that they would find all the R-3 sites at 40, 41 and 42 feet in height.  She stated that it has been proven that a 3-story structure would fit at 35-feet whether it is partial undergrounding or full undergrounding of the garage. 

Chair Moylan asked Comm. Babcock why she wanted to include the limit on stories into the motion and stated that some towns do not have a story limit only a height limit.  He stated that earlier he asked staff by e-mail why the limit on stories was in the recommendation and staff responded that it was historical.  Chair Moylan stated that it was an opportunity to consider whether they wanted to continue to limit the height and the number of stories or do the people actually only care about the height. Comm. Babcock stated that her perception is they care about both and is more comfortable limiting the number of stories. Ms. Ryan stated that she does not know historically why Sunnyvale has number of stories but some communities limit the number of stories either for aesthetic issues and character issues and secondly to limit the amount of windows as with more floors you get more windows. 

Comm. Simons did not support the motion.  He stated that it was not that he did not support it in concept but would like to have the opportunity to vote against a project that was 33 or 34 feet if he felt it was not appropriate for that neighborhood.  He stated that he greatly appreciated the control and the present City requirements. 

Ms. Ryan stated that the Planning Commission recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for their review on March 8, 2005.