REPORT IN BRIEF     

ANALYSIS

Background

Previous Actions on the Site: The following table summarizes previous planning applications related to the subject site:

On October 13, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed this application and received testimony from one member of the public.  The speaker was concerned that the Heritage Neighborhood Association had not commented on the project and that he was not sent a notice of the public hearing.  The Planning Commission discussed the merits and impacts of the proposal as well as the possible ramifications to the streetscape of the 100 Block of North Sunnyvale Avenue. The Commission generally felt that the proposal was compatible with the existing neighborhood and in context with the character of the streetscape.  The Commission also stated that they believed the project was well designed and demonstrated a good use of architecture.

Based on this, the Commission agreed with staff's analysis and recommended that the City Council approve Alternative #1 with the attached conditions.  The Commission also added one condition to the recommendation, for the existing home to be offered for removal from the site prior to demolition.  This offer must be advertised for 60 days prior to demolition.  (See Condition #10 in Attachment 2)

Existing Conditions: There currently exists one single-family home on the site, which is proposed for demolition as part of this application. The home was constructed in approximately 1915 by John Hendy but never used as his primary residence.  During the course of the review of this application, it was identified that this existing home was part of the North Sunnyvale Avenue Streetscape (100 Block) and, therefore, listed on the City's Cultural Resource Inventory.  The home itself is not specifically listed on the inventory nor is the 100 Block listed on the City’s Heritage Landmark Inventory. 

Generally, when projects such as this are reviewed by local agencies, a historical and architectural evaluation is requested which determines the historical significance of the structure at the National, State, and local levels.  In this case, an historical and architectural evaluation was completed by Dill Design Group and submitted to the City by the applicant. The report determined that the home is not eligible for listing on the National or State registries of historic resources.  In Staff’s opinion, the report did not arrive at a definitive conclusion regarding the local historical significance of the home or whether the home was eligible to be listed on the City’s Cultural Resource Inventory.  The report instead placed this decision back with the City to determine if the structure has any local significance. 

As a result, staff requested that the Heritage Preservation Committee make an advisory recommendation on the local significance of the home.  At their August 6, 2003 meeting, the Committee concluded that the home did not have any local historic significance to the City and declined to specifically list the home on the City's Cultural Resource Inventory.

Description of Proposed Project

The applicant is requesting approval of a Tentative Map to subdivide a 14,540 square foot lot into 5 lots (i.e., 4 lots and one common lot) and a Special Development Permit (SDP) to allow for construction of two pair of townhomes. A private street will extend the length of the site providing access to private garages for each unit.  Unassigned parking provided for guests will be located in one section on the site as noted on the site plan. The east and west sides of the lot will be landscaped and provide backyard and front yard areas for the units.

Environmental Review

A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act provisions and City Guidelines. An initial study has determined that the proposed project would not create any significant environmental impacts (see Attachment 3, Initial Study). 

Rezoning

Change Under Consideration: The subject property is located within the R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. The applicant is requesting the addition of a PD (Planned Development) Combining District requiring a Rezone to R-2/PD.

Objective: This rezoning request is being made to allow the applicant to concurrently apply for a Special Development Permit (SDP) to construct the proposed four townhouse units.  The purpose of the Planned Development Combining District is to provide modifications, additions and limitations to other zoning districts to meet special conditions and situations. In 1998, the City Council approved guidelines for the use of PDs and Special Development Permits (SDPs). The subject request for a PD meets all of the three applicable established guidelines.

·         To facilitate development or redevelopment of a site to improve the neighborhood. (Meets)

·         To allow for a proposed use that is compatible with the neighborhood but requires deviations from development standards for a successful project. (Meets)

·         To allow for the development and creations of lots that are less than the minimum size required in the base zoning district. (Meets)

The project involves the subdivision of one property into five parcels, requiring deviations from the requirements of 8,000 sq. ft. per lot and 76 linear feet in lot width.  These deviations will be necessary to create separate owner-occupied lots while providing good site and building design.

Discussion: The PD Combining District enables the consideration of deviations from the Code and/or imposition of more restrictive requirements. The surrounding properties are predominately developed with either apartments, varying types of multi-unit development or single-family homes. The PD Combining District provides flexibility in formulating a project that promotes transition and reinvestment of the neighborhood and in allowing townhouse-style ownership housing.

Special Development Permit

Use: The project site is Zoned R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential) and is proposed for Rezoning to R-2/PD (Low-Medium Density Residential/Planned Development).  An SDP is required since the applicant is proposing a Planned Development Combining District.  This permit addresses the use, building architecture and site layout as well as the specific deviations requested in the project.

The proposed project consists of four dwelling units that are proposed as ownership units.  The units will have attached 2-car garages and rooftop balconies on the top level. Both single-family and multi-family residential uses are allowable in the R-2 Zone with a Special Development Permit approval.  The density of the proposed project is 12 units/acre, which satisfies the housing goal of achieving at least 75 percent of the maximum allowable density (12 d.u./ac). The 14,540 sq. ft. lot allows for up to four dwelling units on the property. 

The FAR for all structures in the project is 60% and the FAR of the individual units are: lot #1-125%, lot #2-124%, lot #3-124%, and lot #4-86%.  In the R-2 Zone, 55% is the maximum FAR allowed without a public hearing.  The City’s Small-lot Single Family Guidelines suggest an overall project FAR benchmark of 50%. Given the mixed housing-types on North Sunnyvale Avenue, (which includes single-family, condominiums and apartments) the proposed FAR of 60% may not be compatible.  Staff is recommending Condition of Approval #9 which requires that t