Title
Study Session Summary of May 19, 2015 - Land Use and Transportation Element (LUTE) - Joint Study Session with Planning Commission
Summary
Call to Order:
Mayor Griffith Called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
City Councilmembers Present:
Mayor Jim Griffith
Vice Mayor Jim Davis
Councilmember David Whittum
Councilmember Pat Meyering
Councilmember Tara Martin-Milius
Councilmember Glenn Hendricks
Councilmember Gustav Larsson
City Councilmembers Absent:
None
Planning Commission Members Present:
Chair Russell Melton
Vice Chair Ken Olevson
Commissioner Ralph Durham
Commissioner Sue Harrison
Commissioner Larry Klein
Planning Commission Members Absent:
Commissioner Ken Rheaume
Commissioner David Simons
Study Session Summary:
Planning Officer Trudi Ryan gave a presentation regarding project background, content of the Draft Land Use and Transportation Element, past and planned outreach efforts, and upcoming steps. Director of Public Works Manuel Pineda presented traffic background and findings of recent traffic analyses relating to the project.
Questions and Issues raised by City Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners
-Plan should address enhanced transit service, including shuttles, bicycle grid and funding for major improvements
-Is the connection to regional transportation considered?
-Place the village centers on the corridors that we expect to see the most transit improvements.
-Most people still depend on cars for commute so we need to have heavy focus on stronger transit access both local and regional in order to achieve mode shift goals.
-Are there examples of successful village centers?
o Staff noted that this information can be provided for future discussions.
-Do we have a way to gauge where we are on mode-shift?
-Are the pending Peery Park Specific Plan and Lawrence Station Area Plans reflected in the LUTE?
o Yes, Horizon 2035 Advisory Committee recommendations for the LUTE and framework for the other plans are essentially the same amount of development.
-How does buildout work? Horizon 2035 plan is a 20-year projection - in that time frame, we need to accommodate at least 2 RHNA cycles. How is this LUTE is different than the trajectory we've been on to provide housing. How is this different? Please illustrate in final presentation.
o Staff noted that historic development trends can be provided for future discussions.
-How will jobs and population be estimated for the EIR?
-Draft LUTE uses subjective terms and is mostly theoretical. Shouldn't the plan dial in more on specifics?
o A few different ways to consider - General Plan is general. Should be qualitative. Describe the end state.
o Most General Plans keep things at a higher level, and use codes (zoning, etc.) and design guidelines to provide details
-The public outreach that has occurred or planned is not enough to reach a broader segment of the community.
o After revised drafts are available in August, staff advise Council about public opinions
-What can we adjust or change in the plan?
o The EIR sets maximums that can be considered without preparing a new EIR.
o There will be additional conversations with Commission and Council.
-Do we have the choice of changing specific LUTE items?
-Residents want to see what it would take to plan for no traffic impacts dropping to E or F LOS.
-LUTE should help achieve Plan Bay Area goals for housing, jobs, and commute.
-TOD - Are there any specific statistics about how many people living in transit-option developments actually use the transit? Let's get some numbers on this, particularly if we can tie it to Sunnyvale.
o Staff noted that this information can be provided for future discussions.
-Housing options - are we recommending ownership or rental?
o The City cannot legally require one or the other. There are policies in the LUTE to encourage home-ownership opportunities
o Staff will research out information on any VMT difference between ownership and rental residents
-Illustrate timing and sequence of TIF improvements
-Are we looking at potential for shuttles, and what they do to impact LOS and other traffic metrics?
o Staff noted that staff will look at the transportation options expressed in the action statements, and refine as needed.
-The City is approving unsustainable amounts of office/tech/computer office developments is what is driving the housing problems of availability and high-cost.
-Which of the likely impacts are from LOS A-C, which ones from D?
-How much would housing units have to be reduced to have no increase in the E-F intersections?
-Residents would like to have information about what it means to increase housing units to the planned levels and degrading intersections.
-Consider an alternative that changes housing and non-residential square footage to a level that does not increase E-F intersections.
-Problem with housing in Sunnyvale is direct result of City approving commercial developments. The computer companies locating in Sunnyvale are driving up residential costs. Increasing commercial space is driving up housing prices. People in other professions are being forced out of the city. Recognize and address this.
-A number of communities have already adopted village centers. Let's get a summary of other communities who have done this as part of final presentation.
-Does the model consider the Lawrence Expressway improvement plans?
o Yes, it includes some of the planned improvements; staff will verify which ones.
-How does Plan Bay Area work with the LUTE? Should we expect that most housing will be located closer to job locations in Plan Bay Area?
-There will not be jobs created in the more remote portions of the region; they will be in nearby areas.
-Plan Bay Area will no longer encourage the commutes over the hill into Silicon Valley. We're seeing schools decline in enrollment. Some populations that were once here for affordable housing are gone. To say we should stop building housing, it makes it difficult for people to provide service to the community.
-County is analyzing the expressway system. Solutions needed for Lawrence Expressway. This is a County project, not VTA - it's in 2040 design phase. Santa Clara County has a large deficit for repairs and maintenance.
-Several through-routes don't belong to us - they're under other agencies' jurisdictions.
-We will continue to experience job growth - Google has reached maximum capacity in Mt. View. Jobs, housing, and transportation solutions are all vital.
-We should explore community shuttle buses.
-Extend our grid system to provide options for bicyclists.
-Jobs-Housing numbers - if Council wants to take a position that doubling the jobs-housing balance isn't a good outcome, how do we address this?
o Many things affect the jobs-housing ratio... more jobs raises, more housing lowers.
-We should consider alternatives that maintain a 1.5 or similar jobs/housing balance.
Public Comment:
Members of the public
Adjournment:
Mayor Griffith adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m.