Title
Study Session Summary of September 13, 2016 - El Camino Real Corridor Plan Presentation of Vision and Land Use Alternatives
Summary
Call to Order:
Vice Mayor Larsson called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. in the West Conference Room.
City Councilmembers Present:
Mayor Glenn Hendricks
Vice Mayor Gustav Larsson
Councilmember Jim Griffith
Councilmember Pat Meyering
Councilmember Tara Martin-Milius
Councilmember Jim Davis
City Councilmembers Absent:
None
Public Comment:
Kiyomi Yamamoto
Zach Kaufman
Kevin Jackson
Arpita Kumari
Sue Serrone
Study Session Summary:
Rosemarie Zulueta, Senior Planner, presented an update on the progress of the Sunnyvale El Camino Real Corridor Plan (ECR Plan) effort. Staff reviewed the reasons for updating the 2007 Precise Plan for El Camino Real. Staff summarized the Market Analysis and ECR Profile report findings and the community input received from early pop-up workshops, El Camino Real Plan Advisory Committee (ECRPAC) meetings and the online survey. These items, along with the City’s existing goals and policies helped shape the draft vision statement and the three preliminary land use alternatives.
Staff provided an overview of the vision statement, the three land use alternatives and the community feedback received. The ECRPAC and community workshop participants generally supported increased potential residential growth throughout the corridor and emphasized that potential impacts to traffic, services, schools and the City’s fiscal health must be assessed and properly mitigated in order to accommodate this growth.
Finally, staff listed the next steps in the planning process, including additional community outreach and the selection of the preferred alternative in the coming months, and anticipated completion of the Draft ECR Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report by mid-2017.
Vice Mayor Larsson opened the discussion for questions and comments.
Comments and Questions From City Councilmembers:
§ Which slide (number) contains the numbers comparing anticipated growth under each ECR Alternative so members of the public could have access to it?
Note: Staff stated that the entire presentation would be posted on with the City Council agendas and the audio of the presentation would also be available.
§ How does this planning effort relate to the Draft LUTE and CAP?
§ The ECR Plan has to be considered in the broader context of the City’s General Plan (i.e., whether the General Plan designates the corridor to absorb the community’s future housing needs), and not in isolation.
§ Vision Statement and Elements are good.
§ Before choosing a preferred Alternative, would like to understand how the ECR Plan Land Use Alternatives impact the jobs-housing ratio.
§ Implementation is key. We are going to see a lot of partial improvements as individual properties are redeveloped. The Plan should have a defined implementation program that provides guidance on when upgrades should be required to existing nonconforming public facilities (e.g. sidewalks and streetscape improvements) adjacent to a proposed development.
§ Provide a Fiscal Impact analysis of the Alternatives.
§ It seems that there may be conflicting retail goals (e.g. high end furniture stores vs. local daily services like dry cleaning or car wash) for the corridor, or perhaps what is needed is a wide range of commercial uses.
§ Interested in seeing the possible circulation improvements throughout the corridor, especially how to cross ECR.
§ Why are certain properties within the Nodes designated as mixed use at 24 du/ac or 24R (allowed to be residential only) in all three alternatives, including Alternative R? The medium density, 24 du/ac, tends to yield only townhomes, which seems low for their proximity to a major transit stop.
§ It seems there could be more opportunity for higher densities in the Nodes. Lower densities could constrain the provision of more affordable housing. If the existing City Council Policy of achieving at least 75% of the maximum density allowed will apply to the ECR Plan, the indicated designations in the Alternatives may not achieve affordable housing goals.
§ How will the preferred Alternative be decided?
Note: Staff stated that the vision statement and alternatives will be presented to City Council at a future public hearing, for a formal vote on the vision and preferred alternative.
§ Address the following items, when appropriate, throughout the planning process:
o Affordable Housing Strategy equals Density Strategy. We have to be up front about how affordable housing is more attainable at higher densities.
o Residential potential outside the nodes, but still in proximity to transit.
o ECR corridor has portions with shallow lots-What is the appropriate height?
o What does “future major transit stop” mean as indicated on the Alternatives maps?
o Enhance the pedestrian environment, shorten crossings, but mid-block crossings are not safe unless signalized
o When analyzing traffic along the corridor, determine how much is coming from outside Sunnyvale (i.e. how much of it is generated regionally vs. locally).
o Avoid building mass close to the street.
Public Comments:
§ We need more homes along the corridor to preserve our treasured natural open space. More homes and eyes on the street mean a safer environment for walking, biking and transit. Review the Sunnyvale Sustainable and Affordable Living Coalition’s Policy Platform calling for a 25% enhanced affordable housing requirement and mode-share targets for the corridor.
§ Currently, there needs to be adequate parking for grocery stores. It is not likely that a family of four will be bicycling to go grocery shopping. Be mindful of the essential, but taken-for-granted services we could be losing if properties are redeveloped, including car washes, U-Haul/rental car agencies and auto services. Preserve these uses through zoning, and when considering commercial uses, think functionally vs. tax-based.
§ Vision Statement Element 2.C is good, but do not shy away from installing bike lanes just because the roadway geometry presents challenges. Translate the vision into reality.
§ Need to enhance public transportation and pedestrian facilities, and address how to make those last mile connections. ECR is currently an unsafe and unpleasant pedestrian environment and needs more “eyes on the street”. Be mindful of height restrictions and lighting.
§ ECR is one of the last places we have left in the City that can absorb the current and future housing demand [Speaker provided excerpts from ECR Market Analysis, ECR Affordable Housing Strategy and Grand Boulevard Initiative housing and jobs balance data].
Adjournment:
Vice Mayor Larsson adjourned the meeting at 6:59 p.m.