REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Title
Proposed Project:
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT: to amend the Downtown Sunnyvale Specific Plan.
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT: to amend Chapter 19.28 and make other related changes to Chapter 13 and Chapter 19 of the Sunnyvale Municipal Code.
REZONE: to re-designate a portion of Block 1a as Block 1.
WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT: to evaluate the proposed DSP amendment
Location: Downtown Sunnyvale
File #: 2017-8047
Zoning: DSP
Applicant/Owner: City of Sunnyvale
Environmental Review (SCH # 2018052020): Adopt a resolution to make findings required by CEQA, certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Project Planner: Michelle King, (408) 730-7463, mking@sunnyvale.ca.gov
Report
SUMMARY OF REVIEWING COMMISSIONS ACTIONS
Listed below are all items from the four commissions who provided recommendations to the City Council. Each recommendation is followed with a staff response. All staff recommended changes can be found in Attachment 24.
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION (July 16, 2020)
BPAC 1. Remove all on-street parallel parking, except ADA parking spaces.
Staff Response: The on-street parking inventory was studied and included in the model used for the Downtown Parking Study and is subsequently included in the predicted available public parking. On-street parking is highly valued by merchants and many of their customers. Staff does not recommend removing any on-street parking.
BPAC 2. Upgrade all Class III Bicycle Route to Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard.
Staff Response: Per the Draft Active Transportation Plan (ATP) not all streets that are designated as Class III bicycle routes can be upgraded to Class IIIB bicycle boulevards. Bicycle boulevards are typically designed with traffic calming measures to slow vehicular traffic down while facilitating bicycle traffic. From the City’s Traffic Calming policy, streets that are designated collectors and higher are not eligible for traffic calming measures as they may hinder emergency vehicle response access. The Draft ATP looked at various bicycle routes and has proposed upgrading some to a bicycle boulevard where appropriate. The proposed bike lane plan in the Draft DSP is consistent with the Draft ATP. Staff does not recommend any changes to the DSP.
BPAC 3. Upgrade Iowa Avenue from Mathilda Avenue to Taaffe Street to Class IV Separated Bikeway on the north side of the street; from Taaffe Street to Sunnyvale Avenue to Class IV Separated Bikeway on the north side of the street, and to Class IIB buffered bicycle lane on the south side of the street.
Staff response: There is insufficient space in the eastbound direction of Iowa Avenue to implement buffered bicycle lanes. To provide a separated bikeway westbound on Iowa Avenue would require either a protected intersection or termination of the separated bikeway. Neither of these options are a superior design. Iowa Avenue westbound currently includes a Class IIB buffered bicycle lane, which is an upgrade and enhancement over Class II bicycle lanes. This configuration is not unsafe and functions with the intersection design and eastbound Iowa bicycle facility. Staff does not recommend any changes to the DSP.
BPAC 4. Upgrade Bicycle Parking standards and requirements to current National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Design Guidelines.
Staff Response: Staff recommends continuing to follow Valley Transit Authority (VTA) Bicycle Technical Guidelines.
The VTA oversees bicycle parking at transit stations as the transit operator for the County so their standards are most relevant. In addition, staff was unable to find any bicycle parking and requirements in NACTO design guidelines that would cover bicycle parking rates or standards outside of transit stops/stations.
Further, the VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines are generally in alignment with the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals Essentials of Bike Parking; a transportation planning standard. Staff does not recommend any changes to the DSP.
BPAC 5. Design streets for 15 MPH speed limits.
Staff Response: The downtown core streets are designed to facilitate traffic moving at a slower speed than the exterior surrounding streets. There are many characteristics incorporated into the design for the Downtown that are conducive to traffic moving slower such as; zero lot lines, buildings at the back of sidewalk, narrower streets and travel lanes, periodic on-street parking (to provide side friction to psychologically slow motorists down), reduced curb radii and an overall emphasis on pedestrian travel with mixed land use and block design. Staff does not recommend any changes to the DSP.
BPAC 6. Prioritize on safe intersection design along Mathilda Avenue, Evelyn Avenue, Taaffe Street, and Sunnyvale Avenue.
Staff Response: The City’s standard intersection design is already a “safe intersection design” that exhibits many characteristics of a complete intersection along with principles of Vision Zero. Staff does not recommend any changes to the DSP.
BPAC 7. Provide specific attention to Evelyn Avenue and Frances Street pedestrian crossing (i.e., upgrade to scramble intersection, HAWKs)
Staff Response: HAWK (High-Intensity Activated crossWalK) crossing beacons are not to be used at existing signalized intersections as the traffic signal already provides a higher level of protection for pedestrian and roadway users. As this intersection may be a good candidate for a scramble crossing (where vehicular traffic from all directions is temporarily stopped, thereby allowing pedestrians <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian> to cross <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_crossing> an intersection in every direction, including diagonally, at the same time), staff is recommending the following design guideline:
GG-GX. Consider “scramble crosswalks” or other innovative pedestrian crossings where appropriate.
BPAC 8. Add Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard on McKinley Avenue between Mathilda Avenue and Sunnyvale Avenue.
Staff Response: See explanation above.
BPAC 9. Accommodations to be made for installation of electric mobility device charging stations.
Staff response: Electric mobility device is a term to broadly describe personal transport by battery power such as electric wheelchairs and scooters for accessible travel, as well as skateboards, kick-scooters, and self-balancing unicycles. It typically excludes electric bicycles; however, electric bicycles could be covered under the sentiment expressed by the BPAC. Include the following additional design guideline to address new technology and innovative design for parking structures. Charging stations were also mentioned by the Sustainability Commission, see SC1 below.
GG-D11. Encourage the inclusion of electric vehicle and mobility charging stations in downtown parking garages and surface parking lots and ensure they are accessible by the public.
BPAC 10. To require no free public parking within the district.
Staff Response: There are several implementation measures included in the DSP that address parking management in the downtown, including Implementation Action 3D. Staff recommends amending this action as follows:
Implementation Action 3D. Parking Management Study. As part of the implementation process of the Parking Study, conduct a parking management study to increase parking efficiency, which shall consider paid parking programs.
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION (July 20, 2020)
Recommendations and staff responses:
SC 1. Enhance opportunities for electric vehicle charging infrastructure, with a focus on DC fast chargers
Staff Response: Add the additional design guideline to encourage charging in the downtown.
See suggested language under BPAC 9 (Policy GG-DX).
SC 2. Suggest promoting additional shared parking as a public benefit in section 5.2.C to further discourage single-occupancy vehicles.
Staff Response: Add underlined language to Section in “5.2.3 Maximum Development Standard and Community Benefits.”
C. Community Benefits Program A development agreement is required to memorialize the details and timeframe for providing community benefits. Examples of community benefits include, but are not limited to, the following.
§ Affordable housing units;
§ Contribution to a community benefit fund;
§ Dedication of land for public improvements; and
§ Additional public and/or shared parking.
SC 3. Prioritize implementation of parking strategies, such as paid parking, in the downtown area, per CAP Move 3.B.
Staff Response: There are several implementation measures included in the DSP that address parking management in the downtown. Staff is suggesting additional language to Action 3D. This is the same recommendation as included in BPAC 10.
Action 3D. Parking Management Study. As part of the implementation process of the Parking Study, conduct a parking management study to increase parking efficiency, which shall consider paid parking programs.
SC 4. Preserve natural and heritage resources during project development review.
Staff Response: As this is a standard project requirement per the Sunnyvale Municipal Code and CEQA requirements, no change is proposed by staff.
SC 5. Consider encouraging bicycle parking facilities.
Staff Response: Although the Draft DSP includes multiple references to bicycle parking staff recommends adding the following specific policy to support robust bicycle parking and improvements in the downtown.
Policy C-1.9 Encourage ample public and private bicycle parking facilities.
SC 6. Consider transportation demand management programs for downtown employers.
Staff Response: The proposed policy C-1.7 (see below) requires all new non-residential developments to participate in TDM programs and encourages existing employers to participate. Unless an existing business is already required to have a TDM program the City cannot impose such a program on them through the DSP.
Policy C-1.7 Require new non-residential developments and multifamily residential developments of 10 or more units to implement a transportation demand management (TDM) program to reduce the impact of single-occupancy automobile trips. Encourage existing employers to participate in TDM programs.
In addition, the draft DSP includes Implementation Action 3.H. regarding the creation of a Transportation Management Association (TMA). The creation of a TMA will provide a central role for requiring, encouraging and managing downtown TDM plans. The Parking Study strongly encouraged the creation of a TMA for the downtown. If Council finds it important to have a TMA (and in response to the Sustainability Commission’s recommendation) the Action statement could be strengthened. Staff is not recommending strengthening Action 3.H. as it would be better to first evaluate the feasibility of a TMA, including fiscal impacts and staffing needs before committing to create one.
SC 7. Ensure that all new development is aligned with most recent City policies to incentivize or prioritize all-electric buildings.
Staff Response: All new development is subject to current City policies, regulations and codes. The City is in the process of developing new “reach codes” (local building energy codes that “reach” beyond the state minimum for building energy use) and anticipates adoption of a Sunnyvale reach code at the end of 2020. Sunnyvale reach codes will address all electric building goals.
SC 8. Incorporate references to specific Plays from the Climate Action Playbook into the Downtown Specific Plan.
Staff Response: Staff recommends that City Council direct staff to administratively add language to Section 9.2, “Specific Plan Implementation Actions” to include a brief description of the Climate Action Plan.
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION (July 22, 2020)
HPC1. Review and address the Sunnyvale Historical Context Statement in the project.
Staff Response: Staff recommends that the City Council Direct staff to administratively add language regarding the City’s Historic Context Statement and its relevance to the plan to Section 3.8 Historical Buildings and Heritage Resources.
HPC2. Make best efforts to reach out to the Vargas family to notify them of the project.
Staff Response: Staff is working with the Sunnyvale Heritage Park Museum staff to connect with Vargas family members.
PLANNING COMMISSION (July 27, 2020)
PC 1. The Director of Community Development or decision body must consider innovative parking design, based on Institute of Transportation Engineers or Urban Land Institute standards, that could include new technology and variations in building design.
Staff response: Recommendation PC1 was in response the Downtown Parking Study but as the Planning Commission recommendation on that report is implemented through the Downtown Specific Plan, the proposed language is included here. Staff is recommending the following additional design guideline to address new technology and innovative design for parking structures.
GG-D12. Director of Community Development or decision body shall consider innovative parking design (based on accepted standards and guidelines such as Institute of Transportation Engineers or Urban Land Institute) including new technology and variations in parking structure design.
PC 2. Update the Draft Downtown Specific Plan Figure 5-1 so that Block 13 reads "office/commercial" and not just "commercial".
Staff response: This is a correction that staff recommended to the Planning Commission. See amended Figure 5-1 in Attachment 24.
PC 3. Include a policy to B-3.5 of the Downtown Specific Plan for new and replacement street trees and trees on private property to be part of a robust, urban forest plan with goals of maximizing tree size and using native, long-lived shade tree species. The trees selected should provide a greatly improved pedestrian realm and experience with engineered fill encouraged to support larger tree species in more spaces. Staff should also develop an approved list of tree species for the Downtown Specific Plan.
Staff response: Staff supports the emphasis on shade trees and is recommending language regarding trees to Policy B-3.5. and include an additional design guideline to maintain a street tree list for the downtown. Staff is concerned that specifying native trees will not provide a sufficient selection of species to attain a robust urban forest. The Downtown is an urban and not a natural setting and many of the native trees to Sunnyvale require larger open areas or are located near creeks and streams. There are many species appropriate to Sunnyvale’s climate that will work well in the Downtown.
Policy B-3.5 Improve the character of local streets with shade trees, wide sidewalks and public amenities, such as public seating, shade, and “smart city infrastructure” (i.e. wi-fi, charging stations, etc.) that support the land uses and functions of the street, where appropriate.
GG-FX. Maintain a recommended street tree list for the Downtown Specific Plan area.
STAFF INITIATED MODIFICATIONS
After publication of the revised July 2020 Draft DSP, staff found that a few corrections were needed. In addition, staff noticed that residential density should be more clearly described to avoid potential ambiguity. Attachment 24 includes these errata and clarifications:
• Direction to staff to correct mislabeled street names in graphic (page 3-13)
• 5.2.1 Downtown Land Use Types (starting on page 5-1)
o Identifies the maximum allowed density instead of density ranges with cross-references to the allowed units per block in Table 5-1. The DSP will also include a new Appendix A that shows how the allowable number of housing units in Table 5-1 is allocated to each parcel in a Block.
• Figure 5-1 Land Use Plan (page 5-4)
o Eliminated Density ranges from the legend
• Table 5-1 (page 5-5)
o Text correction for Block 13 to state Office/Commercial
o Updated acreage numbers for the blocks
o Created individual rows for Blocks with more than one residential density (as shown on Figure 5.1 Land Use Plan).
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City's official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall, Sunnyvale Public Library and Department of Public Safety. In addition, the agenda and report are available at the Office of the City Clerk and on the City's website.
Public Comment letters in response to the Draft Downtown Specific Plan and EIR are provided in Attachment 17 to the report.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 4 to the report) to:
a. Approve the Water Supply Assessment prepared for the DSP Amendments (Appendix J2 of the EIR, see link to the Environmental Impact Report in Attachment 5);
b. Certify the Environmental Impact Report (see link Attachment 5);
c. Make the Findings Required by CEQA and Approve a Statement of Overriding Considerations (included in the Resolution);
d. Approve a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the DSP amendments and future development projects (see link in Attachment 5); and,
e. Approve the amended Downtown Specific Plan (see link in Attachment 5 and additional modifications in Attachment 24)
2. Adopt a Resolution as outlined in Alternative 1 with modifications to the Downtown Specific Plan, provided the modifications are within the scope of the environmental review.
3. Do not adopt a Resolution and provide direction on desired changes.
4. Introduce an Ordinance amending the Sunnyvale Municipal Code Chapters 19.28, 13.08, 19.46, and 19.82, as contained in Attachment 11 to the report.
5. Introduce an Ordinance to amend the Zoning Map to re-designate a portion of DSP Block 1a as DSP Block 1, as contained in Attachment 12 to the report.
6. Introduce ordinances with modifications.
7. Do not introduce any ordinances and provide direction on desired changes.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
Alternatives 1, 4 and 5:
1. Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 4 to the report) to: a. Approve the Water Supply Assessment prepared for the DSP Amendments (Appendix J2 of the Environmental Impact Report, see link to EIR in Attachment 5); b. Certify the Environmental Impact Report (see link Attachment 5); c. Make the Findings Required by the California Environmental Quality Act and Approve a Statement of Overriding Considerations (included in the Resolution); d. Approve a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the DSP amendments and future development projects (see link in Attachment 5); and, e. Approve the amended Downtown Specific Plan (see link in Attachment 5 and additional modifications in Attachment 24);
4. Introduce an Ordinance amending the Sunnyvale Municipal Code Chapters 19.28, 13.08, 19.46, and 19.82, as contained in Attachment 11 to the report; and
5. Introduce an Ordinance to amend the Zoning Map to re-designate a portion of DSP Block 1a as DSP Block 1 as contained in Attachment 12 to the report.
After substantial, valuable input from the community, four City commissions, staff and the project proponents, the final DSP document is a thorough and complete document that will lead the future growth in the downtown area to meet specific goals and intentions. The Draft DSP published in July 2020 along with additional modifications in Attachment 24 reflect the feedback and participation of many individuals and organizations interested in Downtown Sunnyvale.
Staff heartily supports the revised plan and amendments. The environmental documents reflect the final DSP document and will also be used to review future projects submitted under the amendments.
Staff
Reviewed by: Michelle King, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Andrew Miner, Assistant Community Development Director
Reviewed by: Connie Verceles, Assistant to the City Manager
Reviewed by: Trudi Ryan, Community Development Director
Reviewed by: Teri Silva, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Kent Steffens, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Report to Planning Commission 20-0179, July 27, 2020 (without attachments)
2. Noticing and Vicinity Map
3. Relevant General Plan Goals and Policies
4. Draft Resolution for Water Supply Assessment, Certification of EIR, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and Downtown Specific Plan
5. Link to Online Documents (also available at: https://sunnyvale.ca.gov/news/topics/dsp/default.htm)
6. Market Analysis by KMA
7. Fiscal Analysis by KMA
8. DSP Goals and Policies Comparison
9. DSP District Boundary Changes
10. Summary of the DSP Guideline Changes
11. Draft Ordinance Amending SMC Chapters 19.28, 13.08, 19.46, and 19.82
12. Draft Ordinance Rezoning DSP Block 1a and Block 1 Boundary
13. Redline Amendments to SMC Chapters 19.28
14. Excerpts of City Council Minutes of May 3, 2016 and August 15, 2017
15. Summary of March 13, 2019 Community Outreach Meeting
16. Summary of February 11, 2020 Community Outreach Meeting
17. Public comments on Draft DSP (Updated for Council meeting)
18. Link to Final EIR, Response to Comments and MMRP
19. Arborist Report
Additional Attachments for Report to Council
20. Excerpt Draft Minutes from Four Reviewing Commissions
21. Link to Heritage Preservation Commission July 22, 2020 Staff Report
22. Link to Sustainability Commission July 20, 2020 Staff Report
23. Link to Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission July 16, 2020 Staff Report
24. Staff Recommended Additional Changes to DSP