Parcel Map 1992
"
I~ -
CITY OF CAMPBELL
70 NORTH FIRST STREET
CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008
(408) 866-2100
FAX # (408) 379-2572
Department: Planning
June 23, 1993
Mr. Carl Goin, Credit Specialist
Resolution Trust Corporation
HomeFed Bank, F.A.
707 Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101
Mr. Stewart Scheinholtz, Vice President
Bank of America
50 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Re: Parcel Map Conditions, Pruneyard Center
Dear Mr. Goin and Mr. Scheinhol tz:
In the meeting of Wednesday, June 9, 1993, Campbell Planning and Public
Works Staff and the City Attorney met with you to discuss the status of the
tentative map application for the Pruneyard Center. Representatives of the
Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) and the Bank of America asked if
conditions could be structured, for a two lot subdivision, that would postpone
commitments to plan line and construct the extension of Campisi Way until
subsequent development occurs.
Attached is a draft set of conditions that could be rel:orded as covenants
conditions and restrictions (CC & Rs) on a two-lot parcel map. These CC & Rs
would serve constructive notice to prospective purchasers of their obligation
to plan line and participate in constructing the extension of Campisi Way.
The extension of Campisi Way provides the Pruneyard Shopping Center and
PruneyaTd Office site with additional roadway capacity by providing an
alternate traffic route to Highway 17, without relying upon Bascom Avenue.
Bascom Avenue cannot absorb any additionai peak hour trips as the
intersection of Bascom Avenue and Hamilton Avenue is already at capaåty.
The proposed conditions greatly simplify the application process by
eliminating the requirement for a traffic study and parking accumulation
studies prior to filing the two lot subdivision. These conditions are suggested
as an alternative to fulfilling the application requirements outlined in the
attached letters dated August 12, 1992.
Parcel map conditions, Pruneyard Center
Page 2
June 23, 1993
These CC & Rs are in draft form and we welcome suggested modifications
that preserve the intent while simplifying or clarifying the wording. The
RTC property interest is referred to as "Parcel One" and the Bank of America
portion as "Parcel Two".
Please advise if the concepts discussed in the attachment are acceptable to you
as one of the property interests, after which we can discuss the process for
implementing this approach. Should you have any questions, please contact
me at (408) 866-2140.
Sincerely,
i()
/\:Jd, <, ~ cL '
<C.
Steve Piasecki
Director of Planning
cc:
Mayor Conant and Members of the Campbell City Council
Mark Ochenduszko, City Manager
Bob Kass, Public Works Director
Bill Helms, Deputy Public Works Director
Gary Kruger, Traffic Engineer
Bill Seligmann, City Attorney
enclosures
June 23, 1993
Draft for Discqssion Purposes OnlJ
Pruneyard Shopping and Office Center
Proposed Tentative Map Conditions of Approval
1)
Roadway Reservation Area
Reserve an area for street roadway purposes from the northern property
line of Parcel One, to Campbell A venue, as illustrated on the approved
final parcel map. The roadway reservation area shall remain free and
clear of any structures or improvements other than parking, landscaping
and driveways in existence at the time of recordation of the approved
parcel map, unless approved by the City Council of the City of Campbell,
upon findings the proposed improvements would benefit the public
health, safety and welfare without unreasonably restricting construction
of any future public right-of-way.
2)
Plan Line, Engineering Study
a) Prior to approvals for any building additions or demolitions and
reconstruction on Parcels One or Two, which individually or
collectively exceed 20,000 square feet, the owners of the property on
which the building addition(s) is/are proposed, shall agree to conduct
a detailed plan line engineering study to delineate the precise metes
and bounds of an extension of Campisi Way from its present
southerly terminus through the adjacent residential development
thence through the roadway reservation area on Parcel One through
to Campbell A venue, in order to determine the optimum street
alignment under generally accepted traffic and safety engineering
principals.
b)
The engineering study shall include an assessment of all localized
traffic and environmental impacts and appropriate mitigation
measures associated with the roadway connection. The study shall be
presented to the Campbell City Council who shall approve a final
alignment which the Council finds best serves the public health,
safety and welfare. This final alignment shall be binding upon the
owners. The roadway right-of-way width shall not exceed 60 feet.
c)
The share of the costs of the plan line and engineering studies shall
be apportioned between the parcels based on the relative amount of
the building area proposed which individually or collectively exceed
20,000 square feet, and trigger the plan line study, from the date of the
final map recordation.
d)
The engineering study shall identify the precise threshold of
vehicular trips, due to building or use related activity, which
necessitate construction of the extension of Campisi Way through, or
into, the roadway reservation area.
3)
Pruneyard Parcel Map Conditions
Page 2
June 23, 1993
Roadway Construction
a) The owners of the parcel or parcels requesting permits for new
construction or remodeling, shall participate in the construction of
Campisi Way, including all costs associated with acquisition or
dedication, of right-of-way, relocation and redesign of parking areas,
and construction of the roadway. The acquisition of right-of-way and
construction shall include extending the road through the adjacent
parcels (assessor parcel numbers 288-03-004 and 288-03-004) located at
the terminus of Campisi Way and construction of a new traffic signal
at the connection of Campisi Way with Campbell Avenue, including
modifications to the existing traffic signals at Union Avenue and
Campbell Avenue and at Bascom Avenue and Campbell Avenue to
accomodate the new signal.
b)
Campisi Way extension shall be constructed prior to occupancy of
any building area including new construction, or remodelling of
existing building area, which individually or collectively are
projected to contribute sufficient traffic volumes to cause more than
a 1 % increase in the delay for critical lane movements, measured in
seconds, through any signalized intersection which is operating at a
level of service E or worse, during the evening peak hour, or which
contributes sufficient traffic volumes to reduce the projected level of
service below level of service D for any signalized intersection, as
determined by the Campbell City Council.
c)
Owners of Parcels One and Two shall participate in the costs of
extending Campisi Way based on the projected peak hour trips from
new or remodeled construction. The total commitment shall be
apportioned to each parcel based on the projected peak hour trips
from new or remodeled construction, using benefit ratios to be
developed consistent with accepted assessment district practices. The
owners shall establish an accounting system to monitor and
reimburse each other for the costs of extending Campisi Way as
development related traffic impacts occur. The owners may agree to
exchange capacity rights, with the consent of the Campbell City
Council.
4)
Development Limits
New development on each parcel cannot exceed their proportionate share
of the traffic carrying capacity of the future Campisi Way extension, unless
capacity is transferred from the other parcel with the consent of the
Campbell City Council. These development limits are established for the
purposes of assessing the participation in the costs of extending Campisi
Way and do not supercede traffic standards established by the Santa Clara
Pruneyard Parcel Map Conditions
Page 3
June 23, 1993
County Congestion Management Agency, the City of Campbell or
requirements to assess and mitigate development impacts under the
California Environmental Quality Act.
5)
Bascom Avenue Signal
The City of Campbell plans to install a traffic signal in 1994, at the
northerly Bascom A venue driveway and the east west aligned perimeter
road serving the Prune yard, to improve access and circulation for the
Center. Owners of Parcels One and Two will reimburse the City for the
cost of design, construction and installation of the signal, prior to issuance
of certificates of occupancy or final inspection, whichever comes first, for
additions or reconstruction on each parcel in excess of 20,000 square feet.
Said reimbursement shall occur at the time of issuance of building
permits for said expansions. The amount of participation in the cost of
the signal shall be allocated based on the relative land areas of each parcel.
Owners shall sign a reimbursement agreement, setting forth the terms of
this condition.
6)
Assessment District
Owners agree to join and participate in any assessment district formed to
fund the construction of the Campisi Way extension.
7)
Parcel Two Access to Campisi Way
The owners of Parcel One shall grant to the owners of Parcel Two, a
minimum of two vehicular ingress-egress easements over driveway areas
to provide a direct connections from the extension of Campisi Way to
Parcel Two. The easements shall be at least 24 feet wide and shall be
spaced between the northerly property line and Campbell Avenue. The
precise easement locations shall be subject to the concurrence of the
property owners of Parcel One and Parcel Two and the City Council of the
City of Campbell.
8)
Property Interest
By recording this final parcel map, said owners declare that they represent
the entirety of property interests and there are no other separate property
interests in existence and that no additional property interests will be
created without first obtaining approval from the City of Campbell in
accordance with the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California.
9)
Covenant and Deed Restriction
The property owners shall record a covenant and deed restriction running
with the land, obligating existing and future property owners to the
foregoing conditions.
f-
Pruneyard Parcel Map Conditions
Page 4
June 23, 1993
If the following items are addressed in the final map document they do not
need to be covered in the above covenant:
1)
Parking Areas
Non-exclusive vehicular use by owners, occupants and permittees of the
parking areas of the parcels for parking purposes. Reciprocal parking
easements may be unnecessary if the parking ratio for each parcel
approximate the 1 space per 200 square feet of gross floor area for retail
uses and 1 space per 225 square feet of gross floor area for office uses.
2)
On-Site Utility Easements
Provision for utility easements including fire protection systems and
services.
3)
Emergency Access Easements
Delineation of all emergency access easements. The easements shall be a
sufficient width and distance from the buildings to ensure safe emergency
access to and around the buildings.
4)
Ingress and Egress
Owners agree to allow non-exclusive vehicular and pedestrian use by
owners, occupants, and permittees of all driveways, cruising lanes,
interior roadways and service roads in the shopping center and the office
center and pedestrian use of all common walkway areas. The ingress-
egress easements shall cover those portions of the common area of all
parcels, as improved by any person from time to time to furnish ingress
and egress between the public streets adjoining the shopping center and
office center and the parking areas and between portions of the common
area, individual parcels, and parking areas.
5)
Maintenance
Provision that all of the common pedestrian and vehicular circulation
areas and all common area landscaping shall be maintained in good order
and repair.
6)
Pedestrian and Bicycle Easement to the Los Gatos Creek Trail
Recordation of public access easements from Bascom Avenue and from
Campbell Avenue to the Los Gatos Creek Trail entrance at the north
westerly corner of parcel two. The easements shall be of sufficient width
and location to meet the access requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act. In no case shall the easement width be less than 12 feet.
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:
CITY OF CAMPBELL
Donald C. Wimberly
Director of Public Works
Ga~ K=qer. Traffic Enqineer~~
Revised Traffic Study Requirements for pruneyard
Date:
January 11, 1993
----------------------------------------------------------
d.
The proposed subdivision of the pruneyard raises
several, immediate concerns regarding traffic access and
circulation in the vicinity. The need is to identify problems
with existing access and circulation and determine whether the
proposed subdivision forecloses on our ability to solve those
problems, and also guides the city on how to condition the
subdivision of the parcels. The study would assume the same land
uses as now. Future year traffic issues are beyond the scope of
the this traffic study, although it is important that the city
independently assess likely future traffic conditions to
determine whether present problems are further exacerbated.
Scope of Traffic StudY
1. Issues and Known Problems:
a.
The main driveway from E. Campbell Avenue is offset from
Union Avenue to the extent that westbound left turning
traffic conflicts with both eastbound left turns into the
pruneyard as well as with outbound left turns. Additionally,
the distance for southbound right turns to the westbound
left turn lane is too short, so drivers attempting to turn
left onto Union after leaving the pruneyard cannot fully
enter the westbound left turn lane.
b.
The volume of traffic exiting the pruneyard at the north
driveway on Bascom and the main driveway on E. Campbell may
be sufficient to warrant signal controls. Warrants for
signal control should be calculated for both driveways,
assuming that other driveways could be closed Cie., assume
all traffic enters and leaves via these two driveways only).
Traffic safety in the vicinity is a problem in terms of
driveway accidents, accidents in the median, accidents at
signals, and pedestrian and bicycle accidents, and even
night accidents as related to levels of lighting.
c.
The southerly driveway on Bascom creates confusing traffic
memo.O30
g.
h.
i.
2.
a.
Donald C. Wimberly, RE pruneyard Traffic study
January 11, 1993
Page
2
movements in relation to the southbound right turn lane on
Bascom to westbound Campbell.
e.
Pedestrian and bike travel along the frontage is a problem
as is pedestrian and bike travel across SR 17 to and from
the site. Of note is the lack of a sidewalk along the south
frontage. Bike travel is also affected by the special right
turn lanes on southbound Bascom as well as the very wide
westbound curb lane on westbound Campbell.
f.
Several signalized intersections in the vicinity operate
near or at LOS F. These include: Bascom and Campbell, Bascom
& Hamilton, Campbell and Union, and Creekside and Hamilton
(especially considering the revision for the Vasona
Corridor). The signalized intersections of Campisi and
Creekside, and Bascom & Campisi should also be included in
traffic studies for the pruneyard even though they currently
operate at relatively high levels of service.
The ability of pedestrians to get across both Campbell and
Bascom to reach transit stops or uses on the other side of
the street is compromised by the high traffic volumes on
Bascom and on Campbell.
Transit transfers are a problem at Campbell and Bascom, and
the location of transit stops may not be optimum.
The present Circulation Element shows a direct connection
from Campisi to Campbell at Union. To what extent does the
proposed subdivision foreclose that option? Would this
connection increase travel demand on Union? Would this
connection eliminate traffic on Bascom, and especially, at
Bascom and Hamilton?
Scope of Work:
Existing Conditions should include a complete
description of the following:
(1) roadway system serving the site (out to 2 miles),
and including the internal roadway system
(2) other modes (bikes, pedestrians and transit)
(3) volumes - daily, and peaks, also Saturday peaks
(4) LOS with and without optimized signal timing at
appropriate signalized intersections, and all pruneyard
driveways
memo. 030
Donald C. Wimberly, RE pruneyard Traffic study
January 11, 1993
Page
3
(5) other traffic controls (medians, curb uses, loading,
turn restrictions, lane controls, etc.)
(6) origins and destinations of traffic using the street
system adjacent to the pruneyard
(7) accidents: rates per million VMT, per million
entering vehicles, night-day accidents, collision
diagrams for Campbell and for Bascom adjacent to
pruneyard
(8) appropriate data from a study of access and
circulation in the vicinity of the pruneyard by OKS
(9) available gaps for pedestrian crossings between
signals
(10) trip generation of existing uses, at present, and at
full occupancy of the entire pruneyard site, including
directional driveway counts for peak hours
Baseline Conditions:
b.
(1) Adjust existing system roadways with approved
projects (and full occupancy of pruneyard)
(2) Add approved trips to counts and recalculate LOS
(3) Recalculate LOS for all driveways with approved
trips
(4) Recalculate signal warrants with approved trips at any
potential signalized location (including driveways)
c.
Impact Assessments:
Because the proposal does not change the land use or
intensity, the issue of impacts is really: "what impacts are
caused by existing uses at the pruneyard?" The following
alternatives should be addressed in the study:
(1) Extension of Campisi through to Union - with 4
alignments: a) existing one-way pairs directly to
Campbell Avenue; b) use of one or the other of the one-
way pairs as a two-way street to Campbell Avenue; c)
realignment of the roadway to a point east of the
present intersection of the one-way streets; and d)
realignment so that the access drives are an extension
of Union Avenue.
(2) Assessment of these alternatives will address the
operational needs of Campbell and Union in terms of LOS,
and in terms of potential interference between the
movements on the access roads on the site with the
movements at Campbell and Union (turn lane storage
memo. 030
Donald C. Wimberly, RE pruneyard Traffic study
January 11, 1993
Page
4
needs, any potential queue extending from one to the
other intersection, etc.) Determination of whether a
signal warrant is met at the access drive intersection
with Campbell Avenue.
(3) Signalization of the north driveway on Bascom and
closure of the southerly driveway on Bascom (reassign
volumes according to these changes).
(4) Assess cut-through traffic potential if the access
drives are extended through to Campisi from Campbell.
(5) Assess the alternative of making the central driveway on
Bascom the main east side entrance to the site in terms
of on-site circulation and access to parking.
(6) Assess the needed cross-section on Campbell Avenue to
accommodate pedestrians, to make non-signalized
pedestrian crossings of Campbell safer, and the
provision of a sidewalk along the north side of Campbell
Avenue between Bascom and SR 17.
(7) Assess the benefits and costs of locating a transit
transfer station on the site, and alternatives for
providing for such a site. Coordinate with SCTA.
Mitigation:
d.
The mitigation of existing problems caused by existing
pruneyard trip generation as well as current pruneyard access and
circulation characteristics will be the conditions on the
subdivision. A complete plan of improvements addressing all the
problems noted in under: "1. Issues and Known Problems:" based
upon the evaluation of the alternatives above (plus any other
actions or alternatives suggested by project proponents) should
be developed treating the site as a whole. Then, the traffic
study must show that creation of the map will not make
realization of the plan of improvements more difficult than if
the site were not subdivided.
Another aspect that must be addressed if and when the site
is subdivided is development of a mechanism for equitable funding
and implementation of the plan of improvements. A policy for
distribution of the costs of any improvements must be prepared
and the basis for such a policy explained. For example an
assessment based upon square footage, or on vehicle trips could
be implemented. The schedule and phasing of improvements must
also be explained with any triggers for making phased
improvements fully described to the extent that the city could
incorporate the mechanism as conditions on the subdivision.
memo. 030
Donald C. Wimberly, RE pruneyard Traffic study
January 11, 1993
Page
5
Related Citv studies and studv Process
The city is completing a study of access and circulation to
the entire area including the pruneyard. The city will also
assess a scenario wherein the entire pruneyard increases in
intensity and also changes uses. The city will also forecast
traffic conditions to 2000. This information will also be
considered in the review of the proposal, but the Pruneyard
traffic consultant will not need to prepare any traffic studies
involving changes in intensity or use, nor in future year traffic
conditions. The city will also be preparing a deficiency plan for
the CMA intersections of Bascom & Hamilton, Bascom and Campbell,
and SR 17 and Hamilton.
It is appropriate that the city and consultant studies be
coordinated. The city also has various data and other services
that the traffic consultant may use at cost. A list of city
traffic engineering services and fees is described later in this
memo.
The consultant will need to collect much of the data from
the city's files and model. There is also a need to complete an
environmental checklist that is cognizant of the issues and
problems raised above. For example, mitigation of existing
problems may substantially alter traffic patterns in the area,
especially if internal roadways and driveways are modified at the
site. Any substantial alteration of existing traffic patterns
requires a substantive answer, and the traffic study should meet
this requirement.
The city's schedule for examining alternative land uses and
future conditions is to have the detailed forecasting tools
developed by the end of February, 1993 with forecasts of traffic
impacts of future conditions available in April, 1993. The
traffic consultant can also use the city's model to meet their
traffic study requirements. It is expected that the traffic
consultant and the city traffic engineer will provide traffic
information for the decision on approving or not approving the
parcel split. The data from the traffic engineer will not be
available until May, 1993.
List of Traffic Consultants
The following consultants have the breadth of experience and
professional staff to adequately complete the traffic study:
memo. 030
Donald C. Wimberly, RE pruneyard Traffic study
January 11, 1993
Page
6
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. - San Jose (408) 280-6600
CH2M Hill, San Jose - (408) 436-4909
Wilbur Smith Associates, San Jose - 297-5792
Schedule of Fees for Traffic Enaineerina Services
The City of Campbell, Public Works Department offers traffic
engineering services to the public as follows:
Intersection turn counts (two hour count)
Intersection turn counts (both a.m. and p.m. peak)
Average Daily Traffic, Weekday Average Traffic
$
$
$
0.00
57.00
114.00
Campbell Traffic Model: Full-Scope Traffic Study
$2,100.00
Campbell Traffic Model: Reduced-Scope Traffic Study $
Modeling Services:
700.00
Full Scope: impact assessments includes inserting the new
traffic analysis zones (for the project area) and
appropriate links into the network. Trip generation for the
new zones would be developed within the model based upon ITE
Trip Generation as well as the model trip generation
formulae. The model will be run for both the a.m. and p.m.
peak hours for existing, baseline and horizon year scenarios
with and without the proposed development. CMA intersections
and SR 17 will be examined to determine which of them the
project will impact and cause a 1% or greater increase in
Intersection Capacity utilization (ICU) through the project
increment trips. Specific volumes for the project, and
shifts in baseline volumes (ie., existing and approved trips
on the network disclaced by project trips) will be
transmitted to the developer's traffic consultant for
further analysis. (In the case of the Pruneyard ,- the shifts
in project volumes will not come because of changes in trip
generation, but due to changes in the network to correct the
traffic problems in the pruneyard Area.)
Reduced Scope: impact assessments will include the insertion
of new zones and links into the model. Trip generation would
be completed based upon model trip generation. The model
will be run for the a.m. and p.m. peak for baseline
conditions.
memo. 030
CITY OF CAMPBELL
MEMORANDUM
To:
steve Piasecki
Director of Planning
Date:
December 19, 1992
Subject:
Gary Kruqer, Traffic Enqineer ~. ~r
Traffic Studies for Pruneyard Subd1v1s1on ~
~~,
~
----------Ã~~~ñeã~sa-m~o-rna~er~îeWëäwnn-DoñWl00efly--------
regarding the scope of traffic studies for the subdivision of
~e~~~a~. .
From:
Please transmit this memo to Kenneth Rodriques if it is
acceptable to your department. For appropriate coordination
and communication, I will work through your department on
this project rather than communicate independently with Mr.
Rodriques.
cc:
Don Wimberly
Tim Haley
CCPA File
attach
gek: memo.O26
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF CAMPBELL
To:
Donald C. Wimberly
Direotor of Public Works
Date:
November 3, 1992
~O~
From:
Gary Kruger, Traffio Engineer
Subject:
Traffio Studies for pruneyard
----------------------------------------------------------
The proposed subdivision of the pruneyard raises
several, immediate concerns regarding traffic access and
circulation in the vicinity. The need is to identify problems
with existing access and circulation and determine whether
the proposed subdivision forecloses on our ability to solve
those problems, and also guides the city on how to condition
the subdivision of the parcels. The study would assume the
same land uses as now. Future year traffic issues are beyond
the scope of the this traffic study, although it is important
that the city independently assess likely future traffic
conditions to determine whether present problems are further
exacerbated.
Scope of Traffic Study
a.
b.
1. Issues and Known Problems:
The main driveway from E. Campbell Avenue is offset from
Union Avenue to the extent that westbound left turning
traffic conflicts with both eastbound left turns into
the pruneyard as well as with outbound left turns.
Additionally, the distance for southbound right turns to
the westbound left turn lane is too short, so drivers
attempting to turn left onto Union after leaving the
pruneyard cannot fully enter the westbound left turn
lane.
The volume of traffic exiting the Pruneyard at the north
driveway on Bascom and the main driveway on E. Campbell
may be sufficient to warrant signal controls. Warrants
for signal control should be calculated for both
driveways, assuming that other driveways could be closed
(ie., assume all traffic enters and leaves via these two
driveways only).
c.
Traffic safety in the vicinity is a problem in terms of
driveway accidents, accidents in the median, accidents
gek: memo.O19
Page
2
November 3, 1992
d.
at signals, and pedestrian and bicycle accidents, and
even night accidents as related to levels of lighting.
The southerly driveway on Bascom creates confusing
traffic movements in relation to the southbound right
turn lane on Bascom to westbound Campbell.
e.
Pedestrian and bike travel along the frontage is a
problem as is pedestrian and bike travel across SR 17 to
and from the site. Of note is the lack of a sidewalk
along the south frontage. Bike travel is also affected
by the special right turn lanes on southbound Bascom as
well as the very wide westbound curb lane on westbound
Campbell.
f.
Several signalized intersections in the vicinity operate
near or at LOS F. These include: Bascom and Campbell,
Bascom & Hamilton, Campbell and Union, Creekside and
Hamilton (especially considering the revision for the
Vasona Corridor), Campisi ann Crepk~;ne, ~nn BascQ~
~am~i. In addition, Bascom & Union in San Jose is a
prob m directly affected by pruneyard access and
circulation patterns.
g.
The ability of pedestrians to get across both Campbell
and Bascom to reach transit stops or uses on the other
side of the street is compromised by the high traffic
volumes on Bascom and on Campbell.
h.
Transit transfers are a problem at Campbell and Bascom,
and the location of transit stops may not be optimum.
i.
The present Circulation Element shows a direct
connection from Campisi to Campbell at Union. To what
extent does the proposed subdivision foreclose that
option? Would this connection increase travel demand on
Union? Would this connection eliminate traffic on
Bascom, and especially, at Bascom and Hamilton?
2.
Scope of Work:
a.
Existing Conditions should include a complete
description of the following:
(1) roadway system serving the site (out to 2 miles),
and including the internal roadway system
gek: memo.O19
Page
3
November 3, 1992
(2) other modes (bikes, pedestrians and transit)
(3) volumes - daily, and peaks, also Saturday peaks
(4) LOS with and without optimized signal timing at
appropriate signalized intersections
(5) other traffic controls (medians, curb uses, loading,
turn restrictions, lane controls, etc.)
(6) origins and destinations of traffic using the street
system adjacent to the pruneyard
(7) accidents: rates per million VMT, per million
entering vehicles, night-day accidents, collision
diagrams for Campbell and for Bascom adjacent to
pruneyard
(8) appropriate data from a study of access and
circulation in the vicinity of the pruneyard by DKS
(9) available gaps for pedestrian crossings between
signals
b.
Baseline Conditions:
(1) Adjust existing system roadways with approved
projects (and full occupancy of Pruneyard)
(2) Add approved trips to counts and recalculate LOS
(3) Recalculate LOS for all driveways with approved
trips
(4) Recalculate signal warrants with approved trips
3.
Mitigation:
Because the proposal does not change the land use or
intensity, the issue of mitigation is really: "what can be
done to correct the problems noted above?" The mitigation of
existing problems caused by pruneyard trip generation as well
as current pruneyard access and circulation characteristics
will be the conditions on the subdivision.
Of additional interest is the design of the access and
circulation on site. There are several circulation problems
on site at the pruneyard, and the subdivision should also not
foreclose on the ability to address these problems.
Related citv Studies and StudY Process
The city is completing a study of access and circulation
to the entire area including the pruneyard. The city will
also assess a scenario wherein the entire pruneyard increases
in intensity and also changes uses. The city will also
gek: memo.O19
Page
4
November 3, 1992
forecast traffic conditions to 2000. This information will
also be considered in the review of the proposal, but the
pruneyard traffic consultant will not need to prepare any
traffic studies involving changes in intensity or use, nor in
future year traffic conditions. The city will also be
preparing a deficiency plan for the CMA intersections of
Bascom & Hamilton, Bascom and Campbell, and SR 17 and
Hamilton.
It is appropriate that the city and consultant studies
be coordinated. The city also has various data and other
services that the traffic consultant may use at cost. A list
of city traffic engineering services and fees is described
later in this memo.
The consultant will need to collect much of the data
from the city's files and model. There is also a need to
complete an environmental checklist that is cognizant of the
issues and problems raised above. For example, mitigation of
existing problems may substantially alter traffic patterns in
the area, especially if internal roadways and driveways are
modified at the site. Any substantial alteration of existing
traffic patterns requires a substantive answer, and the
traffic study should meet this requirement.
The city's schedule for examining alternative land uses
and future conditions is to have the detailed forecasting
tools developed by the end of February, 1993 with forecasts
of traffic impacts of future conditions available in April,
1993. The traffic consultant can also use the city's model to
meet their traffic study requirements. It is expected that
the traffic consultant and the city traffic engineer will
provide traffic information for the decision on approving or
not approving the parcel split. The data from the traffic
engineer will not be available until May, 1993.
List of Traffic Consultants
The following consultants have the breadth of experience
and professional staff to adequately complete the traffic
study:
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. - San Jose (408) 280-6600
CH2M Hill, San Jose - (408) 436-4909
Wilbur smith Associates, San Jose - 297-5792
TJKM, Transportation Consultants, Pleasanton - (510) 463-0611
gek: memo.019
Page
5
November 3, 1992
Schedule of Fees for Traffic Enqineerinq Services
The City of campbell, Public Works Department offers
traffic engineering services to the public as follows:
Intersection turn counts (two hour count)
Intersection turn counts (both a.m. and p.m. peak)
$
$
$
0.00
57.00
114.00
Average Daily Traffic, Weekday Average Traffic
Campbell Traffic Model: Full-Scope Traffic Study
$2,100.00
Campbell Traffic Model: Reduced-Scope Traffic Study $
700.00
Modeling Services:
Full Scope: impact assessments includes inserting the
new traffic analysis zones (for the project area) and
appropriate links into the network. Trip generation for
the new zones would be developed within the model based
upon ITE Trip Generation as well as the model trip
generation formulae. The model will be run for both the
a.m. and p.m. peak hours for existing, baseline and
horizon year scenarios with and without the proposed
development. CMA intersections and SR 17 will be
examined to determine which of them the project will
impact and cause a 1% or greater increase in
Intersection Capacity utilization (ICU) through the
project increment trips. Specific volumes for the
project, and shifts in baseline volumes (ie., existing
and approved trips on the network disDlaced by project
trips) will be transmitted to the developer's traffic
consultant for further analysis. (In the case of the
pruneyard - the shifts in project volumes will not come
because of changes in trip generation, but due to
changes in the network to correct the traffic problems
in the pruneyard Area.)
Reduced Scope: impact assessments will include the
insertion of new zones and links into the model. Trip
generation would be completed based upon model trip
generation. The model will be run for the a.m. and p.m.
peak for baseline conditions.
gek: memo.019
ì
CITY OF CAMPBELL
70 NORTH FIRST STREET
CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008
(408) 866-2100
FAX # (408) 379.2572
Department:
Planning
August 12, 1992
Mr. Thomas E. Rotticci
Sectras Corporation
50 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Mr. Mark West
Perpetual Asset Management Company, Inc.
707 Broadway, Suite 1200
San Diego, CA 92101
Re: Application Number PM 92-03 located at 1875-1999 S. Bascom Avenue
(The Pruneyard) Notice of Incompleteness
Dear Mr. Rotticci and Mr. West:
The above referenced application to subdivide the Pruneyard is incomplete
because it does not include sufficient information satisfying parcel map
content requirements, code requirements for each new parcel, or
development standards. The following additional information is needed to
complete your application:
A. PARCEL MAP RE UIREMENTS
The following parcel map requirements are necessary to complete the
tentative map exhibit in conformance with the Subdivision Map Act and
local subdivision ordinances and to verify the application is submitted in
accordance with the Resolution Trust Corporation takeover of HomeFed
Bank.
1. Easements
Delineation of existing and proposed easements.
2. Street Dedication
Delineation of existing public right of way and proposed street dedication.
3. Trees
Delineation of existing trees (type and size exceeding 8 inches in diameter,
measured 2 feet above grade).
Pruneyard Tentativl. ¿~ap
page 2
8/12/92
4. Public Improvements
Delineation of existing and proposed public improvements.
5. RTC Concurrence
Provide a statement or information that the application is made with the
full knowledge of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC), and that the
application does not violate any of the provisions of the RTC "takeover"
of Home Fed bank.
B. CODEREOUllŒMENTS
The proposed lots must comply with all code requirements for landscaping,
parking, setbacks, access, building and fire codes and other applicable
development standards in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and as
provided by local subdivision and zoning ordinances. The application must
set forth:
1. Street Improvement Covenants
Covenants obligating the existing and future property owners to jointly
provide for street improvements, as required by Chapter 11.24 of the
Campbell Municipal Code, or condition of subdivision approval, and to
participate in any assessment district which may be formed for the
purposes of installation of said street improvements. (Section 20.16.035 f of
the Subdivision Ordinance)
2. Landscape Improvements
Covenants Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) ensuring the joint
development of landscape improvements along the public street
perimeter of all parcels within the subdivision boundaries. (Section
20.16.035 g of the Subdivision Ordinance)
3. Joint Maintenance
CC & Rs establishing a property owners association for joint maintenance
of reciprocal easements and perimeter landscape areas. (Section 20.16.035
h of the Subdivision Ordinance)
4. Parking Requirements
Information demonstrating that each parcel is self-sufficient in terms of
parking requirements to serve the existing or proposed uses on the parcel
unless parking is assured through permanent parking easements located
on nearby parcels (within 300 feet of the buildings or the center's public
entrance). (Section 20.16.035 c of the Subdivision Ordinance)
7. Utiliiy Easements
Provision for utility easements such as fire protection systems and
emergency access by the Fire Department. (Section 20.16.035 d of the
Subdivision Ordinance)
Pruneyard Tentativ... .vfap
page 3
8/12/92
8. Street Improvements
Map 3 of the Circulation Element of the Campbell General Plan indicates
the extension of Campisi Way through the pruneyard center. It is
necessary to prepare a study demonstrating that the subdivision will not
delay or disrupt future public street improvements including a plan line
study of the precise alignment of Campisi and the affect of the map upon
the proposed plan line. A specific strategy should be proposed which
ensures public street improvements will be installed in a timely manner.
The street improvement requirements for the center should be reviewed
with the Public Works Department. (Section 20.16.035 e of the
Subdivision Ordinance)
9. Building and Fire Code
Review of proposed property lines in relation to structures on each parcel
to ensure conformance with the 1992 Uniform Building Code and the
Uniform Fire Code.
C. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. Landscaping
Review the provision of landscaping on a parcel by parcel basis. The
percentage of landscaping on each parcel should be calculated and
compared to the 10% requirement in the C-2 zoning district. A review
should also demonstrate the parcels provide continuous landscaping
along existing and planned public street frontages. (C-2 Zoning District,
Municipal Code Sections 21.24.070 and 21.57.020 B)
2. Landscape Screening and Lighting Adjacent to Residential
Provide a minimum six foot masonry wall and landscape screening to
effectively screen the commercial from adjoining residential areas. Also,
demonstrate there is no lighting glare from the commercial onto adjacent
residential areas. (C-2 Zoning District, Municipal Code Sections 21.24.100 A
and B)
3. Access to the Los Gatos Creek Trail
Demonstrate how users of the individual parcels will gain access to the
Los Gatos Creek Trail which is currently provided at the north west corner
of the site.
Pruneyard Tentativ
Jap
page 4
8/12/fJ1.
4. Parking Analysis
A parking and loading analysis evaluating the building usage by gross
square footage, seating, or number of rooms on a parcel by parcel basis to
demonstrate compliance with the off-street parking requirements. The
analysis should include the following:
a. The total number of parking spaces.
b. The number of parking spaces on each parcel.
c. The gross building area.
d. The gross floor building area on each parcel.
e. Current and proposed uses on each property.
f. The number of standard and compact parking stalls and the ratio of
compact and standard on each parcel.
g. Loading areas to serve each individual building or use on each
parcel.
(Commercial Parking requirements, Municipal Code Section 21.50.050)
5. Parking Accumulation Study
If the parking standards are not met then it will be necessary to submit a
parking accumulation study supporting the joint use of the parking
facilities between the various uses on the site and that the number of
parking spaces is sufficient to accommodate the demand based upon the
full occupancy of the Pruneyard Center. (Commercial Parking
requirements, Municipal Code Section 21.50.040 B)
6. Traffic Assessment
Traffic study evaluating the impact of extending Campisi Way as
recommended by your traffic engineer in the plan line study, including
the potential for residential cut-through traffic, and the potential to serve
future modifications to the center.
The above information should be provided at the earliest possible date to
expedite processing of your application. Should you have any questions,
please contact us at 866-2140.
SincJely, .. /)
/~/j~ ~,
---/ S~e~i
Director of Planning
cc:
Kevin Hanson, HomeFed Bank
Chuck Toeniskoetter
Mayor Don Burr
Joan Bollier, City Engineer
Bill Seligmann, City Attorney
(
CITY OF CAMPBEll
70 NORTH FIRST STREET
CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008
(408) 866-2100
FAX # (408) 379-2572
Department:
Planning
August 12, 1992
Mr. Thomas E. Rotticci
Sectras Corporation
50 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Mr. Mark West
Perpetual Asset Management Company, Inc.
707 Broadway, Suite 1200
San Diego, CA 92101
Re: PM 92-031875-1999 S. Bascom Avenue (The Pruneyard) Parcel Map Issues
Dear Mr. Rotticci and Mr. West:
The 27 + / - acre pruneyard Center is the largest retail office complex within
the City of Campbell. The long term viability of The pruneyard is essential to
the economic and fiscal health of the City. The application to subdivide the
Pruneyard center into four parcels may compromise the long term viability of
the center and limit the development options of subsequent property owners.
As a single parcel, the property owner(s) have the greatest possible flexibility
when planning new buildings, uses or building expansions. Subdivision into
four parcels carves up the buildable area and severely limits the flexibility for
future uses. These development issues are not directly addressed in the
technical application materials. These issues are important to the City and
need to addressed as the application is processed.
HomeFed Bank and Bank of America should evaluate submitting an
application to rezone to the Planned Development District and prepare a
master development plan which delineates the long term development for
the property. This plan would put prospective purchasers on notice of the
property owner's and the City's plans for the center and outline public
improvement and development responsibilities for subsequent property
owners. Such a plan would attempt to anticipate the cumulative impacts of
the application. A master plan could be structured to address many of the
technical issues raised in the enclosed Notice of Incompleteness letter dated
August 12, 1992.
Pruneyard Tentativ. Jap
page 2
8/12/92
I am glad we had an opportunity to meet on Monday August 10, 1992. I hope
the issue of subdivision and long term viability of the center can be resolved
in a manner which is satisfactory to the City and the property owners.
Sincerely, ~
I, ¡
,'I ~.
C ~i
Director of Planning
cc:
Kevin Hanson, HomeFed Bank
Chuck Toeniskoetter
Mayor Don Burr
Joan Bollier, City Engineer
CITY OF CAMPBELL
MEMORANDUM
From:
Tim Haley
Associate Planner
Mike Fuller ;1YltLZ ~J
Assistant EngineJr
Date:
August 10, 1992
To:
Subject:
Referral of Tentative Parcel Map/Lot Line Adjustment
PM 92-03; 1875-1900 S. Bascom Avenue; pruneyard
----------------------------------------------------------
Our comments regarding the pruneyard tentative parcel map are as
follows:
fì
1) Parcell and Parcel 3 have no frontage upon a public street,
which violates section 20.16.030 of the Campbell Municipal
Code.
2) The Parcel Map conflicts with the City Council adopted
Circulation Element of the City of Campbell General Plan
which shows the extension of Campisi Way through the subject
parcel as a Class II Collector Street.
The Public Works Department recommends that division of the
pruneyard not be permitted before the completion of a
comprehensive land use and transportation master plan. This
plan must address the current land use and transportation issues
as well as those associated with redevelopment of the site.
There are a number of deficiencies associated with the current
street arrangement and on-site circulation at the Pruneyard:
A) A signal is needed on Bascom Avenue at the northerly
pruneyard driveway.
B) The southerly driveway on Bascom Avenue creates a
confusing confluence of movements.
C) Sidewalk is lacking along the Campbell Avenue frontage of
the Pruneyard.
D) The intersections of Union Avenue and Campbell Avenue and
the pruneyard driveway and Campbell Avenue are inefficient
and confusing.
E) The relationship of the pruneyard to other land uses and
transportation facilities need careful study.
These issues must be addressed with this tentative parcel map.
cc: Don Wimberly
Joan Bollier
8/10/92
CONFIDENTIAL
Meeting with Mayor Burr, Charles Toenisksoetter, Thomas Rotticci (Bank of
America), two representatives of Home Federal, Barbara Lee
Pruneyard Shopping Center
Charles Toeniskoetter, explained that the various representatives wanted to
share their thoughts, comments, re the pruneyard and the application
submitted to Planning Department with Mayor.
B of A responsible for Office Towers.
Home Fed responsible for Shopping Center and Prune yard Inn.
Want parcelization from a business standpoint. Ultimately easier to sell.
Rotticci of B of A said Towers are about 80 - 85% leased, but what would help
their leasing efforts is a viable Shopping Center.
Home Fed reps said they are working on potential leases such as Marshall's
for the Food Villa space, Trader Joe's for the ashman's site (Oshman's has
indicated they do not wish to renew in Oct), a couple of restaurants for the
Cookbook site.
Home Fed rep showed proposed map with 4 separate parcels.
In order to make improvements to the Shopping Center, to make it more
attractive to potential tenants, they need the RTC to free up the needed
dollars. Home Fed folks indicated that if they are able to tell RTC that
parcelization is possible (making ulitmate sale of each parcel easier than a
future sale of the whole thing) that the prospect of spending money on the
site for improvements looks better to RTC, ie: if RTC makes dollars available
for improvements, ultimately, they can sell the properties.
Home Fed would like the Inn separate bacause they also have the Campbell
Inn and want to package those two-maybe sell them to one owner.
Mayor Burr first shared the fact that he and the rest of the Council want the
Pruneyard to be a vital, successful shopping center.
Mayor Burr indicated he could only really speak for himself and shared
concerns re multiple parcels: dealing with multiple owners in the future; not
enough parking on the site-individual parcels aren't self sufficient for
parking; General Plan calls for extension of Campisi;
Meeting Re Pruneyard
Page 2
circulation issues on the site; landscaping; traffic signal at the Bascom
Ave driveway needed; and he indicated he understood staff may have
other issues, more technical issues. He also indicated that he believed
these issues would be of concern to the whole Council.
Mayor suggested they work with staff to work through these issues.
One of the Home Fed reps indicated that he had concerns about
requiring a developer (or HomeFed?) to put in the Campisi Way
extension. Mayor Burr explained that this has been called for in our
General Plan, we now have a subdivision request, and we need to talk
about it.
Because RTC is now involved, the Home Fed reps indicated how
important time is to them. They want to know what staff wants in the
way of addtional info or materials for their application, very quickly.
We indicated this would be passed on the the Planning Director and
Mayor Burr suggested the group stop by and see the Planning Director
after our meeting.
cc:
City Council
Mark Ochenduszko
Steve Piasecki
TO:
Mayor Don Burr
FROM:
Steve Piasecki, Director of Planning
DATE:
August 6, 1992
SUBJECT:
Pruneyard Issue Summary
Overview
The pruneyard Center is a key part of the central Campbell planning area and
it's economic viability is essential to the City as a whole. Subdividing the
Pruneyard shopping center and office towers raises several public related
concerns about the impact upon the land use and transportation planning for
the Prune yard and about future redevelopment and long term viability of the
site. Also, there are a number of technical issues associated with the proposed
map. The following summarizes these issues.
Land Use ElemenURedevelopment or Expansion
The Planning Department work program includes a review of the
Pruneyard/Prometheus block to evaluate alternative land uses. Parcelization
complicates the ability to renovate the center in the future. The City will be
dealing with multiple property owners with their own self-interests and lose
flexibility when the best location of a future buildings crosses one or more of
the property lines. Also, the proposed parcels may result in left-over splinter
parcels that are unbuildable if any public right-of-way is dedicated.
Traffic Circulation/Street Improvements
The current Circulation Element of the General Plan calls for the extension of
Campisi Way through the Pruneyard. Also, the Public Works Department
has identified several deficiencies associated with the current street
arrangement and on-site circulation as follows:
--
1) A signal is needed on Bascom Avenue at the north Pruneyard
driveway. The temporary signal at Tower Records would be removed.
2) The southerly driveway on Bascom creates a confusing series of
vehicular movements that need to be resolved.
3) Sidewalks are lacking along the Campbell A venue frontage and the
walks along the Bascom frontage do not meet standard widths.
4) The Union Avenue intersection with Campbell Avenue and the
westerly driveway are inefficient and confusing and need to be studied.
5) The relationship of the center to other land uses in the area needs to
be studied.
\- i..A t .1.
\ \ .'
(Ç£[Mi]~[ID~[L[L ~~~~ [Q)~~£~u[Mi]~[N]u
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
Name of Facility:
Pruneyard Inn
Location:
1875-1900 S. Bascom Ave.
Applicant:~erpet.u..aJ AsseLManagemenLCompany
Address:
707 Broadway#1200. San Diego. CA 921..Qj
Const. Type:_Grp_New:_Remodel:_A/S~
Stories:_Square Feet_P.C.#PM 92-03
\
\
1.
Exterior walls of the group B division 2 occupancies located
within 20 feet of the proposed property line shall be of one
hour fire resistive construction. All openings in such walls
shall be 3/4 hour fire assemblies where located within ten
feet of the property line and no openings are permitted within
five feet of the property line. U.B.C. section 504 and table 5-A.
2.
Exterior walls of the group R division 1 occupancy located
within 5 feet of the property line shall be of one hour fire
resistive construction with no openings permitted. U.B.C.
section 504 and table 5-A.
3.
Two fully complying exits are required from the rear exit
court of the motel U.B.C. section 3311.
4.
Where the property line extends through the building, each
building created by that property line shall have one hour rated
fire walls without openings at the new property line as
required in U.B.C. section 504 and table 5-A
5.
Parapets are required at walls of group B division 2
occupancies located within 10 feet of a property line and on
walls of group R division 1 occupancies located within 5 feet
of a property line. U.B.C. section 1709.
6.
The proposed property line extends to the group B division 2
occupancy at three points at the back of the building, causing
exits leading to the back of the building to be blocked.
7.
The location of the pool equipment building with respect to the
proposed property line will require further evaluation since
this area contains hazardous materials.
8.
Additional fire protection facilities may be required on each of
the two properties since access to both properties will be
impaired.
9.
The applicant should provide a complete study of this proposal
to insure that all conditions are fully assessed. Our comments
address concerns that are obvious based on the limited
information provided, and should not be considered a complete
review of all fire and life safety code violations created by
this proposal.
\)~ L~
~, ~ ~-?~
Pruneyard Issues Memo
Page 2
August 6, 1992
These issues and any associated with redevelopment of the center need to be
addressed. Subdividing the center into multiple ownerships confuses all of
these issues and makes resolution extremely difficult. Subdivision may only
make sense after preparation of a comprehensive land use and transportation
study.
Landscape Improvements
The Pruneyard Center lacks consistent or adequate landscaping along the
street frontage.
Technical Issues
The proposed property lines need to be reviewed for fire safety setbacks and
code requirements. For instance, no evidence has been submitted that the
Pruneyard Inn walls are designed to accomodate the fire code relative to the
proposed property lines.
The pruneyard is deficient in parking. Subdivision of the center necessitates
recordation of cross parking easements. The existence of cross easements
benefitting other property owners complicates their ability to expand or
renovate their portion of the center until permission is granted to remove or
modify the reciprocal easements. The materials submitted thus far have not
identified how the parking deficiency will be rectified.
Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC)
Home Fed Bank, which owns the retail portion of the Pruneyard including
the Pruneyard Inn, was taken over by the RTC o~uly 6, 1992. ..We are not
sure what affect this may have on the subâìvìsion application. Also, I heard a
rumor about someone considering demolishing the center for
condominiums. These issues may be raised in your meeting on monday.
cc:
Mark Ochenduszko, City Manager
Don Wimberly, Public Works Director
Bill Seligmann, City Attorney
BROBECK, PHLEGER & HARRISON
One Market Plaza
Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 442-0900
ENCLOSURE MEMORANDUM
RE91VED
JUL 2 7 1992
Date:
July 24, 1992
í..IÎY o~ C:,/oW JcLl
PLANNING Dt:p f.
To:
Ms. Karon Shaban
Planning Department Secretary
City of Campbell
70 North First Street
Campbell, California 95008
Re:
Planning File No. PM 92-03
1875 South Bascom Avenue
PruneYard Shopping Center and Towers
Herewith the following:
Check for $90.00 balance due with respect to the above-
referenced parcel map application, together with City
of Campbell fee schedule and receipt for $1980.00
previously paid.
By
L.
Enclosures
cc:
Mr. Thomas E. Rotticci
Michael J. Lazarus, Esq.
G:\PB\CGA\O72492C.CGA
BPHSF124JUL92B
frY? ~C¡~=9 3
?rur7~q
July 15, 1992
[õ) ~ fro ~ n \V1f~ IõJ
U\\ JUL 1 ß 1992. .-
steven Piasecki
Planning Director
City of Campbell
70 North First street
Campbell, CA 95008
CITY OF l.,."-\i~:'
:~ \-L..
PLANNING DE.fCJAt;¡ 1 IV' t:N T
RE:
Application of Perpetual Asset Management Company,
Inc. (PAKCO) and Sectras corporation (Sectras) for
Parcel Map: The PruneYard and Towers Properties
Dear Mr. piasecki:
Enclosed for filing on behalf of PAMCD and Sectras
corporation is an application for a four-parcel subdivision of
the PruneYard and Towers properties, encompassing the PruneYard
Shopping Center, The PruneYard Inn, the Towers I and the Towers
II buildings. Included are the City's application form (signed
by Sectras and PAMCD, as "Subdividers," and Sandis and
Associates, as "Engineer"), five (5) copies and one (1) sepia of
a draft tentative parcel map prepared by Sandis and Associates on
behalf of the property owners, one 8~ x 11" reduced copy of the
map, two (2) copies of the most recent preliminary Title Report
for the properties, and two (2) copies of a preliminary draft of
a "Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions and Grant of
Reciprocal Easements for The PruneYard Center."
We request that this application be processed as
expeditiously as possible.
As you know, all of the property encompassed by this
parcel map was previously owned or controlled by Fred and Helen
Sahadi. They encumbered portions of the property to secure loans
in favor of a number of lenders, including HomeFed Bank and
Security Pacific National Bank. PAMCD, which is an affiliate of
HomeFed Bank, acquired title to all of the property in January,
1991 pursuant to a settlement agreement with the Sahadis.
Sectras, an affiliate of Security Pacific National Bank (now Bank
of America N.T. & S.A.), acquired title to the Towers I and
Towers II buildings, and related real property, by virtue of a
foreclosure sale held on April 15, 1992.
As you also know from previous discussions with the
undersigned or other representatives of Sectras and PAMCD, it is
our understanding and belief that there currently exist a number
G:\PB\CGA\O71592B.OO3
BPHSF1 15JUL92A
T
steven Piasecki
city of Campbell
Page 2
July 15, 1992
of legal parcels within the boundaries covered by the within map.
These parcels were legally created under the Subdivision Map Act
and related laws and ordinances. This is true under both the so-
called "financing exception" provided in the Map Act, and by
virtue of creation of these parcels prior to the effective date
of the current Map Act, such that the parcels are "grandfathered"
under the Map Act. The parcels created in this fashion, however,
may not be the most advantageous to the City of Campbell or the
property owners.
From our past discussions with you and your Department,
we believe that it may be more practical for all concerned to
have the property parcelized in accordance with the enclosed map.
Accordingly, the enclosed application to create a four-lot
parcelization has been designed to meet the business needs of the
owners, while providing the City of Campbell with greater
confidence that the property will be held, operated and
ultimately disposed of in a manner which satisfies the City's
planning and other municipal goals.
You will note that the enclosed draft Declaration of
Covenants and Restrictions and Grant of Reciprocal Easements
shows the declarant to be PAMCO only. We will shortly submit a
revised version of this Declaration which shows Sectras as a
declarant with respect to the Towers I and Towers II parcels.
The substance of the Declaration will not change.
Also, PAMCO currently owns the two "wing parcels",
which are within the boundaries of Parcel 3 on the enclosed map.
PAMCO and Sectras currently are negotiating to convey title to
these two parcels to Sectras, and the enclosed application is
submitted on the assumption that this conveyance will take place
at or prior to the time the map is approved and recorded.
Finally, in the course of finalizing this parcel map,
we will be working with chicago Title Insurance Company to
eliminate many of the record easements and restrictions which
were created during the years that the Sahadis owned this
property. The goal is that easements, utilities, and public
access rights in and over the property will be reflected only in:
(i) recorded easements in favor of public utilities and other
third parties, (ii) the recorded parcel map, and (iii) the
recorded Declaration.
G:\PB\CGA\O71592B.OO3
BPHSF1 15JUL92A
¡
steven Piasecki
City of Campbell
Page 3
July 15, 1992
We look forward to working with you and your colleagues
in the City Planning Department to finalize this parcel map.
Please feel free to contact the applicants in care of
the undersigned at the addresses and numbers set forth below.
hristopher- .--Arno! , on behalf 0
-.--
ectr~~orporation
~B ÐDêck, Phleger & Harrison
One Market Plaza
Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 442-0900
~
'.
~., .;: ----"'"'
Michael J. Laza s, q., on behalf of
Perpetual Asset Man e ent Co., Inc.
1875 South Bascom Avenue, Ste 2440
Campbell, CA 95008
Telephone: (408) 371-0811
è :--
cc:
Mr. Mark West (wjo enclosures)
Michael McAndrews, Esq. (wjo enclosures)
Mr. Thomas E. Rotticci (wjo enclosures)
Susan R. Diamond, Esq. (wjo enclosures)
G:\PB\CGA\O71592B.OO3
BPHSF1 15JUL92A
r