Loading...
PD Permit - 1983 . 6L /:z;,;;r PUBLIC HEARINGS AND Planned Development Permit - 920 E. Hamilton Avenue- T. Fleischli - PD 83-04 - (Cont'd. 11/1/83) a) Conversion Impact Report - Resolution No. 6642 ( (' Introduction of Ordinance - Planned Development Permit INTRODUCTION OF ORDINMCES Assistant City Manager Duggan - Report elated Decelllber 6, 1983. Mayor Paul declared the public hearing open and asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak regarding the Conversion Dnpact Report. Timothy Lundell, 1725 S. Bascan Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council on behalf of the Hamilton Mobile Home Park residents and expressed concerns regarding the Conversion Dmpact Report. Frank Freeland, 429 Dunster 12, Campbell, appeared before the Council and expressed his concems on behalf of the senior citizens. There ~ng no one else wishing to be heard, MIS: Ashwor~Kotowski - that the public hearing be closed. ~ MIS: Ashworth, Chamberlin - to adopt a resolution accepting the Conversion Impact Report, PD 83-04. Motion adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES Councilmembers: Chamberlin, Ashworth, Doetsch, Kotowski, Paul NOES Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Counc i lmembe r. : lIone Planning Director Kee - Report dated December 6, 1983. Mayor Paul stated that this matter was continued from the November 1, 1983 City Council Meeting but that it is not a continued public hearing. Following discussion, Mayor Paul stated that he would allow individuals to speak if they had new information to present, but wamed that they would be ruled out of order if the testimony was not new information. William Podgorsek, 860 Virginia Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and expressed his concerns regarding the project. Mr. Podgorsek stated that if the project is approved, then the citizens of Campbell have no altemative but to go to the referendum process. (tb/Jt-cr / J, -fr:, -?# n;¿' a 6 month time limit from the effective date of the ordinance for the completion of the relocation study. Motion adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES Counci1members: Chamberlin, As~worth, Doetsch, Kotowski, Paul NOES Councilmembers: None ABSENT: CouncilmeJllbers: None -- -- '- .-< JZ~~. PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 9:5014-2:57:5 (408) 446-0157 August 23, 1984 HAND DELIVERED The Honorable DuWayne Dickson Chairman Planning Commission City of Campbell 75 No. Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 RE: HAMILTON PARK Dear DuWayne: I would again like to thank you and other members of the Planning Commission for the tremendous amount of time spent considering the many planning issues involved in development of the Hamilton Mobile Home Park site. In my view, the key to developing a concensus plan for the property requires active involvement by the Planning Commission and members of the community early on in the planning process. It is my sincere hope that with this involvement, the final plan for the property will be acceptable to all parties. In this regard, I respectfully request the opportunity to present alternative conceptual site plans to the Planning Commission during a study session to be held at your earliest convenience. At this study session, conceptual site plans would be presented for your preliminary comments. Based on this feedback, we could proceed with the refined design of a preferred site plan or plans for further review. Through this process, the ultimate plan for the property will respond to the extent possible to the concerns of the Planning Commission and members of the community. -- I sincerely appreciate the effort you and members of the Planning Commission have made to assist us in developing a successful plan for the property, and I believe through continued dialogue and study we will be successful in achieving that end. Sincerely, [R{ IH~ Œ ~WŒ ~ AU G 2 :) 1984 Thomas E. Fleischli Project Manager TEF:lb CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT - . PACIFIC GAB AND ELECTRIC COMPANY J}D CItr ~ IE + 1 11 A L MAD E N B 0 U LEV A RD. SAN J 0 S E. CALI FOR N I A 1m 9 ~ ~°rè f¡9M fé3 rm & !'f'~( ~ :;8~ lOJ May 23, 1984 CITY OF" CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mr. Thomas Fleischli Project Manager Prometheus Development Company 10080 North Wolfe Road, Suite 201 Cupertino, CA 95014-2575 --- Proposed Campbell Office Park Complex @ El Patio Substation Site, Santa Clara County Our File 610.4 (Sale-0153) Dear Mr. Fleischli: A proposal to purchase Company lands off Hamilton Avenue was submitted with your letter of December 15, 1984. The proposed use of this property was for vehicular parking lot facilities in conjunction with your proposed Campbell Office Park Complex. Although the proposed parking facility use is generally consistent with PGandE's policies, the Electric Operating and Engineering Departments have reviewed your proposal and found it too incompatible because of conflicts with Company's access and operations. Therefore, we must, regretfully, deny your request to purchase, lease or use this parcel of land. /- If you have any questions or wish to discuss the matter further, you may telephone me on (408) 298-3333, extension 105. The actual job is being handled by Mr. C. Earl Nelson who may be reached on extension 449. Sincerely, « r::. ß:~ f{~þl L. E. ENGLUNrÏJ .....~, Division Land Supervisor cc: Mr. Arthur A. Kee /" Planning Director 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 t2d- ~ NOTE: ~.è original copy of this re.l:',-,..:-t mis-stated on Page Four the net tax increment generated from the project as $3.5 million. The actual amount of net ,tax increment from this project after repayment of the $1.4 million participation loan would be $35 million. --- K. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY -- Proposed Redevelopment Agency Participation in ...., .,. ()TT;l""P ...--..:. -.... RECOMMENDATION: '. That the Redevelopment Agency confirm the business terms of the proposed particip~tion agreement between the Campbell Redevelopment Agency and the Prometheus,' Development Company (900 East Hamilton Avenue). The actual drafting of a formal agreement should wait until after the results of the June 5 referendum are known. DISCUSSION: Staff has negotiated a proposed agreement with the' Prometheus Development Company calling for Redevelopment Agency participation of $1.4 million in the 900 East Hamilton Avenue traffic improvement or relocation costs. The developer's current obligation in these two areas totals an estimated $5~5 million. The proposed agree- ment, which is described in, the attached memorandum, provides that the developer will front all of the costs for the improvements and the relocation, and requires the Agency to repay 'the developer for its share of the costs only after tax increments are received from the project. The attached memorandum also ,summarizes some of the reasons justifying the Agency's participation in this privately sponsored project. PREPARED BY: City Manager's Office A~: April 3,1984 r I I CITY OF CAMPBELL I I L 75 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008 (408) 378-8141 Department: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE February 1, 1984 Thomas Fleischli Prometheus Development Company 10080 North Wolfe Road, suite 201 cupertino, CA 95014-2575 Dear Mr. Fleischli: This letter responds to your letter of January 4, 1984, re- questing that the Redevelopment Agency pay the costs of the traffic improvements required as a condition of approval for PD 83-04. As you know, a referendum petition opposing the Council's approval of PD 83-04 has been submitted to the City Clerk. The petition has approximately 2,700 signatures and is likely, therefore, to force the City Council to choose between rescinding the PD 83-04 approval or calling for a special election on the matter in conjunction with the June 5, 1984 statewide primary election. As a result, the planning approval required for your project is suspended pending final disposition by either the City Councilor the Campbell electorate. I l- The Redevelopment Agency believes that it is now appropriate to begin discussions with you on the question of Agency parti- cipation in the traffic improvements required as a condition of project approval. However, it must be understood in commencing those discussions that any agreement which may be achieved is contingent upon voter approval of the PD zoning, or more accurately, on voter rejection of the referendum question. If the election results overturn the zoning decision, any agreement which might have been reached by the Redevelopment Agency and Prometheus Development Company would be voided. In order to assure the Agency of your understanding of the contingent nature of these discussions, I am requesting that both you and Sanford sign one copy of this letter and return it to me. Upon receipt of your signed response, I will schedule a meeting to discuss the Agency's response to your request for financial assistance on the public improvement costs. Sincerely, Edward G. Schilling Executive Director Campbell Redevelopment Agency ,I CITY OF CAMPBEll Thomas Fleischli February 1, 1984 Page 2 I understand that any agreement which the Prometheus Development Company may negotiate with the Campbell Redevelopment Agency is contingent upon the defeat of the referendum question which may be placed before the electorate on June 5,1984. If the City Councilor the voters cause the ordinance to be overturned, any agreement between the Prometheus Development Company and the Redevelopment Agency would be void. -- Sanford N. Diller President Prometheus Development Co. Thomas E. Fleischli Project Manager PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 95014-2575 (408) 446-0157 January 19, 1984 ~ ~A~ ~ 3U 1~4Œ W CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mrs. Anne G. Coyne City Clerk City of Campbell 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 RE: 900 EAST HAMILTON AVENUE PD 83-04 Dear Anne: - I recently received a copy of Ordinance #1493 approving the re- ferenced application. I have reviewed Exhibit D to said ordinance entitled "Conditions of Approval", and I am concerned about Conditions #36 and #39 as they differ from my notes taken at the Council hearing of December 6, 1983. Specifically, Condition #36 regarding an elevated ingress- egress connection from the proposed parking structure is clearly a Phase II requirement as the parking structure will not be built during Phase I. Similarly, Condition #39 regarding a grade separated pedestrian crossing of the on-site public street is proposed as a Phase II improvement as at-grade pedestrian access to the easterly parking area is provided during Phase I. The ordinance, as written, requires that these improvements be completed prior to occupancy of Phase I. My notes indicate the Council modified these conditions to provide for their satisfaction prior to occupancy of Phase II. I would appreciate you researching this at your earliest convenience, and effecting the appropriate modification. Thank you. Tomas E. FIe schli Project Manager TEF:lb cc: Edward Schilling Arthur Kee /' Joseph Elliott ~ ~~~ ~\W~ ~ JAN 2 3 1984 CITY OF CAMPBELL. PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 20,1983 Second Reading- Ordinance No. 1493 - Planned Development Pexmit - 920 E. Hamilton Avenue - T. Fleischli - PD 83-04 r- -- . . ~, Councilman Ashworth requested that .econd reading of this ordinance be continued to the January 3, 1984 City Council Meeting and cited reasons for his request. Following discussion, M/S: Ashworth, Doetsch - that second reading of Ordinance No. 1493 be continued to the January 3, 1984 City Council Meeting. Motion failed by a 2-3-0 vote, Councilmembers Chamberlin, Kotowski, and Paul voting "No". MIS: Chamberlin, Kotowski - to approve second reading of Ordinance No. l493 - Planned Development Permit - 920 E. Hamilton Avenue - T. Fleischli - PD 83-04. Motion adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES Councilmembers: Chamberlin, KotCMski, Paul NOES Councilmembers : Ashworth, Doetsch ABSENI': Councilmembers: None At this time, Mayor Paul read, for the record, a statement he prepared regarding the circulation of a referendum petition. . . ORDINANCE NO. 1493 BEING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CI'IY CD1NCIL OF 1HE t!:I1Y OF CAMPBElL AOOPTING PLANS, ELEVATIONS & DEVELOPMENT SQŒOOLE FOR mE PLANNED DEVELOP- MENT WNE ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE OF THE CI1Y OF CN-fi'BELL (APPLICATION OF MR 'IHOf>1AS FLEISæLI, PD 83-04). The City Cotncil of the City of Campbell does ordain as follows: SECTION ONE: That the Zoning Map of the City of Qunpbell is hereby changed and amended by adopting the attached Exhibit A entitled Plans and Elevations; Exhibit B entitled ~velopment Schedule; Exhibit C en- titled ~bp of Said Property; and Exhibit D entitled Conditions of Approval, as per the application of Mr. Thomas Fleisch1i for approval of plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of an office complex on property known as 920 E. Hænil ton Avenue in a . Planned ~velopment Zoning District. Copies of said Exhibits are on file in the Office of the Planning Iepartment. SECTION 1WO: This ordinance shall become effective thirty days following its passage and adoption and shall be published once within 15 days upon passage and adoption in the Campbell Press, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Campbell, Cotnty of Santa Clara. PASSED AND AOOPfED this 20th day of following roll call vote: December, 1983 by the AYES: NOES : ABsmr : Co tn ci lmen : Cotncilmen : Cotmcilmen: Chamberlin, Kotowski, Paul Ashworth, Doetsch .' None -- AITEST: THE FOREGOING I',STRUMENT IS A TRU!: MID CaE,,:::;, ce;' C;. THE ORIGII;AL or, FILE L, T:i!3 Ci Fie::. AT,'::ST: Am!!: G, CDY::", CITY CLERK CITY OF MPJELL, CA~iFaR¡'¡IA BY DATED -- ,- -'-' EXHIBIT B - DEVELO~fB'IT SŒŒIULE FILE NO: PD 83-04 APPLICANT: Fleischli, T. 900 E. Hamilton Avenue - A General Partnership SITE: 920 E. Hamilton Avenue 1. Proposed construction to conmence June - September, 1984 - Phase 1. Proposed CDnstruction of Phase II to coJl1l\ence January 1986. 2. 3. Construction proposed for CDmpletion, Phases I and II, June - September, 1987. EXHIBIT D - CDNDITIONS OF APPROVAL FILE NO: PD 83-04 APPLIû\NT: Fleischli, T. SITE: 920 E. JWlILTON AVENUE P. C. Mtg.: 9/13/83 Page 1 of 3 1. Revised elevations and site plan to be approved by the Site and Architectural Review Committee and the Planning ComMission. Site plan shall show detailed pa rid n9 1 ayout with dimens ions, and fi na 1 street a 1i gnment as ap!>roved by the Public Works Department. . 2. Property, to be fenced and hndscaped as indicated and/or added 1n red on plans. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans. 10. 11. 12. 3. . Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material, and loca- tion of irrigation system to be submitted for approval of the Site and Architectural Review Committee and Planning Commission prior to applica- tion for a building permit. Fencing plan indicating location and design details of fencing to be submitted for approval of the Planning Director prior to application for building permit. 4. 5. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of $25,000 to insure landscaping, fencing, and striping of parking areas within three months of completion of construction; or (2) file written agreeMent to complete landscaping, fencing and striping of parking areas prior to application for a building permit. 6. . All mechanical equipment located on roofs and all utilities to be screened as approved by the Planning Director. Building occupancy will not be allowed until public improvements are installed. 7. 8. All parking and driveway areas to be developed in compliance with Section 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking spaces to be provided with appropriate concrete curbs or bumper guards. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code. 9. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall indicate clearly the location of all connections for underground utilities includ- ing water, sewer, electric, telephone and television cables, etc. Sign application to be submitted in accordance with provisions of the sign ordinance for all signs. No sign to be installed until application 1s approved and permit issued by the Building Department. (Section 21.68.030 of the Campbell Municipal Code.) . Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Code stipulates that any contract for the collection and disposal of refuse, garbage, wet garba~e and rubbish produced within the 1imits of the City of Campbel1 shall be made with Green Valley Disposal ComapoY. This requirement applips to all single-family dwellings, multiple apartment units, to all commercial, business, industrial, manufacturing, and construction establishments. - OQ~DITIONS OF APPROVAL: PD 83-04 APPLlCATICN OF: Fleischli, T. Page 2 of 3 13. Trash container(s) of a size and quantity necessary to serve ihe - development shall be located in area(s) approved by the Fire Department. .Unless otherwise noted, enclosure(s) shall consist of I.concrete floor surrounded by I solid wall or fence and have self-closin~ doors of I size specified by the fire Department. All enclosures to be construc- ted at grade level. 14. . Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City requirements for the handicapped. Compact parking stalls -in Phase I shall be limited to 40~ of the total. 1 s. 16. Applicant shall satisfy conditions of all other a~encies having jurisdic- tion over this proposal, such as (but not limited to): Pacific Gas and Electric, Santa Clara Valley Water District. State Dept. of Fish and Game, and Sanitation District No.4, and Los Gatos Creekside Committee. FIRE DEPARTMENT: 17. 18. Provide fire hydrant system to deliver the required fire flow. All buildings shall be provided with fire rrotection equipment as required in the California Administrative Code. Title 19.3. 19. All buildings shall be accessible on three sides by means of a hard surface all weather roadway of at least 20 feet width. BUILDING DEPARTMENT: 20. Six story and eleven story buildings shall be min. type II fire resistive. Fifteen story building shall be min. type I fire resistive. Two story parking structure shall be type I or II construction with no unprotected openings less than 20 feet to any property line - Sect. Sõ4(b) Table S-A Sect. 709 & 1903(b). Roof coverings on all buildings shall be fire retardant in accordance with Table 17-A. Sect. 1906. 21. 22. PUBLIC WORKS: 23. 24. Process and file a parcel map. Provide a copy of preliminary title report. 25. 26. Pay storm drainage area fee. p~ plan examination and construction fee. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. OJNDITIONS OF APPROVAL: PO 83-04 APPLICATION OF: Fleisch1i, T. Page 3 of 3 PUBLIC WORKS-Cont'd: 27. - Obtain excavation permit, pay fees and post performance bon~s for all . the work in the public right of way. 28. Provide evidence of mutual access easements. Construct the following public improvements prior to occupancy in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineer and all other agencies having juriSdic- tion of these facilities: - 29. 30. Provide additional westbound lane on Hamilton Avenue across State Highway 17. Construct a two-way public street traversing the development from Campisi ~ay across a new bridge structure over Los Gatos Creek connecting to Hamilton Avenue with an underpass. 31. Provide an actuated traffic signal controlling internal movements within the development capable of metering traffic entering Hamilton Avenue based on traffic volumes on northbound Highway 17 on-ramp. Construct an actuated traffic signal at the intersection of Campisi Way and the new public street. 32. Modify traffic signal installations at the intersections of Bascom Avenue and Campisi Way and at Bascom Avenue and Campbell Avenue to provide two northbound left-turn lanes while maintaining three northbound through lanes at each intersection. Install median islands on Hamilton Avenue between Los Gatos Creek and Highway 17 northbound off-ramp. Construct a bus pull-out lane and shelter on Hamilton Avenue frontage of deve 1 oprnent. Construct an elevated ingress-egress connection from proposed parking structure extending easterly across the onsite public roadway. Provide pedestrian-bicycle pathway along westerly bank of Los Gatos Creek and across new bridge to easterly creek bank. Modify proposed parking lot access openings from on-site public street in accordance with requirements of City Engineer. Provide grade-separated pedestrian crossing of on-site publ~c stree~ connecting building plaza area to easterly parking area- as lt perta1ns to Phase I. Final on-site street alignment to be approved by the Public Works Department. The applicant shall provide a detailed relocation plan acceptable to the City Counci 1 prior to issuance of a building pennit. Argument against ord~~ance No. l493~ ,:7;>:r.t) j7 ð - ¿J y' . This Ordinance would approve construction of the ",.",~:...",.c't, ~ massive high-rise office complex consisting of one 15 .tory building, one 11 story building and one 6 story building. With nearly as much floor space as the entire pruneyard but on less than half the amount of land, its intensity of use would far exceed any other major development in Campbell. The daily traffic count generated by some 2,400 office workers plus clients and visitors would be primarily carried by Hamilton Avenue. This stretch of Hamilton, between Bascom Avenue and Highway 17, is already one of the heaviest travelled streets in Santa Clara County and it has yet to contend with the increase due from the Ainsley projects under construction on Hamilton just east of Bascom,. Placing this immense development in the heart of an already criti- cally congested area could be chaotic. It could be devastating to many existing businesses dependent upon convenient access. It could preempt future development of other prime properties along Hamilton. It would be certain to heap additional costs in time and frustration for several thousand Campbell community residents who must travel through this area to get to work each morning and home at night. The utter magnitude of this single purpose project i. such as to seriously threaten Campbell's carefully developed and nurtured social and economic balance of diversified commercial, industrial and resi- AFFIRMATIVE BALLOT ARGUMENT CAr~PBELL REFERENDUM ~1EASURE The outcome of this referendum will affect Campbell people and the quality of their environment for years to come. This is a good development in itself, approved by the city staff, planning commission, and council. Furthermore, it city. will bring to Campbell the means to deal with important needs throughout the This ballot poses a choice between losing this opportunity, or taking constructive action to improve Campbell's future. A, majority "YES" vote \'Ii 11 : - 1. confirm the approval of a project coMpletely in accord with the city's master plan, continuin9 Campbell's balance between commercial, industrial, and residential development. 2. create hundreds of construction jobs and many more permanent positions in offices -- all within easy commutin~ distance for 3. Campbell residents. provide more than a million dollars per year to fund improvements 4. needed by Campbell residents and businesses. build additional traffic carrying capacity which we already need, 5. with or without this project. provide relocation benefits for the residents of the mobile home park. They, as a group, support the project. 6. support the city in accomplishing its 1I~1easure B r1andate" to acquire the Campbell High School site -- without additional taxes. A majority "NO" vote will: 1. 2. cancel the project. create no jobs. AFFIRMATIVE BALLOT ARGUMENT CAMPBELL REFERENDUM MEASURE CONT. - 2 3. 4. generate no revenue. build no street improvements to carry the inevitable traffic increases. 5. expose the mobile home park residents to eviction without developer funded benefits. ,-- 6. leave the people of Campbell only two alternatives in acquiring the high school site: a. to replace this project's revenue with additional tax levies. b. to give up all or a large part of the school property. So please consider all of the facts of this complicated issue. Decide what you want for Campbell; and who you want to pay for it. We sincerely recommend a "YES" vote. CITY COUNCIL MEETING DE~1ßER 6,1983 r ( -- Don Hebard, 205 Calado Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and expressed his concerns regarding the project. Charles Williamson, Chairman of -the Hamilton Mobile Home- owners Association, appeared before the Council and presented 98 petitions in favor of the project signed by the mobile home residents. Councilman Ashworth raised a point of order challenging the ruling of the Chair allowing only new information to be presented. Following discussion, MIS: Ashworth, Kotowski - to overrule the Chair and allow public discussion on any aspect of the proposed development including redevelopment. Motion failed by a 1-4-0 vote, Councilman Ashworth voting "Yes". Mr. Rice, 1072 Ridgeley Drive, Campbell, appeared before the Council and expressed his concerns regarding traffic. Ray Clark, 325 April Way, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. Charlotte wendell, 285 Manchester, Campbell, appeared before the Council and read, for the record, a letter from the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association expressing their opposition to the project. Michael Demeo, 1529 Via Cancion, San Jose, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. George Neyama, 1498 Camino Cerrado, San Jose, appeared before the Council and read, for the record, a letter from San Jose Mayor McEnery expressing traffic concerns. Discussion followed regarding the working relationship between the staff of the City of Campbell and the City of San Jose. - 3 - (! r! nq¡8 I ;Z r& . - .- (Ordinance No. 1493) Recess - 10:00 p.m. Closed Session- re: Litigation Reconvene 10:25 p.m. -- Resolution No. 6643- establishing mitigation measures to relieve the adverse impact of conversion of the mobile home park on residents -~ Wayne Mitsunaga, 1518 Via Cancion, San Jose, appeared before the Council and expressed his concerns regarding the project. Joanne Auerbach, 1992 Montemar Way, San,Jose, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. JoAnn Fairbanks, 1565 Hacienda Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. John Bayer, 1498 Rameda Court, San Jose, appeared before the Council and expressed his concerns regarding the project. William Podgorsek, 860 Virginia Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. Ron Christ, lllO Shadle Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. Following discussion, MIS: Chamberlin, Kotowski - that the ordinance adopting plans, elevations and development schedule for the planned development zone established by Ordinance of the City of Campbell, PD 83-04, be introduced for first reading. Motion adopted by a 3-2-0 vote, Councilmen Ashworth and Doetsch voting "No". After the reading of the title of the ordinance, M/S: Chamberlin, Ashworth - that further reading be waived. Motion adopted unanimously. Mayor Paul declared a recess at which time the Council would meet in Closed Session re: Litigation. The Council reconvened at 10:25 p.m. Assistant City Manager Duggan - Report dated December 6, 1983. Discussion followed during which Councilman Doetsch requested that a time limit be established for the completion of the relocation ~tuày. Chuck Williamson, Chairperson of the Hamilton Mobile Homeowners Association, appeared before the Council and expressed concerns regarding the mitigation measures. Thomas Fleischli, Prometheus Development Corporation, appeared before the Council and asked for clarification regarding the time limit for the completion of the relocation study. Following discussion, MIS: Ashworth, Doetsch - to adopt a resolution establishing mitigation measures to relieve the adverse impact of conversion of a mobile home park on residents, eliminating Section *3 of the resolution and adding Measure *6 establishing 4 - . . Ib: PD 83-04 Fleisch1i, T. Introduction of Ordinance - Mr. Thomas Fleischli, Prometheus Development Co. ("900 E. Hamil ton Avenue - A General Partnership") - Planned ~ve10pment Permit and Approval of Plans, Elevations, and Development ,,-,- ~:_, A.J:.J:: r"...; tV'" T' no .., ~ . -,.- PD (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. PLANNING CDM-iISSION RECDl-fv1ENDATION That the City Cotmci1 adopt the attached ordinance approving PD 83-04, in concept, subject to the attached conditions. --- DISCUSSION This item was considered by the City Cotmcil at its meeting of November 1, 1983 and continued to this evening's meeting in order that the Cotmcil might have additional time to review the project. A public hearing was held on the item at the November 1, 1983 meeting. fiST Not applicable. -- , PREPARED BY Planning Staff AGENDA December 6,1983 CITY Or. SAN -JCSI!. CAl..IFC~N'A nEC ~) L::, ~ . (ì Co . Cd. ðU1tU£ -/íò~~ t . A¿ /Û1a' íJ~ ~ e01 NORTH FIRST STREET SAN .JOSE. CA 95110 (408) 277-4237 p ~:' >,-. . THOMA. MoEN8AY MAYOR rm LLlhfl è Li ,,"L November 30,1983 Honorable Mayor and City Council Ci ty of Campbell 76 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 Gentlemen: At its meeting of November 22,1983, the San Jose City Council authorized me to communicate to you the strong concerns felt by the City of San Jose over the proposed rezoning of the Hamilton Mobi1ehome Park, near the intersection of Hamilton and Bascom Avenues. In a letter sent to Campbell on April 12,1982, the San Jose City Manager discussed the various critical issues which San Jose considers to be of particular importance. Subsequent correspondence has reiterated those concerns. It now appears that you may be facing a decision on this same project without having sufficient information to judge whether our concerns have yet been addressed The City of San Jose, in rezoning a portion of the Ainsley property, did significantly reduce traffic impacts on several intersections, many of them in or adjacent to the City of Campbell. That action, however, also changed the traffic circulation patterns of the area in terms of directionality and times of impact. The information presently before you reflects only a superficial look at the cumulative effects of this proposal, not a complete professional analysis of the new situation. We believe that your proposed rezoning m~ have potentially significant effects on intersections in the City of San Jose which have not yet been adequately analyzed. In addition, the tunnel proposed to mitigate traffic impacts m~ direct significant amounts of noise toward San Jose residents~ homes. Honorable M~or and City Council November 30,1983 Page 2 The Cities of San Jose and Campbell have a tradition of working together to solve our mutual problems, particlarly in this area. I would hope that you will delay taking action on this project until you have complete and sufficient information to respond to our concerns, especially the effects of traffic and tunnel noise on the citizens of San Jose. Thank you for your consideration. cc: San Jose City Council Gerald E. Newfarmer Gary J. Schoennauer ~ TME:lsr ,--- CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 1983 COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS Conversion Impact Report - Prometheus Development r ~ --- City Manager Schilling requested that the previous åction taken by the City Council approving the Conversion Impact Report be reconsidered at the December 6,1983 City Council Meeting. Mr. Schilling stated that there was some question if proper notice was given regarding the Conversion Impact Report hearing. Mr. Schilling stated that staff is of the opinion that proper notification was given. However, it would be advisable for the Council to reconsider their previous action so that any question of a procedural defect could be erased. M/S: Chamberlin, Doetsch - that the acceptance of the Conversion Impact Report be reconsidered at the December 6, 1983 City Council Meeting. Motion adopted unanimously. .- -,:; CITY COUNCIL MTG. NOVEMBER 1, 1983 PUBLIC HEARINGS AND Planned Development Permi t - 920 E. Hamilton Avenue - PD 83-04 - Thomas Fleischli INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES This is the time and place for public hearing to consider the application of Thomas Fleischli for a Planned Develop- ment Permit and approval of plans, elevations and develop- ment schedule to allow the construction of an office complex on property known as 920 E. Hamilton Avenue in a PD Zoning District - PD 83-04 and to consider acceptance of the applicant's Conversion Impact Report. City Manager Schilling - Report dated November 1,1983. (' Assistant City Manager Schilling - Report dated November 1,1983. Mr. Duggan appeared before the Council and reviewed the Conversion Impact Report and proposed mitigation measures to relieve the adverse impact of conversion of the mobile home park on residents. Councilman Podgorsek requested that the issue of the PD approval be considered before the matter of the Conversion Impact Report and establishing mitigation measures is considered. Mayor Chamberlin stated that he, as Chair, had the authority to change the order of the Agenda, but that the order would remain as published. However, Mayor Chamberlin stated that a motion to overrule the Chair would be in order. (' M/S: Ashworth, Podgorsek - that the matter of the PD approval be considered before addressing the issue of the Conversion Impact Report and establishing mitigation measures. City Attorney Dempster advised that in order to comply wi th the law the Council should take action accepting the applicant's Conversion Impact Report prior to consideration of the PD approval. Councilman Ashworth withdrew his motion to overrule the Chair. - .. - (!þ r!1¡ : 3 " (1/ r' rr .-, Recess - 8:25 p.m. Reconvene - 8:30 p.m. ,- Mayor Chamberlin declared the public hearing open and asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak regarding the Conversion Impact Report. T~othy Lundell, 1725 S. Bascom Avenue, Campbell, appeared be~ore the Council on behalf of the mobile home park residents, and expressed concerns regarding the Conversion Impact Report. There being no one else wishing to be heard, M/S: Paul, Podgorsek - that the public hearing be closed. Motion adopted unanimously. MIS: Ashworth, Doetsch - that the Council accept the applicant's Conversion Impact Report. Motion adopted unanimously. M/S: Ashworth, Podgorsek - to overrule the Chair and that the matter of the PD approval be considered before consideration of the proposed mitigation measures. Motion adopted by a 3-2-0 vote, Councilmen Paul and Chamberlin voting "No". Mayor Chamberlin declared a five minute recess. Council reconvened at 8:30 p.m. The Planning Director Kee - Report dated November 1, 1983. Architectural Advisor Ken Rodriguez appeared before the Council and discussed several architectural features of the project. Mr. Rodriguez stated that the design and site plan are unique and the development would be compatible with the high rise buildings at the pruneyard. Mayor Chamberlin declared the public hearing op.~n and asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak regarding approval of the Planned Development Permit. Thomas Fleischli, Prometheus Development Company, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the development. Mr. Fleischli distributed copies of a brochure to the Council outlining the project and also presented a petition signed by area business owners/ managers supporting the project. Frank Dorsa, 87l E. Hamilton Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. Ted Rogers, Campbell Chamber of (~mmerce, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. Ksenija Tucker, Livingston's at the Pruneyard, appeared before the Council and spoke in félvor of th'! project. Lee Myers, 155 E. Campbell Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. - 5 - (!/ rßt 3 /1/1/ 3 tõ Recess - 10:05 p.m. Reconvene - 10:20 p.m. John Neece, Executive Secretary, Building and Construction Trades Council, Santa Clara, San Benito and Santa Cruz Counties, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. C~årles Williamson, Chairman of the Hamilton Mobile Home OWners Association appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. Tony Miranda, 2462 S. Bascom Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. Joe Moerenhout, 1493 Camino Cerrado, San Jose, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. Joanne Auerbach, 1992 Montemar Way, San Jose, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. Dewey Reed appeared before the CounCil on behalf of the Campbell Union School District and spoke against the project citing traffic. Mr. Reed also stated that as a Campbell resident he would be opposed to the project. Michael Murphy, reål estate broker for the Prometheus Development Company, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. Dorothy Shattuck, 391 California Street, Campbell, appeared before the Council and expressed her concerns regarding the project. Dan Orloff, Commercial Real Estate Agent with Norris, Beggs & Simpson, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. Wayne Mitsunaga, 1518 Via Cancion, San Jose, appeared before the Council and spòke against the project. Kevin Schram, 225 Union Avenue, Campbell, appeared before the Council and spoke in favor of the project. John Bayer, 1498 Ramita Court, San Jose, appeared before the Council and spoke against the project. There being no one else wishing to be heard, MIS: Podgorsek, Paul - that the public hearing be closed. Motion adopted unanimously. Following discussion, Mayor Chamberlin declared a recess at 10:05 p.m. The Council reconvened at 10:20 p.m. M/S: Doetsch, Paul - that consideration of the application of Thomas Fleischli for a Planned Develop- ment Perm! t and approval of plans, elevations and development schedule to allow the construction of an office complex on property known as 920 E. Hamilton - 6 - . rv1/( (!;ðJ ~/~ 3.1 11"1 r1 '1 (. -- .- Avenue in a PD Zoning District be continued to the December 6,1983 City Council Meeting. Motion adopted by a 3-2-0 vote, Councilmen podgorsek and Ashworth voting "No". M:LS: Paul, Doetsch - that consideration of ådopting a resolution establishing mitigation measures to relieve the adverse impact of conversion of the mobile home park on residents be continued to the December 6, 1983 City Council Meeting. Motion adopted by a 4-1-0 vote, Councilman Podgorsek voting "No". Vice Mayor Paul was excused from the Council Meeting at 10:30 p.m. "" - ; -- Pub~ic hearing to consider the application of Mr. Thomas Fle1schli, on behalf of "900 E. Hamil toñ Avenue - A General Partnership", for a Plamed ~velopnent - Penni t and approval of plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the . ,..ç...... ,..&Ç~,.,.. ,.,..-,-~ ,...... ,--- ,.,~ 920 E. Hamilton Avenue in a PD (Planned ÎJeveíopment/ Comœrcial) Zoning District. PLANNING mf.USSION REmf.1ENDATION PD 83-04 Fleisch1i, T. '!fiat the Ci ty ~uncil adopt the attached ordinance approving this application, 111 concept, subJect to the attached conditions. -- DIsmSSION -- The applicant is proposing to construct an office project which would con- sist of 3 structures of 6, 11, and IS-stories, totaling approximately 485,000 sq. ft. of gross building area. In addition, a two-level above- grade parking st:ructure is also proposed for the site. Proposed off-site improvements include a tunnel beneath Hamilton Avenue with associated ramps, a bridge across Los Gatos Creek to cormect with Campisi Way, and the Nidening of the Hamil ton Avenue bridge across Highway 17 to add one rore westbound traffic lane. The site consists of 14.6 acres of land, æ1d is indicated on the Land Use Element of the General Plan as "Convnercial". The zoning for the property is PD (Planned lèvelopment). -- As proposed in this application, approximately 8.5\ of the net lot area would be covered by 3 office buildings. Another 23.3\ of the site would be covered by the two-level parking st:ructure on completion of Phase II, resu1 t ing in a total lot coverage of approximately 32 \. Parking on grade would cover 29\ of the site, and landscaping would accomt for the remain- ing 39\. The project is proposed to be developed in two phases. Phase I consists of the 6 and 15 story office bui1dings.(333,000 sq. ft.), the tunnel be- neath Hamilton Avenue, the bridge across los Gatos Creek, and an addi- tional westbound lane for the bridge across Highway 17. Phase II will consist of the 11 story building (152,000 sq.ft.), and the parking structure. Completion of both phases is anticipated for 1987. It should be noted that this phasing differs somewhat from the EIR prepared for the project which indicates that the bridge to Qunpisi Way woula be accomplished in Phase II. The applicant has agreed to COI1t>l~te this bridge in Phase I due to concerns raised by the Public \'Iorks Deparbnent. -- . PREPARED BY P1aming Staff AGENDA November 1. 1983 - PD 83-04 Fleischli, T. -2- - Parking for the proposed deve1opnent is indicated as a total of 1940 stalls, resulting in an overall ratio of 1:250. In Phase I, it is proposed that a total of 1380 at-grade spaces be provided for a ratio of 1:241. In addition, it is proposed that the ratio of compact car parking stalls be approved at SO, of the total. The applicant had submitted docunentation to support these ratios as part of the previous application. Iœ to .ihe scale of this project, the Staff can support the 1:241" parking ratio for the reasons outlined in the report. In addition, several other cities have a higher ratio for large projects. The Staff is reconrnending that in Phase I, however, the maximlln ntlnber of compact stalls be limited to 40\. The EIR recommends that the City use Phase I of the deve1opnent to assess the actual parking needs generated by the project when it is in operation. .-. In order to mitigate the disruption to parking areas during ccnstruction of the parking structure and the II-story office building in Phase II, the applicant has proposed using valet parking services for several of the parking areas. Since this w:>u1d be an interim meaSlU'e, Staff does support the use of valet parking. -- Relocation of the mobilehane park residents is an issue which has been raised by the Council on previous occasions. The applicant has subnitted a letter which was submitted to the mobilehome tenants association indicating their willingness to provide $1,000,000 towards the cost of relocating the tenants. A copy of this letter, dated August 12,1983, is attached. The Architectural Advisor has raised several concerns regarding the site lay- out, including the pedestrian/vehicular anival area, the need for additional trees in the parking area, the need for better directional devices and design, and the need for more details of the parking structure.'. -- If this application is àpproved by the City CDunèi1, the following issues should be clarified in subsequent plans to be approved by the Planning Comnission and the City Cotmcil: 1. Parking structure, elevations, circulation, and ramps are not clearly identified. Floor plans of the parking structure are not shown. 2. Sidewalks on the proposed public street through the project are not continuous. 3. Trash enclosures are not indicated. - 4. Access to the PG&E Substation needs improvement. 5. Details of the plaza area soould be provided. - 6. Parking spaces for Phase I, as comted on the plans, årt! less than the total indicated on the Data Sumøry. --- PD 83-04 Fleischli, T. -3- November 1,1983 It should be noted that the City Attorney has made the detennination that the Environmental Impact Report which was prepared for the previous appli- cation for this site is still" applicable, and that no further review of the EIR is required or necessary. Also attached for the CcnIDcil' s review are other items of communication which have been received regarding this application. It sh>uld be noted that at its meeting of February 1, 1983 the City Qmllcil denied the previous application (PD 82-08) on this site (vote: 4-0-0). At its meeting of September 13, 1983 the Planning CDnmission adopted Resolution No. 2232 recommending approval of PD 83-04, in concept, with a vote of 4-2-1 (CDnmissioners Dickson and Fairbanks voting "no", and CDmmissioner Meyer being absent). * * * Attachments: Ordinance CDnditions of Approval, ~velopment Schedule, Location Map Site Plan - Phase II ..- (1) Report from Public Works ~partment. (2) Planning CDmmission Resolution No. 2232 (3) Letter dated August 25, 1983 from Thomas E. Fleisch1i to r-bbile fume Park Residents regarding proposed change in use. (4) Letter from Thomas E. Fleischli dated August 29,1983. (5) Letter dated August 30, 1983 with traffic report prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. " (6) Letter dated August 30,1983 regarding proposed contribu- tion for relocation assistance with attachment to Mr. Chuck Williamson, President, Resident's Association. Letter dated September 7, 1983 regarding market for office space (MacMillan, MJore & Buchanan, Inc.) Letter dated September 7, 1983 from V. Weinert, Secretary Hamilton Park r-bbilehome Owner's Assn., with attachment from Pitagora, Lundell & Crosby--Attorneys. (9) Letter dated August 24, 1983 from Eart~trics, Inc. regarding EIR. (10) Letter dated September 9,1983 from Thomas E. Fleisch1i in response to letter from Hamilton Park r-bbilehome Owner's Assn. (11) Letter received September 10, 1983 from Mr. Jerry fuuseman opposing development. (12) Planning CDnunission minutes from meeting of September 13, 1983. (13) Letter from Mr. Michael J. ~Meo, 1529 Via Cancion, San Jose, opposing development (dated October 13, 1983). (14) Letter dated October 14,1983 - Notice to residents. (15) Report from City Manager's Office regarding Fiscal Impact of proposed development. . (7) (8) ~- - OR.nIX~~Œ NO. - BEISG A~ ORDlXA.~CE OF mE CIlY CDtNCIL OF 1HE CITY OF CA'tPBElL ArOPTING PlA'\S, ELEVATIONS 6 DE\"ELOP'.!E.\'T SOiEIULE FOR lHE PL~'-'\"ED DE\'EWP- f.£\T 1D~'E ESTABUSHED BY ORDI~A.~Œ OF THE CI1Y OF CA.'IPBELL (APPLlCATI<J\ OF t-fR 1H)~"-s FLEISŒlLI, PD 83-04). The City Council of the City of Campbell does ordain as follows: SEcrIQ~ O~"E: That the Zoning !-tap of the City of Ca1T;>bell is hereby changed and anended~' adopting the attached Exhibit A entitled Plans and Elevations; Exhibit B entitled Development Schedule; Exhibit C en- titled ~lap of Said Property; and Exhibit D entitled Conditions of Appro\.al, as per the application of t-fr. Thomas Fleisclù i for approval -- of plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the constrocticm of an office complex on property knO\..-n as 920 E. Hamil ton Avenue in a Planned De\.elopment Zoning District. Copies of said Exhibits are on file in the Office of the Planning Iepartment. SEcrIO~ TI~O: This ordinance shall become effective thirty days follo\.:ing its passage and adoption and shall be published once within 15 da~.s upon passage and adoption in the Campbell Press, a ne\.;spaper of general circulation in the City of Campbell, County of Santa Clara. PASSED ftSD .~PTED this follo\\"ing roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen: ~OF.S: Councilmen: ABSr:\ï: Councilmen: day of 1983 by the -- APPRO\'ED: DE.\." R. Oì.~.tBERLr;, ~t~YOR AITEST: A '-"\"E G. CDY\"E , en¡- C1.ERK . ~ -: "" ". r, l CITY OF CAMPBELL 75 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008 (408) 378-8141 Department: Planning October 2S, 19S3 Mr. Gary Schoennauer Planning Director City of San Jose 801 N. First St. San Jose, CA 95110 RE: PD 83-04,920 E. Hamilton Avenue, Campbell Proposed Office Complex by Prometheus Development Co. Dear Mr. Schoennauer: Thank you for your letter of October 24, 1983 in which you expressed the concerns of the City of San Jose regarding the proposal for development of an office complex at the site of the existing Hamilton M:>bi1e Home Park. This application, as referenced above, is before the City of Campbell again, and "ill1 be discussed by the City COtl'lcil at its meeting of November 1, 1983 beginning at 7:30 p.m. The application mder consideration at this time is identical to the earlier application for which cOI11lOOnts have been received from the City of San Jose. The mitigating measures and conditions of approval being considered by the Campbell City Comcil are also identical to the previous application for redevelopment of the referenced property. Based on this, the Campbell City Attorney has indicated that the Environmental Impact Report which was pre- pared for the previous application for this site is still applicable, and that no further review of the EIR is required. .. Your letter correctly indicates that Section 15153 of the amended CEQA Guidelines became effective on August 1, 1983. This section of the newly revised guidelines specifies minimum requirements for the contents of a notice when an agency proposes to use an EIR prepared for an earlier appli- cation. Ibwever, as indicated in the League of Califomia Cities bulletin, dated August 2, 1983, "Cities have mtil December 1 to conform to the new guidelines. " The current application being considered by the City of Campbell was filed with the Planning Department on July 27, 1983. It has been, and continues to be, the position of the City Attorney that an application filed with the City is subject to requirements in effect at the time of filing. In closing, it sbJuld be noted that both the Campbell City Comcil and P1arming Canrnission also share the concerns expressed by the City of San Jose-regarding the referenced site. The fact that the current application --- CITY OF CAMPBELL Mr. Gary Schoermauer Planning Director City of San Jose -2- October 28,1983 was not referred to the City of San Jose should, by no means, be construed as an attempt to by-pass conments from your agency. Rather, it is our position that the comments received from San Jose for the previous project were still applicable, particularly in light of the reduced traffic impact in the area resul ting from San Jose's rezoning of the Ainsley property. If there are any questions regarding this transmittal, please call. -- Sincerely, AL/J,(L ARIHUR A . KEE PLANNING DIRECfOR MK:PJS:lp -- ,¡ MEMORANDUM CITY OF CAMPBELL Edward G. Schill ing, City Manager ~sePh Elliott, Director of Public ~rks To: From: Subject: Date: October 27, 1983 SUMMARY--TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR THE PROPOSED PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT ---------------------------------------------------------- ,- Attached is a four-page traffic analysis prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates, dated October 27, 1983, wherein the essential aspects of their traffic analysis for the proposed Prometheus development is sum- ma ri zed. This study is an update of the original traffic report included within the Environmental Impact Report which was prepared for the original ap- plication heard by the City Council on February 1, 1983. This traffic report differs from the aforementioned environmental document primarily for the following reasons. 1. Due to zoning changes for the Ainsley property within the City of San Jose, the total generated traffic for that proposed project will be reduced from 15,410 trips per day to 6,830 trips per day. 2. New traffic counts were taken at the Hamilton and Bascom inter- sect ion. The proposed mitigating measures for the Prometheus project are the same as those that were originally proposed last February, and are briefly summarized as follows: 1. Construct an underpass at Hamilton Avenue at the project's western entrance to facil itate left turns. 2. Provide an additional westbound lane on the Hamilton Avenue bridge crossing State Route 17. 3. Construct a bridge over Los Gatos Creek to connect the project to Campisi Way. It is to be noted that this bridge is to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic, as well as vehicular traffic. 4. Provide a second left turn lane on the south approach of the Bascom-Campbe 11 intersect i on. Edward G. Schilling 2 October 27, 1983 5. Provide a second left turn lane on the approach of the Bascom- Campisi intersection. The above mitigating measureS are all offsite improvements. However, in addition it will be necessary to provide a major public roadway on- site, along with traffic signal ization. The levels of service at the major intersections are shown on the tabulation on Page 3. BecauSe the Ainsley project is now planned to be of lower density and thus generate less traffic, there is a sl ight improvement in the level of service at most of the major intersections. - In conclusion, this updated traffic report depicts sl ightly better levels of service at major intersections than the documents reviewed at the February 1 Council meeting because of the aforementioned modifications of the Ainsley development and more current traffic count data. JE/le encl. Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 99 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 925 San Jose. California 95113 408-280-6600 MEMORANDUM TO: Joe Ell iott Director of Public Works City of Campbell FROM: Jeffrey P. Damon DATE: October 27,1983 SUBJECT: Compilation of Traffic Analysis Memoranda for the proposed Campbell Office Park. - Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. was requested to compile our previous traffic memoranda dated August 30, 1983 and October 4, 1983 into one document which briefly discusses the traffic-related issues involved with the proposed Campbell Office Park project located at 900 E. Hamilton Avenue in Campbell. This memorandum addresses that request. The project proposes to ultimately construct 485,000 square feet of commercial office space at the above-mentioned location with buildout occurring in 1987. The project is anticipated to generate the following volumes of traffic: TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION OF PROJECT SCENARIO RATE ADT PM PK-HR IN/OUT SPLIT (¡1000 s. f.) (20%) (20% In/80% Out) Phase 1 - 330K s.f. 12 3960 792 158/634 Buildout - 485K s.f. 12 5820 1164 233/931 A previous traffic study was conducted for this project in 1982. However, Barton-Aschman Associates was retained to re-assess the implications of the project because of two changes which have occurred. They are: 1). The Ainsley property has recently been approved for development by the City of San Jose with a changed use. The property, previously approved for Commercial, Residential, Recreational and Office uses, has been changed to Residential and Research & Development uses. Total generated traffic will be reduced from 15,410 daily (1,934 pk-hr) trips to an anticipated 6,830 daily (991 pk-hr) trips with the new scenario. 2). New traffic counts have been conducted at some critical intersections [6) 1 Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. including Hamilton/Bascom. 3). Activity in the Highway 85 Corridor has increased recently. Currently, Caltrans is conducting preliminary environmental studies and there is approximately $6 Million now available for right-of-way purchase and protection in the corridor. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be completed for alternative projects in the corridor in about 2 years. Funding for the roadway portions appears to be "likely" according to Caltrans officials. Mitigation measures are proposed as part of the project. They are: - Construction of an underpass at Hamilton Avenue and the project's western entrance to facilitate left turns in and out of the project for westbound Hamilton Avenue traffic. - Widening of the Hamilton Avenue structure over S.R. 17 to provide for a westbound right-turn-only movement at the Hamilton/S.R. 17 southbound off ramp/Salmar Avenue intersection. - Construction of a bridge over Los Gatos Creek to provide another point of entry/exit to the project via Campisi Way. - The addition of a second left turn lane on the south approach of the Bascom Avenue and Campbell Avenue intersection. - The addition of a second left turn lane on the south approach of the Bascom Avenue and Campisi Way intersection. Existing and future levels of service were calculated using the Circular 212, Planning methodology as instructed by city staff. The future ana lyses were conducted wi th the project-related traffi c generated, distributed and assigned to the roadway system. The directional distribution used was the same as in the previous study. Existing traffic was increased by 1.5% per year to take into account the growth in background traffic. And in addition, traffic from all approved projects in either San Jose or Campbell affecting critical intersections was also included in the analysis. 2 Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. TABLE 2 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANAlYSIS (FOR 1986-1987) SCENARIO EXISTING 86-87 W/O 86-87 W/ PROJECT 86-87 W/ PROJECT PROJECT & W/O MITIGATIONS & W/ MITIGATIONS INTERSECTION LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C Hmltn/Lei gh (PM) A* 0.59 D 0.83 D 0.86 D 0.86 Hmltn/Bascm(PM) D*** 0.89 E 0.99 F 1.14 E 0.98 Hmltn/Salmr(AM) C** 0.70 D 0.82 E 0.93 E 0.90 -- Hmltn/Salmr(PM) E* 0.98 F 1.13 F 1.21+ F 1.09 Hmltn/Centrl(AM) A** 0.51 A 0.55 A 0.59 A 0.59, Hmltn/Centrl(PM) C** 0.70 C 0.76 D 0.80 D 0.80 Hmltn/Wnchstr(AM) A** 0.51 B 0.65 B 0.69 B 0.69 Hmltn/Wnchstr(PM) D** 0.82 E 0.94 E 0.97 E 0.97 Bascm/Campbll(PM) D* 0.84 E 0.93 E 0.96 E 0.93 Bascm/Cmpisi(PM) D* 0.82 E 0.94 E 0.97 E 0.98 * Source: Count conducted by City of Campbell 8/81. ** Source: Count conducted by City of Campbell 8/82. *** Source: Count conducted by City of Campbell 2/17/83. -- Two intersections were also analyzed for the 1987 W/ Project & W/ Proposed Mitigations scenario using the City of San Jose intersection capacity methodology. The results of those analyses are presented below. INTERSECTION ANALYSES USING SAN JOSE METHOD INTERSECTION 1987 W/ PROJECT & W/ MITIGATIONS LOS V/C 1987 W/O PROJECT & W/ MITIGATIONS LOS V/C Bascom/Hamilton(PM) Hamilton/Salmar D E 0.87 0.93 E 0.94 3 Barton -Aschman Associates, Inc. CONCLUSIONS Conclusions have been drawn from the analysis conducted. They are: 1). There have been significant reductions in the anticipated traffic to be generated by the Ainsley property in San Jose because of a change in the use of the development to occur on the property. -- 2). The intersections operating at levels below "0" will do so regardless of whether this project is constructed. In fact, the operational level of Hamilton/Bascom in 1987 will be better with the project and its proposed mitigations than without the project and the mitigations. (See Table 2). 3). Improvements i n the Hi ghway 85 Corri dor have become more probab 1 e i n recent months. 4). The project proposes several major operational and roadway improvements that will mitigate the project-generated traffic. ,- 4 October 14, 1983 Residents of Hamilton Park 920 E. Hamilton Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 RE: PROPOSED CHANGE IN USE OF HAMILTON PARK Campbell, California Dear Residents: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Article 6, Paragraph 798.56 (f) (1) of the California Civil Code that a Public Hearing will be held on November 1, 1983, at 7:30 PM at the City Council Chambers at 75 North Central Avenue, Campbell, California before the City Council on the application by 900 E. Hamilton Avenue, a general partnership, through the owners of the property, Walter R. Keesling and Robert L. Keesling, et.al., to develop a commercial office project at 920 E. Hamilton Avenue, Campbell, California which is currently in use as Hamilton Mobile Horne Park. Sincerely, 900 EAST HAM L a general t BY: TEF:lb cc: Sanford N. Diller Robert W. Wagner Edward R. LaCroix, Jr. Timothy A. Lundell Arthur Kee Robert L. Keesling Walter R. Keesling ~ æ,~~~Wl~ m Dc, 1 198j -.. CITY ~t:"" C P\","¡-),.~.- '-'. .J""i"¡:j¡;;.LL PLANNING DEPARTMENT æ/~~ PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 915014-215715 (408) 446-0157 October 14, 1983 Mr. Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 75 North Central Ave. Campbell, CA 95008 fD) ~ ~ æ..~VJŒ ~ U\\ OCT 1'/ 1983 - RE: 900 EAST HAMILTON AVENUE Campbell, California CITY CF CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT -- Dear Art: I have enclosed a memorandum dated October 4, 1983, prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. as a supplement to their memorandum dated August 30,1983, regarding traffic analysis for the referenced project. This memorandum addresses two questions posed to the consultants, namely to calculate the projected level of service in 1987 (i) with construction of the project as proposed along with the proposed traffic mi- tigation measures using the City of San Jose methodology for computing level of service, and (ii) construction of the proposed traffic mitigation measures with no project using the circular 2-1-2 planning methodology for computing level of service which was utilized in the prior memorandum. ,-- The purpose of the computation described in (i) above was to determine the projected level of service at the intersection of Hamilton and Bascom Avenues as it would be if the City of San Jose were using its own methodology. As the memorandum indicates, the projected level of service at this intersection in 1987 with construction of the project and the proposed traffic mitigation measures is 0.87 volume to capacity, or level of service "D". This would be compared with a projec- ted volume to capacity of 0.98 for this intersection using the planning methodology described above, or level of service "E". In either case, the projected level of service is within the acceptable parameters set forth in the Agreement dated July 28, 1980, by and between the city of San Jose and the City of Campbell regarding vehicular traffic at the intersection of Hamilton and Bascom Avenues. Further, it is interesting to note the rather minor improve- ment in the projectèd level of service at the intersection of Hamilton and Bascom Avenues if all the proposed traffic mitigation measures were constructed with no project at all. As I understand the consultants findings, this scenario would improve the volume to capacity ratio from 0.98 to 0.94, both ratios being considered level of service "E". - Mr. Arthur Kee October 14, 1983 Page two I respectfully request that the enclosed material be included as a part of our application for the referenced project. Should you or any members of staff have any questions regarding this memorandum, feel free to contact either myself or Mr. Jeffrey Damon directly. Thank you. -- TOMAS E. FLEISCHLI Project Manager -- TEF:lb cc: Jeffrey Damon Robert Wagner Enclosure 1--- --- CITY OF CllMPHELL ~-~. ~-~-~--_. 75 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008 (408) 378-8141 Department: CITY CLERK October 6, 1983 l Thomas E. F1eisch1i Project Manager PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 N. Wolfe Road, Suite 201 Cupertino, CA 95014 RE: 900 E. Hamilton Avenue PD 83-04 Dear Mr. Fleischli: Please be advised that the Campbell City Council, at its regular meeting of October 4,1983, denied your request to schedule consideration of your application at the November 15,1983 City Council Meeting. The City Council unanimously voted to schedule the public hearing for the City Council Meeting of November 1,1983. An agenda will be sent to you prior to that meeting. Very., truly yours, a~ ./}. (&'-¡?-2.--' ANNE G. COYNE City Clerk lac cc: A. Kee, Planning Director CITY COUNCIL MTG. OCT. 4,1983 COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS Ý Letter - Thomas E. Fleischli, Prometheus Develop- men t Company - requesting continuance of the hearing on PD 83-04 --- -- .'--- -- A letter was received from Thomas E. Fleischli, Prometheus Development Company, requesting a continuance of the public hearing on PD 83-04 to November 15, 1983. Following discussion, M/S: Podgorsek, Ashworth - that the request of Thomas E. Fleischli, Prometheus Development Company, requesting continuance of the public hearing on PD 83-04 to November 15,1983 be denied and that the public hearing be scheduled for November l, 1983. Motion adopted unanimously. - Letter - Mr. Thomas Fleisch1i, Project Manager, Pro- metheus fuvelopment - Request proj ect application (PD 83-04) be scheduled for City Cbtmcil meeting of November 15, 1983. Cbmrmmi cat ions STAFF. REOOMMENDATI ON That the City Cotmdl approve the applicant's request to schedule consideration of this application at the Càtmcil meeting of November 15, 1983. -- STAFFDISrnSSION Staff has received the attached letter from Mr. Thomas Fleischli, in which a request is made that the Prometheus Development Cbmpany's application (PD 83-04) be scheduled for the City Cotmcil meeting of November 15, 1983. Had this request to set the public hearing for November 15, 1983 not been made, Staff's nonnal course of action would have been to set the hearing £Or October 4,1983. The applicant lists five reasons for requesting the November 15 hearing date: Generate more current infonnation on the office and research/ development market in the Campbell area; Provide additional time to prepare an updated traffic analysis of the Hamilton/Bascom Avenue intersection; To discuss new ideas on relocation of the mobilehome park tenants; To provide. an opportunity to solicit support for the proj ect from the business comrm.mi ty; and To avoid conflicts caused by vacation scheduling. If the City Cbtmcil considers it desirable to review this application prior to the November 8, 1983 election, Staff could agendize it for the meeting of November 1, 1983. If, on the other hand, the Cbtmcil does not have a preference to hear this item prior to the election, then Staff could agendize it for the CbUIldl meeting of November 15, 1983. 1) 2) 3) ,.-. 4) 5) fiST Not applicable. , PREPARED BY AGENDA Planning Staff October 4, 1983 ,-._' -'.~.._-' - - '- . ... Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. 99 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 925 San Jose, California 95113 408-280-6600 MEMORANDUM TO: 900 E. Hamilton, A General Partnership FROM: DATE: Jeffrey P. Damon October 4, 1983 ,,\ I - ,: , U SUBJECT: Level of Service Calculations Q I ' -- As requested, Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. has calculated levels of service for Bascom/Hamilton for two scenarios: 1987 w/Project &:. w/Proposed Mitigations; and 1987 w/o Project &:. w/Proposed Mitigations. The LOS for the former scenario was calculated using the same projected turning movements for which a LOS calculation was conducted in our August 30, 1983 memorandum (Table 6) for the same scenario. The second scenario calculation was based on the 1983 (existing) turning movements projected to 1987 with the "Approved Trips" (those trips generated by already approved projects) added. The intersection operation was balanced against the Bascom/Campisi operation with the same scenario as the mitigation provides a diversionary route for traffic bypassing the Bascom/Hamilton intersection, thus improving the projected intersection's operational level. For this memorandum, the "Project" and the "Proposed Mitigations" are exactly those as discussed in the August 30, 1983 memorandum. The level of service analyses were conducted by using the computer-assisted City of San Jose Critical Movement methodology for the first scenario and the Circular 212 methodology for the second scenario. The results of the analyses are presented below. TABLE 1 CRITICAL MOVEMENT ANALYSIS Intersec tion 1987 w/Project &:. w/Proposed Mitigations. ; 0.87 1987 w/o Project &:. w/Proposed Mitigations.. Bascom/Hamil ton 0.94 . LOS conducted using City of San Jose methodology .* LOS conducted using Circular 212 Planning methodology (6J ~~"¡¡:;~~~~'!'I~!~'f~:.>,...""",, ""'<;"""}i.~""';~:'~:iPK."\;.~~~~;;!,.Ad""';.:Jt ~:'lli""'.'v'.,',~,." ,<,'" i.<""", '",,' ,"MIIi:';¡";"-~,':,:6;L,"îi.;'i!',,;,"i:d:;"',=:,:.,,,~".~ ... . .. Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. The results presented above suggest that the Bascom/Hamilton intersection is projected to operate at a LOS "D" or liE," depending upon the scenario and intersection methodology employed. JPD/cm -- au/J~ - " PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10060 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 915014-215715 (408) 446-0157 September 20, 1983 Mr. Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 ~ œs~ ~ ~~~ ffi) RE: 900 East Hamilton Avenue PD 83-;04 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT Dear Art: ,,-. Although the Planning Commission adopted Staff's recommendation for approval for the proposed project, additional work must be completed in preparation for the upcoming council hearing. First, in response to questions raised by Commissioners Kosalas and Campos, I want to perform additional research on the office and research and development market in the Campbell area proper. Information is readily available from most real estate firms on the West Valley Market, but in fact, this market does include a fairly sizeable geographical area. I believe it is appropriate to focus our analysis on a condensed geographical area surrounding the proposed project which perhaps will answer the same questions if raised by members of the council. ,- Secondly, based on my recent discussions with Staff, I will be submitting additional traffic analyses, specifically with regard to the intersection of Hamìlton and Bascom Avenues. Third, Chuck Williamson has contacted me and requested a meeting to discuss new ideas on relocation. He has requested Ms. Kathy Bernard of Community Housing Developers attend this meeting, with potential follow-up meetings with members of the County Board of supervisors and their Staff regarding block grant funding. These meetings could require a number of weeks to conclude. Fourth, I intend to meet with key members of the business commun- ity to review the status of our proposed project and solicit their support. I'm sure you can appreciate our reluctance to spend significant time in this area prìor to a favorable decision by the Planning Commission. This effort will take a substantial amount of time and effort as well. Finally, I will be out of the office the first week in October on holiday. - '. Mr. Arthur Kee September 20, 1983 Page two AS a result, I respectfully request that our hearing before the City Council be scheduled for Tuesday, November 15, 1983. I believe we should have sufficient time in the interim to complete the tasks discussed above. I certainly appreciate your consideration of this request. Thank Thomas E. F eischli Project Manager -- ,-- TEF:lb cc: Edward Schilling RESOLUTION NO. 2232 BEING A RESOLUfICN OF THE PLANNING mMISSION OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL RE(J)M'-ŒNDING APPROVAL OF PLANS, ELEVATIrns, AND DEVEWPMENT SŒfEOOLE TO AlLOW crnsrRUCfIeN OF AN OFFICE (J)MPLEX eN PRO- PER1Y KNO'\Am AS 920 E HAMILTOO AVENUE IN A PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT/ro.t.fERCIAL) ZONING DISTRIcr. (APPLlCATlrn OF 900 E. HAMILTON AVENUE - A GmERAL PARTNERSHIP, PD 83-04). - Plans, elevations and development schedule for the construction of an office complex to be located on property known as 920 E. Hamilton Avenue in a PD (Planned Development/Cbmmercial) Zoning District have been presented for approval by Mr. Thomas Fleisch1i, on behalf of 900 E. Hamilton Avenue - A General Partnership. After notification and public hearing as specified by law on said proposed amendments, as filed in the Office of the Planning Department on July 27, 1983, and after presentation by the Planning Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed. After due consideration of all evidence presented, the Plmming Cbnmission did find as follows: That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such use, or detrimental or injurious to pro- perty and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. - Based on the above findings, the Plmming Cbnmission did recommend approval of plans, elevations, and development schedule as presented and further re- coJJD1lends that the City Cbuncil enact the Ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit A, adopting said plans, elevations, and development schedUle for that portion of the above mentioned Planned Development Zone. PASSED AND AIDPTED this 13th day of September, 1983, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT : Cbnrniss ioners : Kasolas, Campos, Howard, Kotowski CbITDnissioners: Fairbanks, Dickson CbJJD1lissioners: ~~yer APPROVED: Michael F. Kotowski Chainnan lrrnST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary ~. - PLANNING mOOSSION MfG. SEPTEMBFR 13, 1983 PD 83-04 Fleischli, T. Public hearing to consider the application of Mr. Thomas Fleischli, on behalf of 900 E. Hamil- ton - A General Partnership, for a Planned Develop- ment Pennit and approval of plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of an office complex on property known as 920 E. Hamilton Avenue in a PD (Planned Development/ Commercial) Zoning District. Connnissioner Dickson reported that this item was considered by the Site and Archi tectural Review Conmi ttee . The Cornmi ttee is recoounending approval, with one change in the conditions. Condition 41 - delete "describing how each ten- ant will be relocated"... r Mr. Kee stated that one reason for this change is that prior to any approval, the City COlIDCil will consider a relocation plan. The relocation issue has been the subject of concern since the original submittal of this development. A letter is enclosed in the Commission's packet (attached hereto) indicating the applicant's agreement to provide some funds for the relocation of the tenants. However, the relocation issue will have to be dealt with at the Council level. Chaiman Kotowski noted that the Commission does not have any responsibility at this time to deal with the relocation issue, only with the development plans. r Mr. Kee noted that this was correct, al thqugh the Council may decide at some time in the future to have the Commission look into the relocation plan. Additionally, Mr. Kee noted that the previous EIR that was accepted by the City has been detennined by the City Attorney to be satisfactory for this submittal, since the plans are the same as previously submitted. Staff did request the EIR consultant to update the EIR. There are two things that have changed since the original application--one is the re-zoning on the Ainsley property at Bascom and Hamilton Avenue to Industrial, and the second is the allocation of state funds for the acquisition of right-of-way for Route 85-- both these things would have a positive effect on the mitigation of the traffic situation at this location. Commissioner Fairbanks asked if there was any change to the development schedule. ~. Kee stated that completion of the entire project is scheduled for 1987; and, there is general agreement that the bridge over Los Gatos Creek will be completed during Phase I. . Commissioner Campos asked if there was an updated "Resident Profile", since the one included in the Staff Report is dated 1981. jJ (1 J1fU( ý 3 ')/ 1~ /3 r1 Mr. Kee noted that the report indicates that the information is basically the same as in 1981 since there is such a small turn-over in the mobile horne park. -t/ Commissioner Campos stated that he felt the profile could be updated. Chainnan Kotowski instructed that a letter from Mr. Jerry P. Houseman regarding this item be entered into the record, and made a part of the minutes. Said correspondence attached hereto. Olainnan Kotowski declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Tom Fleischli, applicant, distributed a brochure to the Commission out- lining the project. He reviewed the application noting the benefits of such a development in Campbell, citing tax bases and jobs information, and the project's connection with the redevelopment of the downtown area. -, Mr. Doug Yoder, representing MacMillan, M:>ore & Buchanan, Inc., spoke regard- ing the. availability and need for office space in the West Valley area. Mr. Fleischli requested that clarification be made on Condition Nos. 36 and 39, noting that they pertain to Phase II of the construction. Mr. Helms noted his agreement with this request as it pertains to Condition No. 36, but that Condition No. 39 would be a condition to be complied with in Phase 1. - Mr. Timothy Ltmdell, Attorney representing mobilehome residents, spoke at length regarding the relocation plan, indicating that the residents did not object to the office development; and, that the $1,000,000 offered as part of a relocation fund by the applicant was a good starting place, although it was not nearly enough. Mr. Lundell noted that he felt that the relocation plan (referred to in Condition No. 41) should be"describing how each tenant will be relocated"; and, that the issue of relocation should be addressed prior to anything else. Mr. Wayne Mitsunaga, 1518 Via Cancion, San Jose 95128, spoke in opposition to the project, citing noise, visual impact, and traffic. He felt the pro- ject should be significantly down-sized. Mr. Sanford Diller, Attorney representing Prometheus Development Co., noted that the developer does share the residents concern,with the housing situa- tion. The Keesling's (property owners) position is that they, éII.S private iIfdividuals, do not have to shoulder the responsibility for thi$ housing. ~~. Diller submitted to the Commission that the best interests of all con- cerned would be served by an approval of this project. 14. O1arles Williamson, O1airperson - Hamilton Mobilehome Owner'~ Association, stated that there has been considerable and continuous work between the develop- er and the park residents since the first submittal of this project. The home- owners/residents recognize that the site is right for development and would like to take this opporttmity that is presented to take advantage for the people who require affordàble housing opportunities. He noted that the monies offered by the developer could be combined with other funding to begin to work out some solutions, and indicated the Association's opposition to any change in Condition No. 41. .pe~ C/-/ 3 ~vg9 3 ff No one else wishing to speak, it was moved by Commissioner Howard, and seconded by Conunissioner Fairbanks, that the public hearing be closed. MOtion carried unanimously. :J- Discussion Conunissioner Howard stated that he felt this was a very good project; however, he expressed concern about what might happen if Phase II of the project is not completed, mainly with regard to the open areas that will be made available on Phase II. Addi tionally, he felt that the access to the PG&E station was not large enough to accommodate the large trucks. Commissioner Campos questioned the role of the Commission, as regards to Condition No. 41 and the relocation plan. He felt that the Conmñssion should have same role in this plan. -, Mr. Dempster stated that the City Council has not delegated that authority to the Planning Commission at this time. Commissioner Dickson stated that the City Council took action on this application before, and he felt that the Commission should be very care- ful to make sure that something has changed since that time. Mr. Dempster stated that the applicant has a right to present their applica- tion again, and the Commission has a right to look at it as a new project again. Mr. Dempster conttinued that there have been changes, he felt, suffi- cient enough to warrant a re-application of the same project. - Commissioner Kasolas noted that one of the most significant changes that is apparant is the cooperation of the tenants and the applicants. He con- tinued that he did not see any difficulty with respect to the change in Condition No. 41, specifically on the basis that there are two issues be- fore the Commission, and the Commission is to act only on one of those issues--the planning function. The specific relocation of the tenants has not been delegated to the Conmission. He added that he has confidence that the City Council will take care of those needs within the commtmity, and spoke în favor of the proj ect. Commissioner Dickson stated that the Commission should make sure that they understand the differences from the last time the project was considered: Route 85 planning; Redevelopment Agency in effect; re- zoning of Ainsley property to Industrial. Still to be considered is the visual impact in that the profile is quite dense even though the architectural style is good; and, the traffic is at a saturation level, though not as quite saturated. Chairman Kotowski noted his understanding that the traffic will only get worse because of the nature of the county and the people moving, into the a~a. However, street improvements to mitigate the situation will not be done tmless it is done by developers. Mr. Helms noted his concurrence, and indicated that there are currently no adopted plans by the Council to construct any of these improvements at the City's expense. - -. re~ q~/3 -It'? .¡ ~ CDnmissioner Campos asked if the service station across from this site has been purchased yet in order to complete the turmel mder Hamilton Avenue. Mr. Dempster responded that there has been no change in this situation. -1- CDnunissioner Kasolas noted that it was his tmderstanding, regarding the proposed development, that if Cænpisi Way is extended over the çreek and the ttlUle 1 added tmder Hænil ton Avenue, traffic will be reduced at the corner of Bascom and Hamilton. r Mr. ¡.elms responded that this is the Staff's position. Studies give the indication that the mitigation measures will improve the level of service at this intersection. RESOWfIOO" NO. 2232 It was moved by Conunissioner Kasolas, and seconded by Conunissioner I-bward, that the Planning Conunission adopt Resolution No. 2232 reconunending approval, in concept, of PD 83- 04 subject to cond1tions as listed in the Staff Conunent Sheet, with clarification made to Condition No. 36 indicating it to be a part of Phase II, and the dele- tion of the words"... describing how each tenant will be relocated prior". . . from Condition No. 41. M>tion carried with the fOllowing roll call vote: r AYES: NOES: ABS:ENf: Conunissioners: Kasolas, Campos, fbward, Kotowski Conuniss ioners : Fairbanks, Dickson Connnissioners: Meyer It It It ....-~ ,.. -, : ITEM NO.6 STAFF illMMENT SHEET - PLANNING illM4ISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 13, 1983 PD 83-04 Fleischli, T. Public hearing to consider the applicfltion of Mr. Thomas Fleischli, on behalf of 900 E.! Hamilton Avenue - A General Partnership, for a! plarmed development permit and approval of plfms, ele- vations, and development schedule to allow the construction of an office complex on property known as 920 E. Hamilton Avenue in a ~D (PI armed Development/Commercial) Zoning District. STAFF REillM.ffiNDATION That the Plaming Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve this application, in concept, subject to the attached condi tions . - STAFF DISCUSSION The applicant is proposing to construct an office project which would con- sist of 3 structures of 6,11, and IS-stories, totaling approximately 485,000 sq. ft. of gross building area. In addition, a two-leve~ above- grade parking structure is also proposed for the site. Proposed off-site improvements include a turmel beneath Hamilton Avenue with associated ramps, a bridge across Los Gatos Creek to connect with Campisi ¡Vay, and the widening of the Hamil ton Avenue bridge across Highway 17 to add one more 1,vestbound traffic lane. The site consists of 14.6 acres of land, and is indicated on the Land Use Element of the General Plan as "Conunercial". The zoning for the property is PD (Planned Development). - As proposed in this application, approximately 8.5% of the net lot area would be covered by 3 office buildings. Another 23.3% of the site would be covered by the two-level parking structure on completion of !Phase II, resulting in a total lot coverage of approximately 32%. Parking on grade would cover 29% of the site, and landscaping would account for the remain- ing 39%. The project is proposed to be developed in two phases. Phase I consists of the 6 and 15 story office buildings,(333,000 sq. ft.), the tunnel be- neath Hamilton Avenue, the bridge across Los Gatos Creek, and ah addi- tional westbound lane for the bridge across Highway 17. Phase II will consist of the 11 story building (152,000 sq. ft.), and the parking structure. Completion of both phases is anticipated for 1987. It should be noted that this phasing differs somewhat from the EIR prepared for the project which indicates that the bridge to Campisi Way would be accomplished in Phase II. The applicant has agreed to complete this bridge in Phase I due to concerns raised by the Public Works Department. -- - PD 83-04 FleiscMi, T. -2- September 13,1983 Parking for the proposed development is indicated as a total of 1940 stalls, resultillg ill an overall ratio of 1:250. In Phase I, it is proposed that a total of 1380 at-grade spaces be provided for a ratio of 1: 241. In addition, it is proposed that the ratio of compact car parking stalls be approved at 50% of the total. The applicant had submitted documentation to support these ratios as part of the previous application. -- Due to the scale of this project, the Staff can support the 1:241 parking ratio for the reasons outl:ined in the report. In addition, several other cities have a higher ratio for large proj ects. The Staff is reconunending that :in Phase I, however, the maximum number of compact stalls be limited to 40%. The EIR reconunends that the City use Phase I of the development to assess the actual park:ing needs generated by the project when it is in operation. In order to mitigate the disruption to parking areas during construction of the park:ing structure and the II-story office building :in Phase II, the applicant has proposed us:ing valet parking services for several of the park:ing areas. Since this \\Ould be an interim measure, Staff does support the use of valet park:ing. Relocation of the mobilehome park residents is an issue which has been raised by the Conmission on previous occasions. The applicant has subnitted a letter which was submitted to the mobilehome tenants association indicating their wi1l:ingness to provide $1,000,000 towards the cost of relocating the tenants. A copy of this letter, dated August 12,1983, is attached. The Architectural Advisor has raised several concerns regarding the site lay- out, :including the pedestrian/vehicular arrival area,; the need for additional trees in the parking area, the need for better directional devices and design, and the need for more details of the parking structure. r If tHis;applid\tion is approved by the City Comèil, the £ollowmg:issues should be clarified in subsequent plans to be approved by the Planning Conunission: 1. Parking structure, elevations, circulation, and ramps :¡¡.re not clearly identified. Floor plans of the parking structure are not shown. 2. Sidewalks on the proposed public street through the proj ect are not cont:inuous. Trash enclosures are not indicated. 3. 4. Access to the PG&E Substation needs improvement. 5. 6. Details of the plaza area should be provided. Park:ing spaces for Phase I, as comted on the plans, are less than the total indicated on the Data StmIJI1ary. PD 83-04 F1esichli, T. "" --- -3- September 13, 1983 It should be noted that the City Attorney has made the detennination that the Environmental Impact Report which was prepared for the previous application for this site is still applicable, and that no further review of the ErR is required or necessary. Also attached for the Connnission' s review are other items of cdnnnunication which have been received regarding this application. Even with the concerns expressed above, Staff is reconnnending approval of this application on a conceptual basis, with the requirement that detailed plans for each phase be brought back to the Commission for approval. It should be noted that, at its meeting of January 11, 1983, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2165 recommending approval of this project to the City Council, by a vote of 5-2-0 (Commissioners FairbanMs and Dickson voting "no"). * * * - Attachments: - a. b. c. d. Condi t ions of Approval Development Schedule Location Hap Letter dated August 25, 1983 to MObile Horne Park Residents from Thomas E. F1eisch1i Letter dated August 29,1983 Letter dated August 30,1983 with traffic report prepared by Barton-Aschrnan Associates, Inc. Letter dated August 30, 1983 regarding proposed ~ontribution for relocation assistance Letter dated September 7,1983 regarding market tor office space Letter dated September 7, 1983 from V. Weinert, Secretary, Hamilton Park Hobilehorne Owners' Assn., for Chll1ck Williamson, President Letter dated August 24, 1983 from Earth ~fetrics, Inc. regarding ErR Letter dated September 9,1983 from Torn F1eisch1i in response to letter from Hamilton Park ~bbi1ehome Owners' Assn. e. f. g. h. 1. J. k. .f . 1 ,- (~ IT Y 0 F C 1\ M P BEL L 75 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008 (408) 378-8141 Department: Planning IDTICE OF HEARING -..------ Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Campbell has set the hour of 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 13,1983, in the City Hall Cotmcil Chambers, 7S N. Central Avenue, qampbell, California as the time and place for public hearing to co~ider the application of Mr. Thomas Fleischli (on behalf of 900 ¡E. Hamilton Ave., A General Partnership) for a planned develqpment pennit and approval of plans, elevations and development ~chedule to allow the construction of an office complex on propert~ known as 920 E. Hamilton Avenue in a PD (Planned DeVelopment/ConfœrCial) Zoning District. APN 288-01,2,3 & 4 (PD 83-04) . Map and legal description of subject property are on file in the Office of the Planning Departrent, 7 S N. Central Avenue, Campbell, California. Interested persons may appear and be heard at said hearin~. ClIT OF CAMPBLL PLANNING COM-ITSS I ON AR1HUR A . KEE , SECRETARY .- PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 9ðO14-2ð7i5 (408) 446-0157 September 9, 1983 RE: 900 E. Hamilton Avenue PD 83-04 i ~ ~~~9~~~ ~ CITY qF CAMPBELL ~NI~B DEPARTMENT HAND DELIVERED Mr. Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 Dear Art: .- i I I have enclosed a letter dated August 25, 1983, from ~imothY A. Lundell on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Ha ilton Park Mobile Homeowners Association to Sanford N. Dill r, and letters dated August 31, 1983, and September 6, 1983,! from Sanford N. Diller to Timothy A. Lundell. ' This correspondence relates to the proposal of 900 E.! Hamilton Avenue, a general partnership to Mr. Charles Williams~n on behalf of the Hamilton Park Mobile Homeowners Association to contribute $1,000,000, to be placed in a relocation fund to assist in relocating the residents of Hamilton Park. ! -- Mr. Lundell, in his letter of August 25, 1983, resPo~ded to this proposal Wit.h a counter proposal consisting of four (4) acceptable alternatives, the most desirable of which ould require the developer and tne Campbell Redevelopment ~gency to locate and acquire a site, construct a new mobile ho1e park thereon, and relocate the residents to the new park. I In addi- tion, the residents' least desirable alternative woul!d require a contribution of $2.5 million dollars to be placed iin a fund for the purchase of mobile homes in the park, with a~y excess being utilized as a rental subsidy for future rental !costs of low income residents. ' Mr. Diller responded to this counter proposal in his !letter of August 31, 1983. He points out, in short, that the ~proposal submitted to Mr. Williamson represents the maximum c ntribution the proposed project can economically support, and i , equitable in light of the fact the residents are faced with a ~elocation decision irrespective of our proposed project as a r~sult of the Keeslings' notice to close down the park. . r-1r. Arthur Kee September 9, 1983 Page two --- Mr. Diller's correspondenc. e of September 6, 1983, i~cludes a recent court case supporting the legal proposition ~hat pre- venting a landlord from exercising his right to tefminate his business as a landlord was unconstitutional under t e Due Process Clause of the California Constitution. Thi court case was particularly timely in light of the notion held by some residents that in fact the Keeslings can someho~ be restricted from closing down the mobile home park. i I felt it important to submit this correspondence t~ complete the record prior to our upcoming public hearings. f expect the issue of relocation will be discussed by member$ of the Planning Commission and City Council and they shoul~ certainly have complete information available to them. I res~ectfully request this correspondence be included as a part of our ap- plication and submitted to members of the Planning Çommission and City Council for their review. ' - i I In past meetings with Mr. Williamson, and in the entlosed correspondence we have tried to convey our standing I commitment to contribute to a relocation fund for relocation al'Sistance required as a result of approval of our proposed pr ject. We are prepared to meet with Mr. Williamson and Mr. Lu dell at their convenience to discuss the residents preferen es and our economic limitations and to explore alternate solut ons to the relocation problem. Thank you. I I I I I I ON A VENUti , nership I I Thomas E. Fleischli i Project Manager I i TEF:lb cc: Sanford N. Diller Edward Schilling Timothy A. Lundell Charles.Williamson Enclosures ,--, Seria Clara Vc....JY Water DisUict 5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95118 TElEPHONE (408) 265-2600 September 7, 1983 Mr. Arthur Kee Director of Planning City of Campbell 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 I I I I I I I We have reviewed the site plan for the proposed Campbell Office Pj'rk adjacent to Los Gatos Creek sent to us on August 27, 1983. The proposed plan appears generally satisfactory. Comments in our letters of December 2, 1982 and November 10, 1981 still apply. Attention Mr. Martin Woodworth Planner I Dear Mr. Kee: Subject: PD-83-04 Please send improvement plans for our review and issuance of a per it. ~n;er.~ UV,,- (;?~ W. F. Carlsen Division Engineer Design Coordination Division cc: Carl N. Swenson Company, Inc. 95 South Market Street, Suite 600 San Jose, CA 95113 Mr. Joe Elliott, Director of Public Works City of Campbell ~ ŒnŒ~W~ ~ -S P 1 0 1983 CITY F CAMPBELL PLAN ING DEPARTMENT AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 915014-2:5715 (408) 446-0157 September 7, 1983 HAND DELIVERED Mr. Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 RE: 900 East Hamilton Avenue PD83-04 Dear Art: -- i I have enclosed a letter dated August 25, 198~ from Michael Murphy of MacMillan, Moore & Buchanan, In . regarding the market for office and R & D in the West Valle Market. Michael prepared this letter report in anticipatiqn members of ~bePlanning Commission and City Council may have questions as to the need for first-class office space in Ca~pbell. I believe the report clearly points out the i4sufficient supply of office space in the West Valley Market. ¡ I was particularly surprised to read that major tenantslare moving out of the area as a result of insufficient expan~ion space. Michael notes two examples, the Chubb Insurance G~oup who moved from the pruneyard and leased approximately 15,000 sq. ft. in Trammell Crow's Project at the San Jose Ai~port and USF&G who moved from 15,000 sq. ft. at Hamilton a~d San Tomas to 20,000 sq. ft. on North First Street in San Jo~e. In both cases, the tenant would have preferred to stáy in the West Valley but could not get adequate expansion ~pace in a first-class project in the area. . -. Please include this letter report in our appl~cation to be made available to members of the Planning Comm~ssion and City Council. Should you have any questions on a4y of this material, please feel free to contact or Micha~l Murphy directly. Thank you. : TEF/jle cc: Michael Murphy Edward Schilling (with enclosure) ~ ~~~~W~ ~ SEP 08 1983 CITY OF" CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT -- ..-. PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 9ðO14-2ð7ð (408) 446-0157 August 30, 1983 FOR HAND DELIVERY Mr. Arthur A. Kee 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 RE: 920 East Hamilton Avenue PD 83-04 Dear Art: -- Enclosed please find a traffic report prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. for the referenced project. This report is an up- date of prior traffic studies and includes changes in non project related traffic generation, namely the recently approved Grey Lands Business Park to be located on the Ainsley property, and the approve office project located on Campisi Way. I respectfully request that the enclosed material be included as part of the pending appli- cation for 900 East Hamilton Avenue (PD 83-04). Should you have any questions during your review of the enclosed, feel free to contact either Jeffr y Damon at Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., (408) 280- 6600 or me. ,-.. Thank you. r . Thomas E. lelschll Project Manager TEF:cam Enclosure cc: William Helms (with enclosures) Jeffrey Damon ~ æ~œUWŒ ~ AU G 3 1983 ¡ CITY OF d:AMPBELL PL:ANNINI3 ~EPARTMENT -- .- PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 9:5014-2:57:5 (408) 446-0157 August 30, 1983 Mr. Arthur Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 Re: 920 East Hamilton Avenue PD 83-04 Dear Art: \- Enclosed herewith please find a letter da ed August 12,1983 from Sanford N. Diller to Mr. CharI s Williamson as President of the Hamilton Park Mobile Homeowners Association. This letter proposes a con- tribution of $1,000,000 to be placed in a relocatio fund and made available to residents at Hamilton Park in need of relocation assistance as a result of approval of the referenced application. Please note that the relocation assistanc is contingent upon final approval of the project and e ecu- tion of a disposition and development agreement bet een 900 East Hamilton Avenue and the City of Campbell Redevelop- ment Agency which provides for Agency participation in the cost of off-site improvements as proposed in the ap lication. -, As you know, the Redevelopment Agency has ade no committment as to their interest in participating i the project. If in fact the Redevelopment Agency agrees to participate in the project, and as a result relocat"on assistance is required by California Law or otherwi e, it is our intention that the $1,000,000 contribution r ferenced above would be pooled with the resources of the Red velopment Agency to be utilized in the satisfaction of any st tutory requirements for relocation assistance by the Agenc . fD) Œ t ~ ~W~ r¡y lJ\\ IS1P 01 1983 lW CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT - - Mr. Arthur Kee August 30, 1983 Page Two I respectfully request that the enclosed letter be included as part of the referenced applic tion by 900 East Hamilton Avenue, a general partnership. Thank you. ~y'r Thomas E. Fleischli Project Manager TEF:cam Enclosure cc: Edward Schilling Charles Williamson Timothy A. Lundell ,-. ! ~ITAGORA' LUNDELL & CROS~ ~@ ~ W ATTORNEYS AT LAW ~ TELEPHONE BASCOM FINANCIAL CENTER, SUITE 211 <::? (408) 377-7802 172S SOUTH BASCOM AVENUE . ~ CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95006 ~ ~ ~ A) -?~6' ~ ~a ~JÎ qo~ ~~ ~ ~.> ~~ August 25, 198~~~ ~;. , . RICHARD M. PITAGORA TIMOTHY A. LUNDELL MATTHEW A. CROS8Y. A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP. Sanford N. Diller Prometheus Development Company 10080 North Wolfe Road, suite 201 Cupertino, CA 95014-2575 Re: Hamilton Park Mobilehome Owners Association Dear Mr. Diller: me begin by stating that the ~ d~~l~ of t Park Mobilehome Owners Assocl.atl.on, with respe proposed project, h- l~_u ...moO ~e:~'ætr h,","~': ~tr -.. - ---" , , 1"'~ &_-- , _L ':'uL- ~ L___L_=> ...__J ..~.. 1) offers This will acknowledge receipt of your 1 tter dated August 12, 1983, addressed to Mr. Charles Willia son of the Hamil ton Park Mobilehome Owners Association, w ich letter has been reviewed by the Board of Directo s of the Association. The Board has requested that I pr sent their response by this letter. : I I Mr. Williamson expressed to your assqciate, Mr. Thomas E. Fleischli, reservations concerning the manner in which the offer set forth in your letter of Aug st 12, has been presented. '-t': ~ u- n'" ":'_"'u~r ...~t\:~!n~;t:.be ---' .,., _lljl___L.m.... ....uu ~",nLm9~m:.;'1~~~ .M\11)'(JD>¡¡~he . ~w~ä~\\ a ~Þ-othe~ a¡(fêtnént '1iìl,' "iII... To the extent that ~ny further offers are fortI:- coml.ng, as the result of thl.s letter or furth~r negotl.- ations, it would be appreciated if the conting~ncies (the substance of which we are all well aware) i could be down-played so as make the offer appear more concfete. frêr, let ellamilton t to your !iäMe .. ~¡¡~.11e absolutely -- -1- . . Sanford Dill-- August 25, I ~ no possibility of relocation of the displaced obilehomes, and 2) provides alternative rental housing at wo to three times the present cost of rents at Hamilton P rk. As you are aware, the popular preference for relocatio of mobile- homes has been the acquisition of property and onstruction of a new mobilehome park to which Hamilton Par residents, and possibly others, could be moved. As you ust also be aware from your own efforts in that regard, $ , 000, 000. 00 represents only a fraction of the cost of suc an under- taking. Nevertheless, relocation to another mob lehome park still represents the first choice of the ssociation, al though all of us realize from many months 0 study that there are significant problems in making such a roject work (i.e., unavailability of a suitable parcel, exc ssive cost, etc.). I i ~~~~~"R'F¡E-ê'h '~'ce':';':mãy:'.;])e ->.U', J+-+---.w-.M-. th~ JI.. oøSa~i.'&~i'li:i.ng~..,., '~;bmrconfii~er ~t""r~~s. ii- - , (llj ~ ~~~tté' .~At;8~- ~i~~ Jt- ~~~;-::~~~Ín:;' ~'=:~~f 17- I 1_1- lw~...l!!11J"L-~... -_...~__~qC06&, æ81e A -.............vu "-......... ~~~~;'iJpëëif/ö'WÖäshit~:COI\- ~r:' A ~~~~" '8Vil\q~Mw . .L- ~~~. . ~r-wf@~:}¥~gpec~ ':1¡¡¡their:~tQ~ JI '" L ... - - \ftPI~ -........¡j)~1I:t~Œi.tt)~td'1" ~ost;¡':~:G f . e, 1 . 1st e ffl~~~~~~\~l15~~ %~,~,,~~~~) ~ ,..~.._.L I P J ØIIH U'~'~~~Tffrt;endeëri't:òP~"fffOV!de ~ .J>---.....v.i_~~oqetl\er ~ç p"""b""'y+-..ä.--..hy...bb'F-~k4iiv"IJiII~~.HFö'öli;(ja" . ;;;.;to, ¡"',,:ass,,'i1Ist ; - ~~.,¡ ã -41 --.vw.n~ The options, rde,¡;'d\~f RI-~ __e,~e as follows: I , 1fII'{': The developer in conjunction i with the Campbell Redevelopment Agency will locate an~ acquire a suitable site, and construct thereon, a mobile ome park to which the residents of Hamilton Park will be oved (along the lines of the Relocation Plan prepared last I September); or : 2 . ~l -"u L... i~~~~¡.'11WÍ1!!~:fi'o'ommft:2~¡"iân a::J:::o__:::o_L - jO [ :"¡"'Q'ID(1:oward'1~'l\ssõcätrõtirs~7óWn 0 FÇ,......,,- . --~tJ!~', "~~~1f<Fl~f8Öë'ã'fê~;;it:()f;;;;:â"'~::'11eWl' -1~" 1 ~-~~, which efforts will necessartlY include exploring other sources of financial assistance including grants and loans made available through 0 her public agencies; or I i 3 . ;1a 11....~m.@@W~:J.::Fìi'é~,~..the' sum .:. M!1~u [ !\1!I~~*l'.Phasr6~'i~hðmës~ï1;:Hâinl,1.ton ß& f" - -2- . . - - -- -. Sanford Dill August 25, 1983 P;:¡r1c "'... ",'h,,~ ~ -I'f4* 1 ~ "'-~~-li ¡f;a¡j,-~.ket¡, e:¡~.th.;;.1Ùle -Ov....""..,~ Fv~.i---------m-vo-i:t'.t:;eàr~1mft"'"'ï'~..:.r.-~ . '~la..ed ~ ~MIi~h~lllftt~~!fo~,t-bR~P'1S~. ." 1iub-8i<lizag ,. . -- - ~~f9"""1l&~Mmt~ðCðd \~\i3:e8 identa . The Association feels that the forego'ng presents a reasonable and attainable range of alterna ives which provide some degree of realization of the ~ 'gamparabie },':'11~i nn 'q'~~~"š'. The AssocJ.at on remains wJ.llJ.ng to work toward a final understanding 0 this issue at the earliest possible date, with the reali ation that resident relocation is only one of many facdts of your project which must be resolved before the end ~f the year. Please feel free to contact Chuck Wi!lliamson or myself to discuss the foregoing proposal further~ Thank you for your courtesy and consideration. . Very truly yours, I TIMOTHY A. LUNDELL! TAL/dw Enclosure cc: Charles Williamson Charles E. Fleischli Edward Schilling -3- - ,. -- August 25,1983 .Mobi1e Home Park Residents . .Hamil ton Park 920 East Hamilton Avenue Campbell, California 95008 RE: Proposed Change in Use of Hamilton Park Dear Residents: -- Notice is hereby given pursuant to Article 6~ paragraph 798.56 (f) (1) of the California Civil Cøde that a public hearing will be held on September l~, 1983 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Council Chambers at: 75 North Central Avenue, Campbell, California befqre the City of Campbell Planning Commission on the ap- plication by 900 East Hamilton Avenue, a general' partnership, through the owners of the property. Walter R. Keesling and Robert L. Keesling, et a1., to develop a commercial office project at 920 Eas~ Hamilton Avenue, Campbell, California which is cur- rently is use as Hamilton Mobile Home Park. Enclosed herewith please find a report on th~ impact of the proposed change in use upon the res~- dents of Hamilton Park. Said report is required Rur- suant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65863.7. Said report has been submitted to the C~ty of Campbell in connection with the referenced app~ica- tion by 900 East Hamilton Avenue. -- ,- TEF:cam Enclosures " - . : Sincerely, . " . / .' , 900 EAST H~LTONYA~E~..UE, a genera1!artner¡".,1..p , . :7.... I Þ .j "1'" , /' BY:' /".".,1.4..' Thomas E. F1eischli Project Manager - . cc: Sanford N. Diller Robert W. Wagner Edward R. LaCroix, Jr. (with enclosures) Timothy A. Lu~de11 (with enclosures) ~ æ If\) re D ~n re W Arthur Kee (w1.th enclosures) U;l~~ V ~ Robert L. Keesling (with enclosures) Wal ter R. Keesling (with enclosures) AUG 30 1983 CITY OF' CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT -- II. earth metrics i ncorpor:ated August 24, 1983 Mr. Arthur Kee City of Campbell Planning Department 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 Subj ec t: Prometheus Office Developnent Earth Metrics Project A8098 Dear Mr. Kee: This letter is written to comment on the environmental process of the Prometheus Office Developnent in the City of Campbell. From an ~nvironmental analysis standpoint consistent with CEQA and the State Guideline!s and the Guidelines of the City of Campbell, Earth Metrics finds that the! earlier EIR prepared by Earth Metrics should suffice for an infonnation basiis to move toward a decision on the project. In particular we see no need ~o revise or recirculate the EIR. The following ancillary infonnation may be of interest at this t:ime which should serve to further reduce antic ipated traffic impacts in the local area. First, the use of the Ainsley property in San Jose is now projected to be less intense under the McCandless developnent than assumed in the EIR. Hence local traffic impacts are expected to be reduced. Second, the State has made further commitments to a major transpbrtation project for the West Valley Corridor (Route 85), the developnent of which was not assuned in the EIR, but which fac 11 ity would further mitigate traffic impacts on Hamilton Avenue. In particular the State is canmitting protective right of way acquisition funds and is actively pursuing the Alternatives Analysis step required for this type of project by the Federal Highway Adm in i str ation. If you have need for further infonnation in this matter please contact me. Sincerely, C' \V\,~~\ ~X~~'~' C. Michael Hogan, Ph~. Presid ent Œ1H/ll ~ ~~Œ~~Œ ~ AUG 2 5 1983 859 COWAN ROAD, BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNINI3 DEPARTMENT (415) 697-7103 q CJ PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOL.F"E ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 915014-215715 (408) 446-0157 ~ August 12, 1983 Mr. Charles Williamson President Hamilton Park Tenants 3557 Amber Drive San Jose, CA 95117 RE: Dear Chuck: Association Hamilton Park As we discussed, 900 E. Hamilton Avenue, a gen~ral partner- ship is prep~red to contribute $1,000,000.00 toward$ the cost of relocating the tenants residing at the mobile home park at such time as the City Council approves our proposed commercial office project for this site. It is understood that these monies would be made available and be allocated among the tenants at the park on t~e basis of (i) the financial needs of the tenants, and (ii) ten~rit preferences. The goal to be achieved in the final plan is to pro~ide some basis of allocation satisfactory to all tenants at the park and the City of Campbell. Determination of an equitable allocation by an independent third party, such as the Santa Clara Co~nty Department of Housing and Community Development, would certainly be acceptable. It is understood that this proposal is contingent upon satis- faction of the following conditions precedent for o~r benefit: - 1. The final approval by all required public authorities of zoning to permit the construction on the s~bject property of a commercial office project in accordançe with 900 E. Hamilton Avenue, a general partnership's master plan for the subject property. Approval shall be deemed final after the period for appeal and/or judicia¡ challenge of initial approval shall have lapsed without such action having commenced. 2. Execution of a disposition and development, agreement by and between 900 E. Hamilton Avenue and the! City of Campbell Redevelopment Agency which provid~s in part for participation of the Redevelopment Agency in the cost of off-site improvemen~s required as a condition of approval specified in Paragraph 1 above. This agreement shall further assure 900 E. Hamilton Avenue of its ability to obtain a building permit within the statutory time period ",,---'--"-"^---,---' ~..- -.,---'------- - - ..--, ._,-,- ------,-.,......-- --c- ---".-..-- --"--;- --' ... ~ ~ '/1 Mr. Charles Williamson August 12,1983 Page Two for development of all phases of the proposed project. This Agreement shall be subject to the sole and absolute $atisfaction of 900 East Hamilton Avenue. Please be apprised that this is not a contract, nor ~n offer to enter into a contract. Any final contract is subject to the review, approval and drafting of our attorney. aowever, we will present the proposal outline herein as a par~ of our application pending before the City of Campbell for development of the commercial office project on the referenced property. Of course, we cannot influence your business judgment and the business judgment of all persons involved, howev~r, as an observer who I believe can be objective, the pend~ng liti- gation which in my considered opinion will result in eventual termination of the tenancies, it would be in the best interest of the parties you represent to seriously consider this proposal and to accept it. We have some concern of your group wishing to insert contingencies. Such contingencies would detract from the affirmative response that the City Council would like to have and if they are not satisfied, we would not have an Agreement. . In the event the conditions precedent for the benefit of 900 East Hamilton Avenue as stated herein are not satisfied by December 31,1983, it is the intention of 900 East Hamilton Avenue to withdraw its pending application, including this proposal,'and terminate its pursuit of said approvals. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me or Tom F1eisch1i. Thank you. SND:lg cc: Edward Schilling Timothy A. Lundell Thomas E. F1eisch1i °. Enclosure .' . B-96- 4/21/81 NOTICE TO APPLICANTS REGARDING EFFECT OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY ON LAND DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS PURSUANT TO DEVELOPMENT OF APN 288-01-002, 003 & 004 Please take notice that no vested right to a building permit shall accrue as the result of the granting of any land development approvals, and applications. Pursuant to the adoption of ordinance 9.045 by County Sanitation District No.4 of Santa Clara County, the agency providing the above described parcel(s) with sewer service, if the District's Manager and Engineer makes a deter- mination that the issuance of a sewer connection permit to a building, or proposed building, on the above described property, will, in his opinion, cause the District to exceed its ability to treat adequately the wastewater that would result from the issuance of such connection permit, then said permit may not be issued, and, hence, no building permit may be issued by this agency. -- If the sewer connection permit is issued, it may contain sub- stantive conditions designed to decrease the wastewater associated with any land use approval. ACKNONLEDGMENT By signing below, time of application, that he/she fully understan 900 E. ve. . a General Partnership E. Fleischli APN 288-01-002, 003 & 004 Distribution: original to county Sanitation District No.4 Copy to issuing city, Town or County Copy to applicant .".. PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY , 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 93014-2373 (408) 446-0157 August 3, 1983 Mr. Arthur A. Kee Planning Director City of Campbell 75 North Central Avenue Campbell, CA 95008 RE: 900 E. Hamilton Avenue PD Application -- Dear ~lr. Kee: Pursuant to your letter dated August 1,1983, I have enclosed the completed application for review by the Planning Commission. If you have any questions, please call. -- Thomas E. Fleischli Project Manager VIA HAND DELIVERY FEF:lb Enclosures \R( ~~ŒOWŒ ~ AUG 041983 CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT ...- PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 10080 NORTH WOLFE ROAD, SUITE 201 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 915014-215715 (408) 446-0157 July 27,1983 ~ HAND DELIVERED Mr. Arthur Kee Director of Planning City of Campbell 75 No. Central Avenue Campbell, California 95008 RE: 900 E. Hamilton Avenue - Application for Planned Development Permit -- Dear Arthur: Enclosed please find an application for a Planned Development Permit by 900 E. Hamilton Avenue, a general partnership for the property located at 920 E. Hamilton Avenue in Campbell, California also known as Hamilton Park. I would appreciate you scheduling this application on the Planning Commission agenda of Tuesday, August 23, 1983. Your attention to this ted. -- cc: Sanford N. Diller Robert Wagner Robert Keesling Walter Keesling Edward R. LaCroix, Jr. Michael Murphy Enclosure