Pre-Application - Authorization to Proceed - 2017OF ' CA446
MEMORANDUM
�,. Community Development Department
°R`""0.° Planning Division
To: Chair Kendall and Planning Commissioners Date: August 22, 2017
From: Victoria Hernandez, Assistant Planner
Via: Paul Kermoyan, Community Development Director
Subject: Pre -Application Study Session — 65 S. Second Street
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study session is to present a conceptual plan to construct three (3) two-story
residential homes, on property located at 65 S. Second Street. The preliminary application ("pre -
application") process provides an opportunity for the Planning Commission to provide feedback
during the early stages of the planning process in order to facilitate preparation of a formal
application.
Submittal of a pre -application and a study session .review by the Planning Commission is not
required for this scope of work pursuant to Campbell Municipal Code. (CMC) Sec. 21.41.020.
However, the applicant has voluntarily submitted 'a pre -application and requested a study session
review by the Planning Commission. Since the pre -application process does not constitute a
formal application review, comments are considered advisory recommendations for the use of
the applicant. Moreover, comments are not binding upon the Planning Commission as to any
determination made on a formal application (CMC Sec. 21.41.030(E)). In that regard, staff s
review of the preliminary project plans is limited to the overall project design concept and is not
considered a substitute for formal project review.
PROJECT DATA
Zoning Designation: P-D (Planned Development)
General Plan Designation: Mixed Use - Low -Medium Density Residential `(6-13 units/gr.
Acre) and/or Professional Office
Net Lot Area:
9,492 sq. ft.
Lot Area — A:
2,440 sq. ft.
Lot Area — B:
2,315 sq. ft.
Lot Area — C:
2,827 sq. ft.
Common Lot Area:
1,910 sq. ft.
Building Height:
26 feet 35 feet Maximum Allowed
Building Square Footage:
Proposed Living Area - A:
1,818 sq. ft.
Proposed Garage - A:
400 sq. ft.
Proposed Living Area - B:
1,752 sq. ft.
Proposed Garage - B:
400 sq. ft.
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
Proposed Living Area - C: 2,152 sq. ft.
Proposed Garage - C: 400 sq. ft.
6,922 sq. ft.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): .73 (6,922 sq. ft.)
Building (Lot) Coverage: 36% (3,425 sq. ft.)
Parking: 6 covered, 3 guest
Setbacks:
Proposed
Front (east):
3 feet
Street Side (north):
6 feet
Side (south):
3 feet
Rear (west):
5 feet
Garage (east):
3 feet
BACKGROUND
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Page 2 of 9
.50 Maximum Allowed
40% Maximum Allowed
6 covered, 2 guest (total required)
Required'
20 feet
12 feet
5 feet or 50% of the wall height
5 feet or 50% of the wall height
25 feet
The project site is an approximately 9,500 square foot corner lot located at the south west corner
of Orchard City Drive and S. Second Street (reference Attachment i — Location Map). The site
is currently developed with a single family home that would be demolished as part of the
proposal. Mixed Use (Low -Medium Density Residential and/or Professional Office) zoned
properties abut the site to the east and south, Low -Medium Density Residential zoned properties
abut the site to the west, and commercial properties abuts the site to the north across Orchard
City Drive.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The conceptual plan proposes to demolish an existing single -story, single family residence and
construct three detached two-story single-family residences. The submitted plans indicate the
parcel would be subdivided into three condominium air space lots with a shared driveway and
guest parking area. The proposed residential units would range in size from approximately 2,100
square feet to 2,500 square feet, inclusive of attached two -car garages for each unit (reference
Attachment 2 — Written Description and Attachment 3 — Preliminary Plans).
ZONING/LAND USE CONSISTENCY
The project site is designated as P-D (Planned Development) and has a Low -Medium Density
Residential (6-13 units/gr. Acre) and/or Professional Office (Mixed Use) land use designation.
The P-D zoning district is intended to provide a degree of flexibility in development standards so
as to allow developments that are more consistent with site characteristics while creating an
optimum quantity and use of open space and exemplary building design. The zoning district
allows within its boundaries a use or development, or a combination of uses or developments,
that is determined to be in conformance with the underlying land use designation of the General
Plan. The conceptual three -unit development would have a density of 9 units per gross acre and
would be consistent with the R-M (Multiple -family) zoning district, which corresponds with the
Low -Medium Density Residential General Plan Land Use designation. Development of the
property in conformance with the P-D zoning district and the Low -Medium Density Residential/
Professional Office General Plan land use designation is allowable with approval of a Planned
Development Permit.
Development of a property in the (P-D) Planned Development zoning district must be consistent with the development standard
of the zoning district that corresponds with the General Plan land use designation of the property. The development standards
for the (R-4 Multiple Family Residential zoning district, which corresponds with the Low -Medium Density Residential land use
designation, shall be applied.
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
Page 3 of 9
The site's Low -Medium Density Residential/Professional Office Mixed Use land use designation
comprises of parcels that are situated primarily near Downtown, where there is a need to locate
transitional use types to buffer single-family homes from commercial impacts. Many parcels
designated with the Low Medium Density Residential and/or Professional Office category have
homes that are on the Historic Inventory, which have been converted to office use, while
maintaining the character of the historic homes. The subject property is not listed on the City's
Historic Inventory.
The site's adjacency to Orchard City Drive,.however, and potential impacts from the downtown
commercial properties on the proposed residences is a matter that the Commission may discuss
in terms of General Plan conformance. The General Plan provides several policies and strategies
applicable to this proposal which may be taken into consideration by the Planning Commission:
Goal LU-6: To promote and encourage development along the loop streets, and beyond.
Policy LUT-9.3: Design and Planning Compatibility: Promote high quality, creative design and site
planning that is compatible with surrounding development, public spaces and natural
resources.
Strategy LUT-9.3d: Building Design: Design buildings to revitalize streets and public spaces by orienting
the building to the street, including human scale details and massing that engages the
pedestrian.
Policy LUT-11.2: Services Within Walking Distance: Encourage neighborhood services within
walking distance of residential uses.
Strategy LUT-13.1:
Variety of Uses: Attract and maintain a variety of uses that create an economic
balance within the City while maintaining a balance with other community land use
needs, such as housing and open space, and while providing high quality services to
the community.
Goal LUT-20:
Traditional neighborhoods and home designs that complement Historic Downtown
Campbell.
Policy LUT-20.1:
Compatibility: Ensure that new residential developments are designed to blend with
existing building forms and be predominantly detached single-family units, as
appropriate.
Strategy LUT-20.1a:
Detached Units: Ensure that development or redevelopment projects with more than
2 units consist of detached units with one and two-story building elements, when
located in a predominantly single-family residential neighborhood. Ensure residential
unit entries face the public street.
Strategy LUT-20.1b:
Building Patterns: Ensure that new development is designed to blend in with the
existing building patterns of the neighborhood. For example, if the majority of the
garages on the street are at the rear of the site, the new building should be designed
to accommodate a rear garage.
Strategy LUT-1.5d:
Higher Floor Area Ratios (FARs): Develop provisions for allowing higher FARs in
new projects that provide a mix of uses, maintain a jobs/housing balance or are
located within proximity to Light Rail.
Goal CNR-10:
Protect the community, especially sensitive noise receptors such as schools, hospitals
and senior facilities, from excessive noise.
Policy CNR-10.1:
Noise Reduction: Reduce noise levels at the source.
Traffic -Related Noise: New residential development shall conform to a traffic related
noise exposure standard of 60 dBA CNEL for outdoor noise in noise -sensitive
outdoor activity areas and 45 dBA CNEL for indoor noise. New development, which
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
Page 4 of 9
does not and cannot be made to conform to this standard shall not be permitted.
Acoustical studies, describing how the exterior and interior noise standards will be
met, shall be required for all new residential developments with a noise exposure
greater than 60 dBA CNEL.
Strategy CNR-10.1d: Noise Mitigation Measures: Review and require noise mitigation measures for
development projects, including setbacks between uses, earth berms, sound walls,
landscaping and site design that shields noise -sensitive uses with non -sensitive
structures such as parking lots, utility areas and garages, or orients buildings to shield
outdoor spaces from noise sources.
Strategy CNR-10.1E Sound Walls: In cases where sound walls are used as mitigation, they should be
encouraged to help create an attractive setting with features such as setbacks,
changes in alignment, detail and texture, pedestrian access (if appropriate) and
landscaping.
DISCUSSION
The following discussion highlights various issue areas that staff believes are integral to review
of this proposal. These issue areas are being identified to assist the Commission's discussion of
the proposed project.
LAND USE APPROPRIATENESS
The General Plan contains policies and strategies that emphasize the need to maintain a variety
of uses that create an economic balance within the City while maintaining a balance with other
community land use needs. The Mixed Use land use designation allows for the site to
accommodate either a mix of residential uses and office uses, or singularly residential or office
uses, encouraging neighborhood services within walking distance of residential uses.
There are a variety of ways to develop this site, which will be the main topic of discussion. These
include: Mixed Use (office and residential), Residential only, and Office only. As with any land
use decision, there are advantages and disadvantages associated with a particular land use on a
specific property. In order to assist the applicant in framing a proposal appropriate for this
property, feedback is necessary for the conceptual plan to build solely residential buildings.
General Plan Land Use Designation
® General Commercial
-"Office/Low-Medium Density Residential (6-13 Units/Gr. Acre)
® Low -Medium Density Residential (6-13 Units/Gr. Acre)
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017 Page 5 of 9
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
Mixed Use: The development of a mixed use project on the property would allow for ground
floor office space on the site. Due to the location of a sound wall which separates the
neighborhood from the traffic activity of Orchard City Drive, the ability to promote pedestrian
activity along Orchard City Drive would be challenging unless the sound wall is removed. Also,
locating non-residential office on a busy street which attracts more motorists may encourage
non-residential vehicular traffic to enter a residential neighborhood. Staff has observed
neighborhood concern with this type of land use relationship. Although, Orchard City Drive has
been identified in the General Plan as one of the downtown "loop streets" (Goal LU-6 of the
Downtown Development Plan is to promote and encourage development along the loop streets
(General Plan, Appendix Al)), it remains unclear which side of Orchard City Drive is intended
to be reactivated. For example, should the north side be activated since it is contiguous to the
other non-residential developments, or should both sides of the street be activated? Even though
this property is not located within the boundaries of the Downtown Development Plan,
development on the south side of Orchard City Drive could affect the characteristics of the loop
street.
However, the Campbell Municipal Code also includes provisions that encourage mixed use
development, where permitted, by exempting the residential units of a mixed use development
from the Floor Area Ratio calculation of the site (CMC Sec. 21.36.130(B)(3)). The applicant's
conceptual plan presents a design that would include a Floor Area Ratio of .73, where a Floor
Area Ratio of .50 is the development standard for Low -Medium .Density Residential units.
Development of a mixed use project may allow for the additional Floor Area Ratio the
conceptual plan proposes.
Lastly, a mixed use development may not be able to maintain the character of the primarily
single family residential neighborhood to which it would abut, resulting in an inconsistency with
Goal LUT-20, which encourages traditional neighborhoods and home designs that complement
Historic Downtown Campbell. Strategy LUT-20.lb also speaks to ensuring that new
development is designed to blend in with the existing building patterns of the neighborhood,
which could not be achieved by introducing a mixed use development alongside primarily single
family homes. In essence, a multi -story development with commercial on the ground floor could
be viewed by the neighborhood as inconsistent with its character.
Existing wall along Orchard City Drive.
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
Page 6 of 9
Residential: There are several advantages and disadvantages associated with the development of
a residential -only project on this site. The surrounding properties on S. Second Street, south of
Orchard City Drive, are primarily single family residential properties, except for the adjacent
property located at 75 S. Second 'Street, which is developed with. a single story residential
building that has been converted into an office use, as is permitted with the property's zoning
and land use designation. The development of the subject site as a residential -only development
would be compatible with the primarily residential neighborhood, consistent with Policy LUT-
20.1, which strives to ensure that the new residential development consists of predominantly
detached single-family units. The residential use would not expose neighboring residential
properties to the noise impacts associated with office uses, such as commercial trash pick-up and
customer vehicular traffic associated with office or mixed use developments. Development of a
residential -only project would also allow for the existing sound wall along Orchard City Drive to
remain and maintain the consistent visual character of the loop street between S. Third Street and
S. First Street.
The development of 65 S. Second Street as a residential -only project would, however, isolate the
adjacent office development at 75 S. Second Street between residential properties, creating a
parcel that resembles `.`spot zoning." The property at 75 S. Second Street is currently occupied by
Soundtek Studios, a sound recording studio.
Development of three residential units on the property would also pose site planning concerns, as
discussed in the analysis of the Architecture and Design.
Primarily Single Family Residential development along S. Second St.
Office: Alternatively to what is discussed above, an office -only development would be consistent
with the existing office use on the adjacent property at 75 S. Second Street. However, the
architectural design and site layout of an office building on the subject property could pose a
challenge. Although the adjacent property to the south is an office use, it occupies a structure that
was once a single family home, while a new office building might not maintain that single family
home character.
The development of an office -only use on the site would also allow for the addition of services
within walking distance of residential uses,' consistent with Policy LUT-11.2. Office
development would encourage pedestrian activity along Orchard City Drive, a Goal of the
Downtown Development Plan. In addition, Strategy LUT-13.1 'of the General Plan speaks to
attracting and maintaining a variety of uses that create an economic balance within the City
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017 Page 7 of 9
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
while maintaining a balance with other community land use needs, such as housing and open
space, and while providing high quality services to the community. An Office -only development
could be carefully planned on the site to ensure - minimal disruption to neighboring residential
properties, while providing a variety of uses and services to the neighborhood. Careful
consideration would have to be to be taken when designing the site layout so as to ensure noise
impacts typical of office uses, such as trash pick-up ' and customer vehicular traffic, would be
minimal to the surrounding residential uses. The design and site layout should,also be consistent
with the General Plan Policies and Strategies that speak to ensuring compatibility with
surrounding development and maintaining consistent building patterns of the neighborhood.
Adjacent Office Use at 75 S. Second St.
ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN
Various General Plan policies and strategies speak to the necessity of site planning, and design
compatibility with a site's surrounding neighborhood. The property, which borders both
commercial properties and residential properties would ensure that the development consists of
detached units, consistent with the residential neighborhood. This would be consistent with
General Plan Policy LUT-20.1, which emphasizes that the conceptual plan should be designed to
blend with existing building forms and be predominantly detached single family units, as
appropriate. Although consistent with this Policy, the development of three units is not
necessarily consistent with the primarily single family character of the neighborhood. The
addition of a private access road and guest parking on the site is inconsistent with the
development of the neighboring residential properties. The orientation of the buildings away
from the public street is not only inconsistent with the building orientation of the neighboring
properties, but is also inconsistent with General Plan Strategy LUT-20.1 a, which speaks to
ensuring residential unit entries face the public street. In addition, the conceptual plan would be
inconsistent with Strategy LUT-20.1b, which recommends that if the majority of the garages on
the street are at the rear of the site, the new building should be designed to accommodate a rear
garage. The conceptual plan demonstrates a site layout that would not blend in with the existing.
garage placement pattern of the neighborhood, as the majority of the garages on the street are at
the rear of the site, and the proposed site layout pushes the garage of Unit -A as close as three (3)
feet to the front property line.
Although the conceptual plan indicates that no residential units would face the public street, this
does allow for the existing sound wall along Orchard City Drive to remain in its current location.
This wall helps serve as a hard line break between different land uses, separating the residential
neighborhood from the commercial downtown.
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
Preliminary Site Plan
Preliminary Elevation
NOISE IMPACTS
Page 8 of 9
The General Plan includes several policies and strategies that strive to protect sensitive noise
receptors, such as residential land uses, from excessive noise. Acoustical studies, describing how
the exterior and interior noise standards will be met, may be required to determine whether
Orchard City Drive would expose the proposed residential units to noise levels greater than 60
decibels in the outdoor open spaces of each unit and/or 45 decibels in the interior spaces of the
units. If it is determined through the acoustical studies that mitigation measures are warranted,
the project may be required to construct a new sound wall, which may not be consistent with the
existing sound wall along Orchard City Drive. Alternative mitigation may include wall thickness
of the proposed buildings, added insulation, inoperable windows, orienting the building
entrances toward Orchard City drive, maintaining the outdoor open spaces for each unit behind
the buildings, interior to the site, shielded from the traffic noise of the loop street, to name a few.
Planning Commission Study Session — August 22, 2017 Page 9 of 9
65 S. Second Street — PRE2017-02
Public Comments: One comment letters was received from the public in response to the public
noticing of this application. The public comment (reference Attachment 4 — Public Comment)
was in opposition to the project, due to the proposal of multiple homes on a primarily single-
family street.
SUMMARY
Based on the discussion points raised in this study session memorandum, staff requests comment
and direction on the following items:
• Land Use Appropriateness
o Is a residential -only development appropriate on this site?
o Would the approval of this land use create "spot zoning" for the adjacent property
on S. Second Street?
• Architecture and Design
o Does the Commission support the architectural design and site layout presented?
o Should the project orient building entrances toward Orchard City Drive to activate
the loop street?
• Noise Impact Analysis
o Would the project benefit from a site layout that protects residential open space
from traffic noise?
o Would the possible addition of a sound wall inhibit the activation of the loop
street?
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Written Description
3. Preliminary Plans
4. - Public Comment
Y
Prepared b : V j� Z;,�
P
Victoria Hernandez, Assistant Planner
Approved by:
Paul Kermoy4, %mmunity Development Director