GP and ZC 1990ORDINANCE NO. 1805
BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY
OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA, FROM INDUSTRIAL TO
COMMERCIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 535 WESTCHESTER
DRIVE, A CITY-INITIATED APPLICATION, GP 90-03. APN:
412-29-05, AND 412-30-35.
The City Council of the City of Campbell does ordain as follows:
SECTION ONE: That the Land Use Element of the General Plan of the
City of Campbell, together with amendments thereto, is hereby changed
and amended as per Exhibit A, and as contained in Exhibit B entitled
Development Policies, attached hereto.
SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30)
days following its passage and.adoption and shall be published once
within fifteen (15) days upon passage and adoption in the San Jose
Mercury News, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of
Campbell, County of Santa Clara.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
roll call vote:
7th day of
August, 1990
by the following
AYES:
NOES:
.ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers: None
Councilmembers: Kotowski
Watson, Conant, Burr, Ashworth
ATTEST:
./~ ~ APPROVED:
B~rb~ra Olsasky, city Cl~
n J. Ashworth,
Mayor
Exhibit B
DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP 90-03
ZONE CHANGE ZC 90-03
FORMER WINCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE
Ao
Land Usg
The land use is limited to destination commercial uses. Destination
commercial is defined as a retail or retail/wholesale use which
relies on the public's knowledge of the store's location through
marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-mouth
advertising. Such uses serve a market area beyond Campbell due to
the large-scale or specialization of the use
2. Examples of destination commercial uses are:
a. membership-type retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods
in bulk quantities ("box retail")
b. factory discount outlets
c. automobile-dealer malls
d. other uses which meet the definition contained in A.1
ge
The future planned development permit application shall master
plan development of the entire site.
B. Development Intensity
A floor area ratio (FAR) of approximately .30 is anticipated for this
site. In conjunction with consideration a specific development
application and a public hearing, the City Council may authorize a
FAR of up to .35 with the following findings:
ao
the additional FAR will not adversely affect the adjoining
uses.
the additional FAR will not adversely affect the local
circulation system.
the use characteristic:, are substantially similar to those
envisioned by this General Plan Amendment.
adequate parking can be provided on-site.
Development Policies - GP 90-03 & ZC 90-03
PaE;e -2-
Traffic and Access
Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis which
studies project traffic impacts on the local circulation network
including appropriate intersections and neighborhoods in adjoining
jurisdictions. The City should consult with the adjoining
jurisdictions to identify the intersections and neighborhoods to be
studied.
Do
In conjunction with a development application for this site, the
applicant shall submit information regarding off-site
improvements proposed to mitigate traffic impacts and to improve
site access. Details shall be provided on road improvement and
intersection modifications.
o
The developer shall examine methods to ensure safe and
convenient pedestrian linkage to the neighboring residential areas
Noise
Noise-generating facilities such as loading docks and mechanical
equipment should be located away and/or buffered from residential
areas.
The future developer shall submit a noise study evaluating impacts
in two areas:
so
impact of site generated noise on adjoining residential
uses, and
noise impacts of project traffic on residential streets used to
access the site, such as Union Avenue.
A sound wall shall be constructed where the site adjoins residential
uses.
Eo
Landscaping
The future development should provide a landscape buffer along
the westerly property line to create an attractive appearance when
viewed from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping shall be provided along property lines abutting
residential uses. The landscaping should block views of the
development and ensure privacy for residents.
Development Policies - GP 90-03 & ZC 90-03
Pal~e -2-
C. Traffic and Access
Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis which
studies project traffic impacts on the local circulation network
including appropriate intersections and neighborhoods in adjoining
jurisdictions. The City should consult with the adjoining
jurisdictions to identify the intersections and neighborhoods to be
studied.
Do
In conjunction with a development application for this site, the
applicant shall submit information regarding off-site
improvements proposed to mitigate traffic impacts and to improve
site access. Details shall be provided on road improvement and
intersection modifications.
o
The developer shall examine methods to ensure safe and
convenient pedestrian linkage to the neighboring residential areas
Noise
Noise-generating facilities such as loading docks and mechanical
equipment should be located away and/or buffered from residential
areas.
The future developer shall submit a noise study evaluating impacts
in two areas:
a. impact of site generated noise on adjoining residential
uses, and
b. noise impacts of project traffic on residential streets used to
access the site, such as Union Avenue.
A sound wall shall be constructed where the site adjoins residential
uses.
The future development should provide a landscape buffer along
the westerly property line to create an attractive appearance when
viewed from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping shall be provided along property lines abutting
residential uses. The landscaping should block views of the
development and ensure privacy for residents.
Development Policies - GP 90-03 & ZC 90-03
Page -3-
Landscaping should be provided throughout the parking areas to
provide shade and visual relief. The developer is encouraged to
provide planters at the ends of parking aisles and to intersperse
planters within the aisles.
Landscaping should also be provided to filter views of the building
mass.
Parkimr
The developer should provide data on the parking demand for the
specific use. The City may impose a more restrictive parking ratio
than the standard commercial ratio of 1 space/200 square feet.
The developer shall submit a sign program with a development
proposal for the site. The City shall evaluate the need for freeway-
oriented signage in conjunction with sign program proposal to
increase facilitate public convenience and awareness of the site
location.
H. Miscellaneou~
Planning staff shall monitor the implementation of the the
mitigation measures contained within the Negative Declaration to
ensure that the measures are implemented in any future
development application for the subject property. Monitoring of
the mitigation measures shall be consistent with Section 21081.6 of
the Public Resources Code.
gp90=3cc.rct(mc3)
General Plan Amendment to change the ..
Land Use Element designation from
Industrial to Commercial
High
· du/ac)
· ·
- · .- ..' ,.,..-..,. _-..-. -
Density Residential
· ·
·
·
I I I
I1·111 · ·
Mobile Home Park e ~,
· ·
I I I i
I···
·mil
Immm
mil
Ilmmm
IIIll~
imm·
····mmmm
Industrial o o,, o o~
":,~5 :.' ....
............... :.,.. :.~:: ........
,/
::~:-::.:: ::;:: -.
---/ (. - .' 2 2 .' .';: '...':: 2:: .' i
...... .. ........... .':~
-': -' ,1,5,~*' .... , ......
.-.-.-.-/ ;- ........ _~.... ~ , : /
..:::~ ,::!:: :':::~;.':'" , _ *
....... [ .... ' "'""''"~ ' EXZtlBIT C
..... '"i ~ .........J.'::."
..... ::'~" ............ ' x ' GP90-03
ORDINANCE NO. 1806
BEING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
535 WESTCHESTER DRIVE (APN: 412-29-05 AND 06,
AND 412-30-35), AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS
CITY-INITIATED APPLICATION, FILE NO. ZC 90-03.
The City Council of the City of Campbell does ordain as follows:
SECTION ONE: That the Zoning Map of the City of Campbell is hereby
changed and amended by adopting the attached Exhibit A entitled Map of
Said Propert and contained in Exhibit B entitled Development Policies,
as per the City-initiated application for approval of a Zone Change for
property located at 535 Westchester Drive from M-I-S (Light-Industrial)
to PD (Planned Development) Zoning District.
SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective thirty days (30)
following its passage and adoption and shall be published once within
fifteen days upon passage and adoption in the San Jose Mercury News, a
newspaper of general circulation in the City of Campbell, County of
Santa Clara.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7~ day of
following roll call vote:
August , 19 90 by the
AYES: Councilmembers:
Watsorb Conant~ Burr, Ashworth
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Kotowski
ATTEST:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
Barbara Olsasky, City C~
APPROVED:
John J. Ashworth, Mayor
PD
;-2-0
R-3-S
P-D
R-3-S
R-3-:
R-3-S
96/4
$J80
~947
1-S
Zone Change to change the zoning
designation from M-1-S (Light
Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development)
ZONING MAP
EXHIBIT D
ZC 90-03
Exhibit B
DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP 90-03
ZONE CHANGE ZC 90-03
FORMER WINCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE
Land Use
The land use is limited to destination commerdal uses. Destination
commerdal is defined as a retail or retail/wholesale use which
relies on the public's knowledge of the store's location through
marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-mouth
advertising. Such uses serve a market area beyond Campbell due to
the large-scale or specialization of the use
2. Examples of destination commerdal uses are:
a. membership-type retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods
in bulk quantities ("box retail")
b. factory discount outlets
c. automobile-dealer malls
cl. other uses which meet the definition contained in A.1
o
The future planned development permit application shall master
plan development of the entire site.
B. Development Intensi.ty
A floor area ratio (FAR) of approximately .30 is anticipated for this
site. In conjunction with consideration a specific development
application and a public hearing, the City Council may authorize a
FAR of up to .35 with the following findings:
a. the additional FAR will not adversely affect the adjoining
USes o
b. the additiOnal FAR will not adversely affect the local
circulation system.
c. the use characteristics are substantially similar to those
envisioned by this General Plan Amendment.
d. adequate parking can be provided on-site.
Development Policies - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -2-
June 26,1990
C. Traffic and Access
Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis which
studies project traffic impacts on the local circulation network
including appropriate intersections and neighborhoods in adjoining
jurisdictions. The City should consult with the adjoining
jurisdictions to identify the intersections and neighborhoods to be
studied.
Eo
2.
In conjunction with a development application for this site, the
applicant shall submit information regarding off-site
improvements proposed to mitigate traffic impacts and to improve
site access. Details shall be provided on road improvement and
intersection modifications.
o
The developer shall examine methods to ensure safe and
convenient pedestrian linkage to the neighboring residential areas
Noise
Noise-generating facilities such as loading docks and mechanical
equipment should be located away and/or buffered from residential
2.
The future developer shall submit a noise study evaluating impacts
in two areas:
impact of site generated noise on adjoining residential
uses, and
noise impacts of project traffic on residential streets used to
access the site, such as Union Avenue.
A sound wall shall be constructed where the site adjoins residential
uses.
Landscaping
The future development should provide a landscape buffer along
the westerly property line to create an attractive appearance when
viewed from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping shall be provided along property lines abutting
residential uses. The landscaping should block views of the
development and ensure privacy for residents.
Development Policies - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -3-
June 26,1990
Fe
Go
Landscaping should be provided throughout the parking areas to
provide shade and visual relief. The developer is encouraged to
provide planters at the ends of parking aisles and to intersperse
planters within the aisles.
Landscaping should also be provided to filter views of the building
mass.
Parkin~
The developer should provide data on the parking demand for the
specific use. The City may impose a more restrictive parking ratio
than the standard commercial ratio of 1 space/200 square feet.
Signage
The developer shall submit a sign program with a development
proposal for the site. The City shall evaluate the need for freeway-
oriented signage in conjunction with sign program proposal to
increase facilitate public convenience and awareness of the site
location.
pcgp90-3/Zrpt(mc2)
AYe. -o
i
oo
General Plan Amendment to change' the
Land Use Element designation from
Industrial to Commercial
High
du/ac)
DensitY
Residential
(21'27 ~'
·
· ·
· ·
· !
· !
· II
Home Park
Industrial
July 17, 1990
Public Hearings
Planning Department
Winchester Drive-in Site - City-initiated General Plan Amendment
(GP 90-03) and Rezoning (RZ 90-03) Applications
RECOM2VIENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council take the following actions
concerning the former Winchester Drive-in site:
A. Grant a Negative Declaration.
B. Introduce an ordinance approving a General Plan Amendment per the attached model
ordinance including site-specific development policies.
C. Introduce an ordinance approving a Rezoning per the attached model ordinance.
Staff recommends that Council take the following additional actions:
A. Authorize staff to explore the potential relocation of the City Corporation Yard to a
portion of the Winchester Drive-in site (or proximate sites).
B. Authorize staff to analyze reconstruction of Cristich Lane to a public street and proceed
with selection of a consultant to assist with the analysis.
C. Authorize the Mayor to forward a letter responding to the City of San Jose's letter after
the second reading of the ordinance.(see Exhibit P).
A. General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Industrial to
Commercial. File No. GP 90-3.
B. Zone Change to change the zoning designation from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D
(Planned Development). File No. ZC 90-3.
A. In 1989, Staff began to evaluate alternate land uses for the Winchester Drive-in site in
terms of traffic, access and visibility, compatibility with adjoining uses, and fiscal
impacts. Staff concluded that destination commercial would be the most appropriate use
for the site. At the meeting of March 20, 1990, City Council initiated a General Plan
Amendment (GPA) and rezoning application to change the land use designation for the
site from Industrial to Commercial.
B. Planning Commission held a hearing on this item on May 22, 1990. The hearing was
continued to allow Western Federal Savings, the property owner, and the Cambrian
Community Council additional time to review the application and to allow staff time to
analyze the reports by Western Federal Savings' consultants.
C. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the subject items at their meeting of
June 261990.
City Council Staff Report - GP 90-03 & ZC 90-03
Pa~e -2-
July 17, 1990
Public/Governmental Agencies
A. Pasco de Palomas Mobile Home Park Board of Directors
The Mobile Home Park residents do not object to the GPA as long as noise,
lighting/safety, and site development issues are addressed by the future development
(see Exhibit K)
B. Cambrian Communi .ty Council
The Cambrian Community Council recommends a mixed use designation for the site
consisting of destination commercial and senior housing or a park (see Exhibit J).
The group is concerned about traffic that may impact residential neighborhoods
and with the traffic impacts on Camden, Curtner and McGlincey Avenues during the
PM peak period.
C. City of San lose
The City requests that a "complete traffic analysis, preferably in the context of a full
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)," be provided prior to approval of the subject
applications (see Exhibit H). Their letter also identifies additional San Jose
intersections that should be studied.
Staff
go
Based on staff's recommendation, the Commission recommended approval of development
policies which will accompany the GPA and rezoning actions (see Exhibits A & B).
Policies are proposed that pertain to land use, noise, traffic, landscaping, and other
development issues.
The policies require submission of a noise study in conjunction with the future planned
development permit. The policies also require construction of a sound wall along property
lines shared with residential uses.
Staff does not believe senior housing or park uses are appropriate for the site. Senior
housing ideally should be proximate to public transit routes and shopping g areas for
convenience. The site's isolation makes it an undesirable site for a park as it is not
centrally located to the Union Avenue residential area and the lack of public visibility
may create security problems.
Do
Staff believes that while a detailed traffic study is appropriate when the development
plans are submitted, it is not necessary at this General Plan Amendment stage where
general land uses and development policies are being established and a range of build-out
scenarios are possible. The proposed development policies require that a detailed traffic
report be prepared when a specific development is proposed, including intersections in
adjoining jurisdictions.
Staff's preliminary traffic analysis evaluated impacts of alternate land uses on the
street network and included several intersections in San Jose. The report indicates that
the impacts of a destination commercial use would be similar or less than those
City Council Staff Report -- GP 90-03 & ZC 90-03
.Pa~e -3-
July 17, 1990
associated with the previously approved research and development park and that
destination commercial traffic can be accommodated by the road system. Staff's analysis
also showed that build-out of this site under the existing General Plan designation
represents a worst-case scenario and would have greater traffic impacts than the
proposed General Plan Amendment.
Fo
On a related matter, the Redevelopment Agency requests authorization to explore
opportunities for relocation of the City Corporation Yard to a portion of the subject site or
near-by sites. Destination commercial uses may not utilize the entire 23 acre site. Staff
also requests authorization to select a consultant to analyze the reconstruction of Cristich
Lane to a public street.
Planning Commission
Several Commissioners expressed concerns with the following issues (see Exhibits N & O
for Commission Minutes):
Marketability of the site for destination commercial uses.
Cost of road improvements.
Traffic impacts.
Bo
The Commissioners believed that the proposed use was preferable to the existing
Industrial designation and the development policies would give the City more control
over future development of the site.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend the granting of a Negative
Declaration and approval of General Plan Amendment GP 90-03 and Zone Change ZC 90-03.
Exhibit A.
Exhibit B.
Exhibit C.
Exhibit D.
Exhibit E.
Exhibit F.
Exhibit G.
Exhibit H.
Exhibit I.
Exhibit J.
Exhibit K.
Exhibit L.
Exhibit M
Exhibit N
Exhibit O.
Exhibit P.
Ordinance for GP 90-3
Ordinance for ZC 90-3
General Plan Map
Zoning Map
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Discussion of Environmental Impacts
Vicinity Map
Letter from the City of San Jose dated June 19, 1990
Letter from Cambrian Council dated June 11,1990
Letter from Paseo de Palomas Board of Directors dated May 22, 1990
Planning Commission Staff Report for June 26,1990
Planning Commission Staff Report for May 22, 1990
Planning Commission Minutes for June 26,1990
Planning Commission Minutes for May 22, 1990
Draft Letter from Mayor Ashworth to City of San Jose
Prepared by:
Randal R. Tsuda, Senior Planner
gpgO-3cc.rpt(rnc2)
ORDINANCE NO.
BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY
OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA, FROM INDUSTRIAL TO
COMMERCIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 535 WESTCHESTER
DRIVE, A CITY-INITIATED APPLICATION, GP 90-03. APN:
412-29-05, AND 412-30-35.
The City Council of the City of Campbell does ordain as follows:
SECTION ONE: That the Land Use Element of the General Plan of the
City of Campbell, together with amendments thereto, is hereby changed
and amended as per Exhibit A, and as contained in Exhibit B entitled
Development Policies, attached hereto.
SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30)
days following its passage and adoption and shall be published once
within fifteen (15) days upon passage and adoption in the San Jose
Mercury News, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of
Campbell, County of Santa Clara.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
roll call vote:
day of
by the following
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Barbara Olsasky, city Clerk
John J. Ashworth, Mayor
General Plan Amendment to change the
Land Use Element designation frorr
Industrial to Commercial
High Density Residential
(21-27 alu/ac)
Mobile Home Park
west
Public/Semi-Public
Industrial · .~,-.-
GENERAL PLAN MAP
EXHIBIT C
GP 90-03
Exhibit B
DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP 90-03
ZONE CHANGE ZC 90-03
FORMER WINCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE
Land Use
The land use is limited to destination commercial uses. Destination
commercial is defined as a retail or retail/wholesale use which
relies on the public's knowledge of the store's location through
marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-mouth
advertising. Such uses serve a market area beyond Campbell due to
the large-scale or specialization of the use
2. Examples of destination commercial uses are:
a°
membership-type retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods
in bulk quantities ("box retail")
factory discount outlets
automobile-dealer malls
other uses which meet the definition contained in A.1
o
The future planned development permit application shall master
plan development of the entire site.
B. Development Intensity
A floor area ratio (FAR) of approximately .30 is anticipated for this
site. In conjunction with consideration a specific development
application and a public hearing, the City Council may authorize a
FAR of up to .35 with the following findings:
ao
the additional FAR will not adversely affect the adjoining
uses.
the additional FAR will not adversely affect the local
circulation system.
the use characteristics are substantially similar to those
envisioned by this General Plan Amendment.
adequate parking can be provided on-site.
Development Policies - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -2-
June 26,1990
C. Traffic and Access
Do
Eo
Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis which
studies project traffic impacts on the local circulation network
including appropriate intersections and neighborhoods in adjoining
jurisdictions. The City should consult with the adjoining
jurisdictions to identify the intersections and neighborhoods to be
studied.
In conjunction with a development application for this site, the
applicant shall submit information regarding off-site
improvements proposed to mitigate traffic impacts and to improve
site access. Details shall be provided on road improvement and
intersection modifications.
o
The developer shall examine methods to ensure safe and
convenient pedestrian linkage to the neighboring residential areas
Noise
Noise-generating facilities such as loading docks and mechanical
equipment should be located away and/or buffered from residential
areas.
The future developer shall submit a noise study evaluating impacts
in two areas:
ao
impact of site generated noise on adjoining residential
uses, and
noise impacts of project traffic on residential streets used to
access the site, such as Union Avenue.
A sound wall shall be constructed where the site adjoins residential
uses.
Landscaping
The future development should provide a landscape buffer along
the westerly property line to create an attractive appearance when
viewed from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping shall be provided along property lines abutting
residential uses. The landscaping should block views of the
development and ensure privacy for residents.
Development Policies - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Pa~e -3-
June 26,1990
Fo
Go
o
Landscaping should be provided throughout the parking areas to
provide shade and visual relief. The developer is encouraged to
provide planters at the ends of parking aisles and to intersperse
planters within the aisles.
o
Landscaping should also be provided to filter views of the building
mass.
Parkin~
The developer should provide data on the parking demand for the
specific use. The City may impose a more restrictive parking ratio
than the standard commercial ratio of 1 space/200 square feet.
Si~na~e
The developer shall submit a sign program with a development
proposal for the site. The City shall evaluate the need for freeway-
oriented signage in conjunction with sign program proposal to
increase facilitate public convenience and awareness of the site
location.
pcgp90-3/2.rpt(mc2)
ORDINANCE NO.
BEING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
535 WESTCHESTER DRIVE (APN: 412-29-05 AND 06,
AND 412-30-35), AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS
CITY-INITIATED APPLICATION, FILE NO. ZC 90-03.
The City Council of the City of Campbell does ordain as follows:
SECTION ONE: That the Zoning Map of the City of Campbell is hereby
changed and amended by adopting the attached Exhibit A entitled Map of
Said Propert and contained in Exhibit B entitled Development Policies,
as per the City-initiated application for approval of a Zone Change for
property located at 535 Westchester Drive from M-i-$ (Light-Industrial)
to PD (Planned Development) Zoning District.
SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective thirty days (30)
following its passage and adoption and shall be published once within
fifteen days upon passage and adoption in the San Jose Mercury News, a
newspaper of general circulation in the City of Campbell, County of
Santa Clara.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
following roll call vote:
day of , 19 by the
AYES:
Councilmembers:
NOES:
Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
APPROVED:
John J. Ashworth,
Mayor
ATTEST:
Barbara Olsasky, City Clerk
PD
P-F
R-3-S
;-2-O
R-3-S
P-D
R-3-S
3380
407/8
Zone Change to change the zoning
designation from M-1-S (Light
Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development)
ZONING MAP
EXHIBIT D
ZC 90-03
Exhibit B
DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP 90-03
ZONE CHANGE ZC 90-03
FORMER WINCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE
Land Use
The land use is limited to destination commercial uses. Destination
commercial is defined as a retail or retail/wholesale use which
relies on the public's knowledge of the store's location through
marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-mouth
advertising. Such uses serve a market area beyond Campbell due to
the large-scale or specialization of the use
2. Examples of destination commercial uses are:
ao
membership-type retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods
in bulk quantities ("box retail")
factory discount outlets
automobile-dealer malls
other uses which meet the definition contained in A.1
The future planned development permit application shall master
plan development of the entire site.
B. Development Intensity
A floor area ratio (FAR) of approximately .30 is anticipated for this
site. In conjunction with consideration a specific development
application and a public hearing, the City Council may authorize a
FAR of up to .35 with the following findings:
ao
the additional FAR will not adversely affect the adjoining
uses.
the additional FAR will not adversely affect the local
circulation system.
the use characteristics are substantially similar to those
envisioned by this General Plan Amendment.
adequate parking can be provided on-site.
Development Policies - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -2-
June 26,1990
C. Traffic and Access
Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis which
studies project traffic impacts on the local circulation network
including appropriate intersections and neighborhoods in adjoining
jurisdictions. The City should consult with the adjoining
jurisdictions to identify the intersections and neighborhoods to be
studied.
In conjunction with a development application for this site, the
applicant shall submit information regarding off-site
improvements proposed to mitigate traffic impacts and to improve
site access. Details shall be provided on road improvement and
intersection modifications.
o
The developer shall examine methods to ensure safe and
convenient pedestrian linkage to the neighboring residential areas
Noise
Noise-generating facilities such as loading docks and mechanical
equipment should be located away and/or buffered from residential
areas.
The future developer shall submit a noise study evaluating impacts
in two areas:
Eo
impact of site generated noise on adjoining residential
uses, and
noise impacts of project traffic on residential streets used to
access the site, such as Union Avenue.
A sound wall shall be constructed where the site adjoins residential
USES.
Landscaping
The future development should provide a landscape buffer along
the westerly property line to create an attractive appearance when
viewed from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping shall be provided along property lines abutting
residential uses. The landscaping should block views of the
development and ensure privacy for residents.
Development Policies - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -3-
June 26,1990
Fo
o
Landscaping should be provided throughout the parking areas to
provide shade and visual relief. The developer is encouraged to
provide planters at the ends of parking aisles and to intersperse
planters within the aisles.
Landscaping should also be provided to filter views of the building
mass.
Parkln~
The developer should provide data on the parking demand for the
specific use. The City may impose a more restrictive parking ratio
than the standard commercial ratio of 1 space/200 square feet.
Si~:na~e
The developer shall submit a sign program with a development
proposal for the site. The City shall evaluate the need for freeway-
oriented signage in conjunction with sign program proposal to
increase facilitate public convenience and awareness of the site
location.
pcgpgO-3/2.rpt(mc2)
General Plan Amendment to change the
Land Use Element designation from
Industrial to Commercial
- High
· du/ac)
·
Density
Residential
I mi B II
imlll
/mmlmmmm&
lB mi m B
B II m Il
(21-27 ~!
I lB im i
I am m i i
llmll
mmmm
mmlm4
mmmm
mmmml
Imlm!
immml
illl
IIIim
Mobile Home Park
BmBB
BBmB
Industrial
~ ~.,,-.m ...0.......0-~. .. ..........
C::.:-:~'~.. '~i!.ii':ii'ii.i} ~i--~__..~: i: :_~ ~,~;~ o-~--'~;::.::::: !~,:::: !.!,:d,:_~__ --~, ..........
t:::~ ~"::::::":::::::° , -
::: :~-g~ ............. ~ ........ ~, ~ -.
..... , . .
· .:; ..... ~... ':~:" ~ .~ , /
:~ ~: .., .. GENE~L PL~ MAP
~::::::: r:~::'::~::::"'"~ -. '' E~B~C
'"'~ ~' ............ GP 90-03
PD
14/~6
P-F
/C-2-0
R-3-S
P-D
R-3-S
t
R-3-S
96/4 5
3380
407/8
Zone Change to change the zoning
designation from M-1-S (Light
Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development)
ZONING MAP /
EXHIBIT D
ZC 90-03
70 NORTH FIRST STREET
CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008
(408) 866-2100
FAX # (408) 379-2572
Department:
Planning
DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Exhibit E
FILE NO:
GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
APPLICANT:
City of Campbell
ADDRESS:
535 Westchester Drive, Campbell
APN:
412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
City-initiated application for the 23 +/- acre
former Winchester Drive-in site. General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation
from Industrial to Commercial. Zone Change
application to modify the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
Pursuant to the applicable sections of the California Environmental Quality
Act and City of Campbell Resolution No. 5164; and
After review of plans and information supplied by the applicant pertaining to
the subject project, and after completing the attached initial study, the City of
Campbell does hereby determine that the subject project, as modified by the
mitigation measures contained within the initial study, will have no
significant effect on the environment within the terms and meaning of said
Act and Resolution.
Executed at Campbell, California this day of June, 1990.
Randal R. Tsuda
Senior Planner
gp90-3.nd(mcl)
Exhibit F
Initial Study
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST "1"O BE USED BY THE CI'T'Y OF CAMPBELL IN MAKING ilNITIAL STUDY
il.
BAC~LR~
L ._!
ENV l RON]VlENTAL IMPAC'I"S
(EXPLANATIONS OF' ALl. YES AND ~ ANS~IERS ARE FIEOLIIFtED ON ATTACHED SHEET)
YES MAYBE NO
1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
geologic substructures? []
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil? []
c. Change in topograph~ or ground surface relief
features? []
d. The destruction, covering or modification of
an~ unique geologic or physical features? []
e. An~ increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or.~ff the site? []
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which ma~ modif~ the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean
or an~ ba~, inlet or lake? []
g. Exposure of people or propert~ to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
1 of 6 pages
Y~.$ MA yra£ NO
2. AIR. Will proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of
ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or tempera-
ture, or any change in climate, either locally
or regionally?
3. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or in any altera-
tion of surface water quality, including but not
limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity?
Alteration to the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water supplies?
Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
bo
fo
he
4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species or number
of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment
of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
D
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[] []
2 of 6 pages
YE:S MAYBE NO
5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms, insects or microfauna) ?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the migration
or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habi tat ?
6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
10.
11.
12.
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new
light or glare?
LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial
alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area?
9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in:
Increase in the rate of use of an~ natural
resources?
Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
RISK OF UPSET. Does the proposal involve a risk
of an explosion or the release of hazardous sub-
stances (including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population of an area?
HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing?
3 of 6 pages
YES MAYBE NO
13.
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
result in:
Will the proposal
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement.
b.Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d.Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
16. UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
[]
[] []
[]
[] [] ~
4 of 6 pages
17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in:
18.
19.
20.
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the
obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open to public
view?
RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?
ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL. Will the proposal result
in an alteration of a significant archeological or
historical site, structure, object or building?
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory? []
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? (A short-term impact on
the environment is one which occurs in a rela-
tively brief, definitive period of time while
long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.) []
c. Does the project have impacts which are indiv-
idually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(A project may impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on each resource
is relatively small, but where the effect of
the total of those impacts on the environment
is significant.) []
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly? []
[] []
[] []
[] []
5 of 6 pages
!I1. DISCUSSION OF EI~/I~TAL EVALLIATIGN
L..
IV. D~ INAT ION
AFTER REVIEWING THE ENVIRONMENTAl. INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE
APPLI CANT ~, AND AI='TE~R COMPLETING TI.,I~ ENV! RONMENTAL CI..I£CKL! ST USE
BY THE CiTY OF CAMPBELl. IN MAKING AN L~IVIRONMENTAI. ASSESSMENT
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
although the proposed project could have a
I
find
that
significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the miti-
gation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect
on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required.
6 of 6 pages
Exhibit G
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FILE NO:
APPLICANT:
ADDRESS:
APN:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
City of Campbell
535 Westchester Drive, Campbell
412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35
City-initiated application for the 23 +/- acre
former Winchester Drive-in site. General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation
from Industrial to Commercial. Zone Change
application to modify the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
la. Will the proposal result in disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
3b. Will the proposal result in changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
Discussion:
Currently, the site is almost entirely paved with asphalt. Future
development is likely to reduce the amount of paved suface on site, as
the City requires on site landscaping. Therefore, overcovering of the soil
will be reduced and absorption rates will increase.
Mitigation:
None required.
6a. Will the proposal result in increases in existing noise levels?
6b. Will the proposal result in exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Discussion:
Charles M. Solter Associates prepared a noise study for the previously
Discussion of Environmental Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -2-
4/19/90
approved research and development park. The study concluded that
project-generated traffic would increase noise levels in Union Avenue
residential areas by a maximum of 1 dBA in the AM peak period and 0.8
dBA in the PM peak period. These figures are based upon a traffic
analysis prepared by George S. Nolte and Associates which determined
that the project would generate 617 trips in the peak periods.
The Campbell Public Works Department traffic analysis anticipates that
destination commercial uses will generate 1,032 trips in the PM peak.
Utilizing the assumptions contained within the Solter Associates study,
the project is likely to increase noise levels in the Union Avenue
residential by approximately 1.4 dBA in the PM peak period--a 0.4 dBA
increase from a project allowed under the existing General Plan and
zoning designations. A 3dBA change is the minimum perceptible
change in noise level. A 5dBA increase is generally considered to the
threshold for a significant impact. The commercial designation will
improve the AM peak noise level as no trips are generated during that
period.
Mitigation Measures:
A noise analysis should be required at the development plan stage
to verify that no significant noise impact will occur along
residential streets.
o
2. Project review at the development plan state should ensure that on-
site noise impacts on adjoining residential uses are mitigated.
Potential mitigation techniques may include the following:
a. location of loading areas away from residential uses
b. location of parking areas away from residential uses
c. construction of a noise attenuation wall
d. limitation on hours of operation
3. Construction activity should be limited to normal weekday working
hours to minimize short-term impacts on adjoining residential
areas.
Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an areal
Discussion
The site is currently designated for Industrial uses. The proposal will
change the land use designation to Commercial. The proposal will also
Discussion of Environmental Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -3-
4119190
13a.
modify the zoning from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
A key land use issue is compatibility with the adjacent residentially
designated uses to the north and east of the subject site. The range of
commercial uses is generally more compatible with residential uses than
is industrial. Industrial uses, more often than commercial uses, generate
higher noise levels and odors and may utilize hazardous materials. A
commercial use can have the following impacts on residential uses:
1. noise
2. traffic
3. aesthetics/visual impacts
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are contained within than discussion of questions
6a, 6b, 13a, and 18.
Will the proposal result in generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
Discussion
The Campbell Department of Public Works has prepared a traffic analysis
of the proposal (a copy is attached). The report concludes that a
destination commercial use will generate 1,032 trips during the PM peak
period. Approximately 25% of the trips will be existing trips diverted
from other arterials. Therefore, this proposal will create about 775 new
PM peak period trips. The analysis also evaluated alternative uses for
the site. Destination commercial results in the least number of new trips
in the peak direction of traffic.
The previously approved research and development project would have
produced approximately 617 trips in the PM peak period. The proposal
will result in a net increase of 158 trips.
Mitigation Measures
The traffic analysis specifies the following measures can be utilized to
mitigate project impacts:
Signal coordination on Camden Avenue between Union Avenue
and the San Tomas Expressway/Highway 17 off-ramp.
Discussion of Environmental Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -4-
4/19/90
Geometric and operational improvements and the intersection of
Bascom and Union Avenues.
o
Improvement of Cristich, McGlincey, and Curtner to a cross-section
of 44 feet from curb-to-curb from the site to Camden Avenue.
The report states that these measures will fully mitigate project traffic
impacts and will even improve existing traffic conditions. The report
further anticipates that, when constructed, Highway 85 will improve
traffic conditions throughout the area.
A detailed traffic analysis should be required in conjunction with a
development plan application to evaluate traffic impacts of the specific
project. The report should also analyze the impact of project traffic on
the Curtner Avenue residential area. The report should specify
techniques required to discourage cut-through traffic on Curtner
Avenue.
Will the proposal result in effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
Discussion
18.
Campbell's parking standards require one space for every 200 square feet
of building area. Assuming 300,000 square feet of building is constructed,
1500 parking spaces will be required. For comparison purposes, the
previously approved 420,000 square foot research and development
facility provided was required to have 1680 parking spaces.
Mitigation Measure
Adequate parking should be provided on-site to avoid impacts on
adjoining properties.
Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to public view?
Discussion
The site currently is vacant and in disrepair. In the past, the site has
contained large amount of trash, debris, and abandoned vehicles
requiring nuisance abatement actions. Development of the site will
improve the aesthetics by removing a vacant site susceptible to illegal
dumping.
Discussion of Environmental Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -5-
4/19/90
Mitigation Measures
At the project review stage, particular attention should be paid to
screening the parking areas and the building with landscaping to provide
visual relief. Loading docks should be screened or oriented away from
public view.
gp90-3.dei(mcl)
Discussion of Environmental Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -6-
4/]9/90
REFERENCE MATERIALS
Traffic Noise Assessment for Application, Charles M. Solter Associates,
Inc., July 25, 1983
2. Traffic Analysis of Campbell Business Park, George S. Note and
Associates, July 1983
3. Winchester Drive In Site: Traffic Analysis, Campbell Department of
Public Works, February 27, 1990
4. Documentation of Costco Trip Generation Rates, Wilber Smith
Associates, December 5, 1988
5. Assessment of Costco Trip Generation at Fostoria Way Site, Wilbur
Smith Associates, Feburary 17, 1988
6. Site Approval Application S 83-13, Equireal Development Corporation
288?30
[VATE
/52
OOL
General Plan Amendmen~ t° Change the
Land Use Element designation from
Industrial to Commercial
CURTNER
AVE.
~7/Oa
VICINITY MAP
EXI-IIBIT H
GP 90-03/ZC 90-05
FROM:SAN JOSE CITY PLANNIh~
TO: 488 3?9 2572 JU~4 LETTER FROM SAN JOSE
EXHIBIT I
CITY OF: 9,AN 00~,1~, CAI-I~OllhlIA
G~.N ~10~r-, (~A
[4~G) ~77. 423'7
'T'H OMA$1Me~NEIq¥
June 19, 1990
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
70 N. First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
Dear Commissioners:
We have appreciated the opportunity to review your city's proposal for a
General Plan amendment and rezoning of the former Winchester Drive-In site,
file numbers GPgO-03 and ZC90-03. We understand Campbell's interest in
pursuing these changes but feel that the probable traffic impacts of this
project, particularly as they might affect San Jose, have not been clearly
identified. Given the magnitude of the project and its location in an area of
limited traffic capacity, we ask that a complete traffic analysis, preferably
in the context of a full £IR, be provided to San Jose prior to any approval of
the pending projects.
Our transQortation Planning Division of Public Works has reviewed the
documents· provided and concludes that they raise as many questions as they
answer. Perhaps because the traffic analysis is apparently provided only in
summary form, it is not clear: 1) if there is any long-term (i.e., General
Plan level) analysis included; 2) to what extent the lg82 traffic analysis
work was relied upon; and 3} how trips were distributed in the model. It is
clear, however, that several at risk intersections in San Jose were not
included in the analysis.
Public Works' Comments
General Plan level traffic analysis should Include information which
answers the following questions:
1. What is the forecasted time frame of the TMODEL2 traffic analyses? Is
it year 1990, 2000, or 2020?
2. What is the analysls area of the TMODELZ Traffic Analysis? How much
of San Jose is included.
3. Does the TMODEL2 traffic forecasting model consider any existing or
proposed construction which will generate trips when completed?
1Staff Report-Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990; Exhibit E-Draft
Negative Declaration; Environmental Assessment-Campbell Business Park (1983)
F~OM:SA~ JOSE CITY PLANNING TO: ~BB 379 2S72 JUN 21, 199@ @:]gAM P.B]
Pladning Commission
City of Campbell
June 19, 1990
Page Two
A detailed traffic report addresslng the zoning phase of the project
should include the following information:
1. Analysis and mitigation for those San Jose intersections which are
likely to be affected by this project.
City of San Jose intersections:
Dry Creek/Leigh Curtner/Leigh
Foxworthy/Leigh Htllsdale/Leigh
Union/Htllsdale Foxworthy/Union
Curtner/Union
These intersections are operating at a LOS of D, £, or F. The
traffic report should include trip generation rates for the
proposed land use(s) and micro/macro trip distributions.
Use City of San Jose Level of Service methodology in the traffic
report for intersections located within the City of San Jose
jurisdiction.
Cm
Include the approved trips inventory (ATI) for approved projects
that have not been built but have been approved for construction.
City of San Jose will provide ATI for its area.
d. Mitigation measures should be included for the near term impact of
the project.
A clarification of the commercial land use is needed. Is it one
and/or a combination of land uses show in Table i (auto, office,
residential, industrial, etc.)? Since the specific land use is not
known at this time, a "worst case" land use scenarios should be
analyzed.
The typical Costco trip generation rate of 3.75 proposed by Wilbur
Smith Associates appears to be low based on our experience with
similar land use, i.e., the Story/McLaughlin Price Club used a 5.6
trip generation rate for the P.M. peak hour.
It appears that the additional site access via an overcross(ng over
State Route 17 to Railway needs further.analyses at this time. What
trips are distributed to this route? Has Caltrans been contacted to
determine the feasibility of this proposal?
What is the proposed timing of construction for the subject property?
Will it be after the completion of Route 85/87?
.FROM:SAN JOSE CITY PLANNINP
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
June 19, t990
Page Three
TO: 4BB 379 257~ TUN 21, 199B 8:4~AM
P. 8zi
6. What is the justification for using a 25% diverted trip reduction for
the destination-commercial land use? What land use is this applied to?
7. What is the boundary of the Curtner Avenue residential area?
In addition, we concur with the recommendations in the City of Campbell's
staff report which require that the developer of a s~ecific project submit
a detailed traffic analysis with specific mitigation when applications for
development permits are filed. Such analysis should identify all off-site
impacts and traffic improvements required to mitigate project traffic,
This analysis should be submitted to the San Jose Department of Public
Works' for review before development permits are approved.
We ask that full general plan and rezoning level traffic analysis be referred
to San Jose's Department of Public Works for review prior to approval of the
pending general plan amendment and rezontng. Ralph Qualls, Director of Public
Works, may be contacted at (408) 277-4333 if there are any questions regarding
these comments or any supplemental material which might be useful. Thank you
for your cooperation in this matter; we look forward to an early resolution of
these issues.
Sincer_e.]_y,
Tom McEnery
Mayor
The_Camb_r_ian _C o m m u n i ty_Co_u__n_c i 1
Jay Parrine, Chair
Campbell Planning Commission
City of Campbell
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
June 11, 1990 LETTER FROM CAMBRIAN
COUNCIL
EXHIBIT J
JUN 1990 -
CITY OF' CAMPBELL
laI.~NNING D£PARTM£NT
RE: GP90-03/ZC90-03
Dear Mayor Ashworth:
The Cambrian Community Council would like to recommend % Mixed
use zoning for the Winchester Drive-In site. This would include
Destination Commercial (one business only-Costco) with the balance
of the acerage to include other options which would have a minimum
traffic impact. Such options could include senior housing and a
small park with' access to the County Park with a pedestrian overpass
over Highway 17.
With only Destination Commercial zoning (Cosco and other
commercial establishments), cut-through traffic in residential
neighborhoods could be unbearable with an additional 16,000 trips
per day projected. In addition, PM traffic would undoubtedly back
up on Highway 17/ Camden avenue exit. As you know, San Jose and the
County would also have to be involved in traffic mitigation for this
project.
As you are aware, the Campbell Planning Commission has delayed
making a decision on the General Plan amendment for the Winchester
Drive-In until June 26, 1990. Whatever is zoned for that site will
require an extremely well thought out plan for handling almost
double the daily number of trips that Curtner and McGlincey now
carry. In the case of Route 85, the desingnation of just major
commercial development could exacerbate the traffic problems on
Bascom, Curtner and Union Avenues. Because of this, we urge that
any area wide traffic study include a minimum of 13 intersections.
Members of the Cambrian Community Council feel strongly that
this is a regional issue and an area wide study is imperative. We
appreciate the opportunity to participate in this very important
project.
Sincerely,
SU:nw
CC:
Steve Ulett
Vice-chair, Cambrian Community Council
Councilmember Jim Beall, City of San Jose, District 9
Supervisor Rod Diridon
Don Wimberly, Director of Public Works, City of Campbell
Ralph Q~alls, Director of Public Works, City of San Jose
Ron Shields, Director of Public Works, Santa Clara County
DE
Paseo De Palomas Inc
LETTER FROM PASEO
PALOMAS
EXI-IIBIT K
2~5 UNION AVENUE CAMPliELL CA 9500~ (408) 371-2922
To: Planning Commission, City of Campbell
From: Board of Directors, Paseo de Palomas, Inc.
Mobile Home Park, 295 Union Ave., Campbell,CA 9~008
Sub;oct:
Comments of Pasco de Palomas, Inc. to the General Plan
Amendment for the former Winchester Drive-In:
File No. GP 90-3.
The Board of Directors of Paseo de Palomas, Inc., acting on behalf
of the shareholders/residents of Pasco de Palomas Mobile Home
Park, does not object to the rezoning of the Winchester Drive-In
property from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned DeveIop-
ment)-Commercial, as recommended by Staff---Provided that the
following conditions/concerns are addressed and met in the
development of the property.
I. Noise/lAir Pollution
A. As per the Staff Report, we want to go on record as
insisting on proper noise abatement measures.
B. There must be an accoustical buffer between the
developed property to our west, including adequate setback and
appropriate landscaping. A freeway/type wall between six and
eight feet high on the property line is requested.
C. There must be attention given to car exhaust fu~es and
other air pollution factors impacting our residents.
II. Lighting/Safety
A. Lighting of the area must be kept low and directed so
that it will not affect the residents of Pasco.
B. Adequate policing of the entire property needs to be
provided at all times.
C. Adequate policing and maintenance of the entire
property must be provided prior to and during the period of
development and construction.
Site Development
A. Adequate dialogue between the city., the developer and
Pasco must' occur during planning and construction as changes are
~.nade in the plans. We understand that access to the property will
have no impact upon Pasco or our entrance road. We must be kept
informed of any and all proposed changes.
B. W~? are, of course, concerned regarding building height
a~d building location on the property. The configuration of the
dev~z]opment must be done in a way to minimize any impact on
Pa see.
C. 7he Luzlding(s) should be one story and the loading
dock/dumpster aro,~s be kep~ away from our property line.
Conolusion: We thank the Pla~nzng Staff for their efforts to
EXHIBIT L
ITEM NO. 2
STAFF REPORT -- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 26, 1990
GP 90-03/ZC 90-03
Continued Public Hearing to consider the following
applications by the City of Campbell for the former
Winchester Drive-in site located at 535 Westchester
Drive (APN: 412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35):
General Plan Amendment to change the land
use designation from Industrial to Commercial.
File No. GP 90-3.
Zone Change to change the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development). File No. ZC 90-3.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following actions:
Recommend that City Council adopt a Negative Declaration for
Application GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3.
Recommend that City Council approve Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-
3.
BACKGROUND
go
The subject applications were first heard at the Planning Commission
meeting of May 22, 1990. Consultants retained by Western Federal
Savings, the property owner, made presentations on the traffic and fiscal
impacts of the proposal. Western Federal Savings requested a
continuance to allow them additional time to review their consultants'
reports to determine their preferred use. The Cambrian Community
Council also stated that a continuance would allow them an opportunity
to develop a recommendation for land use on the site.
Bo
The Commission continued the hearing for five weeks to allow the
interested parties time to review the applications and to allow staff time
to analyze the reports by Western Federal Savings' consultants.
Planning Commission Staff Report - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Pa~e -2-
June 26,1990
DISCUSSION
Western Federal Savings
go
The property owner has provided staff with the Traffic Impact Study by
Nolte and Associates and a Fiscal Impact Analysis by Keyser Marston
Associates (see Exhibits L and M).
Bo
The Traffic Impact Study generally supports staff's previous traffic
analysis. It should be noted that the study found that a full destination
commercial project will result in less intersection delay than a mixed use
destination commercial/multiple family project during the PM peak
hour. In addition, a destination commercial use results in less
intersection delay at most intersections than an apartment project during
the PM peak hour.
Co
The Fiscal Impact Analysis is consistent with staff's previous findings.
Destination commercial generates significantly greater City revenues
than does residential or mixed-uses with minimal City service costs.
Do
Staff met with Western Federal Savings since the previous public
hearing. Western Federal Savings is currently evaluating its position
regarding the proposed destination commercial land use
Cambrian Community Council
go
Staff met with Cambrian Community Council representatives on June
19, 1990. A letter from the group is enclosed as Exhibit J. The group
recommends a mixed use designation for the site consisting of
destination commercial and senior housing or a park.
Bo
Staff does not believe that the subject site is an appropriate location for a
senior housing project. Such a project should be proximate to public
transit routes and be near neighborhood shopping areas for convenience.
Co
The site is also not a desirable location for a park as the site would have
no direct access to a public street and not centrally located to the
reamainder of the Union Avenue neighborhood. A park on this site is
also undesirable from a security standpoint. Drive-by police surveillance
of the site would be difficult. Lack of public visibility is often a factor
leading to security and vandalism problems at parks. The City is
currently in the process of revising its Open Space Element which will
establish criteria to prioritize open space and parkland acquisition.
Planning Commission Staff Report - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -3-
June 26,1990
City of San Jose
go
The City of San Jose requested that a "complete traffic analysis, preferably
in the context of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR)," be provided
prior to approval of the subject applications (see Exhibit H). Their letter
addresses technical issues in the preliminary traffic analysis and
identifies additional San Jose intersections that should be evaluated.
Bo
This General Plan Amendment and rezoning action will establish a
general range of destination commercial uses that will be allowed on the
site. Traffic impacts cannot be precisely assessed until a specific
development project is proposed. Under staff's proposed approach, a
detailed traffic study will be performed when a development application
is submitted for a Planned Development Permit. The proposed
development policies require the study to analyze traffic impacts on
intersections in adjoining jurisdictions.
Co
An EIR was prepared for the previously approved research and
development park. Staff's preliminary traffic analysis evaluated impacts
of alternate land uses on the street network and included several
intersections in San Jose. The report indicates that the impacts of a
destination commercial use would be similar or less than those
associated with the research and development park and that destination
commercial traffic can be accommodated by the road system. Staff's
analysis also showed that build-out of this site under the existing
General Plan designation represents a worst-case scenario and would
have greater traffic impacts than the proposed General Plan
Amendment.
Do
Staff believes that while detailed traffic studies are appropriate when the
development plans are submitted, it is not necessary at this General Plan
Amendment stage where general land uses and development policies
are being established and a range of build-out scenarios are possible.
SUMMARY
go
The previous staff report which describes the proposal in detail is
attached for reference (see Exhibit N). Staff continues to support
destination commercial as the land use most suitable for the site in
terms of traffic, access and visibility, compatibility with adjoining uses,
and fiscal impacts to the City.
Bo
Staff believes that the a full Environmental Impact Report is not
appropriate at this juncture; the proposed development policies require
detailed studies during the Planned Development Permit process. Staff
has prepared a Draft Negative Declaration finding that the application, as
Planning Commission Staff Report - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -4-
June 26,1990
Co
modified by development policies, will have no significant impacts on
the environment.
Staff recommends that Planning Commission forward the Draft
Negative Declaration and Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 to the City
Council with a recommendation for approval. The application would be
tentatively scheduled on the City Council meeting of July 17, 1990 with
the NOCA General Plan Amendments.
Prepared by:
Approved by:
~andal R. Tsuda, Senior Planner
Steve Piasecki, Director of Planning
Attachments
Exhibit A.
Exhibit B.
Exhibit C.
Exhibit D.
Exhibit E.
Exhibit F.
Exhibit G.
Exhibit H.
Exhibit I.
Exhibit J.
Exhibit K.
Exhibit L.
Exhibit M.
Exhibit N.
Exhibit O.
Findings of Approval
Development Policies
General Plan Map
Zoning Map
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Discussion of Environmental Impacts
Vicinity Map
Letter from the City of San Jose dated June 19, 1990
Letter from Cambrian Council dated June 11, 1990
Letter from Paseo de Palomas Board of Directors dated May 22,
1990
Fiscal Impact Analysis by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Traffic Impact Study by Nolte and Assodates
Staff Report dated May 22, 1990
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes of May 22, 1990
pcgp90-3/2.rpt(mc2)
EXHIBIT M
ITEM NO. 2
STAFF REPORT -- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 22, 1990
GP 90-03/ZC 90-03
Public Hearing to consider the following
applications by the City of Campbell for the former
Winchester Drive-in site located at 535 Westchester
Drive (APN: 412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35):
General Plan Amendment to change the land
use designation from Industrial to Commercial.
File No. GP 90-3.
Zone Change to change the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development). File No. ZC 90-3.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following actions:
1. Open the public hearing to receive testimony on the subject application.
Withhold action on the application and continue the hearing to the
Planning Commission meeting of June 12, 1990. The Cambrian Council
has submitted the request for continuance (see discussion on Page 6).
BACKGROUND
Site Description
go
The 23 +/- acre Winchester Drive-In site is the largest single
undeveloped site remaining in the City of Campbell. The site is
bordered by Highway 17 to the west, multi-family residential to the
north, the Paseo de Palomas mobile home park to the east, and the Santa
Clara Valley Water District percolation ponds to the south. In addition,
several industrial parcels adjoin the site to the east and south.
Bo
Access to the site is limited. The only direct public street access is
provided over a small industrial parcel fronting Westchester Drive.
Secondary access is available via Cristich Lane, a private street, and from
a 45 foot wide access easement off of McGlincey Lane. All entrance
points lead to McGlincey Lane, which is accessed from Camden, Union
or Curtner Avenues. Camden and Union Avenues contain heavy traffic
volumes during peak hours; Curtner Avenue is a residential street.
Staff Report - Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -2-
May 22,1990
Site History
go
The site was utilized as a drive-in theater until the late 1970s. In 1984,
the City reviewed an environmental impact report and development
proposal to construct a 420,000 square foot research and development
complex. While approved by the City, the project has not been
constructed. The project approval expired in 1985.
Bo
In 1989, the City initiated an action to abate code violations related to the
dumping of debris and abandoned vehicles. Ownership of the parcel had
been under dispute for several years. In November 1989, Western
Federal Savings assumed ownership of the site through a foreclosure
action.
Co
The City Council authorized staff to conduct a land use study of the
Winchester Drive-In site as part of the budget goals for Fiscal Year 1989-
1990. For six months, staff evaluated alternate land uses and studied the
access, economics, and traffic implications.
Do
Staff prepared a City Council report summarizing its findings on
alternative land uses for the subject site. Based on staff's
recommendation, City Council initiated a General Plan Amendment
(GPA) and rezoning application to change the land use designation from
industrial to commercial at their meeting of March 20, 1990. Council
also authorized staff to prepare policies to guide future development on
the site.
EVALUATION OF REOUEST
Land Use Description
go
The commercial land use designation ordinarily allows a wide range of
office and retail uses whose impacts vary depending on the particular
user. Staff proposes that use of the subject site be limited to destination
commercial. These users are less reliant on drive-by visibility and
convenient access to attract customers. Instead, customers typically will
seek-out destination commercial stores.
Bo
Destination commercial relies on the public's knowledge of the store's
location through marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-
mouth advertising. Some examples of destination commercial uses are
warehouse outlets, automobile parks, and membership-type
retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods in bulk quantities
Co
Under the proposed designation, staff anticipates that the subject site can
accommodate approximately 300,000 square feet of building area.
Staff Report - Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -3-
May 22,1990
Traffic
Ao
The Public Works Department has prepared a traffic report assessing the
impacts of the proposal (see attachment). The report states that a
destination commercial use will generate approximately 1,032 trips
during the PM peak period. Approximately 25% of the trips will be
existing trips diverted from other arterials. This proposal, therefore, will
produce about 775 new PM peak period trips. The proposed use also
results in the fewest new trips in the peak direction of traffic.
Significantly, destination commercial does not produce traffic in the AM
peak period.
Bo
^ traffic report was prepared for the research and development project
approved in 1984. That project would have produced 617 trips in the PM
peak period. A destination commercial use results in a net increase of
158 vehicular trips. It should be noted that under the present General
Plan and zoning, the site could be developed to an intensity greater than
the previously approved project. Such a development would create
traffic far in excess of the proposed commercial use.
Co
As a traffic mitigation measure, staff proposes that the site developer be
required to submit a detailed traffic analysis and plans for specific
mitigation measures in conjunction with a development application.
The developer will be required to address the following items at a
minimum:
Thorough evaluation of project traffic impacts on the Curtner
Avenue residential area and identification of alternative mitigation
techniques.
2. Improvements to be undertaken to provide safe access to the site.
o
Identification of all off-site impacts and traffic improvements
required to mitigate project traffic.
Noise Impacts
go
Development of the subject site may create noise impacts in two areas --
1) on adjoining residential parcels and 2) on residences along streets
used by motorists going to and from the site. Staff's environmental
assessment proposes that a noise study be required at the development
plan stage to evaluate noise impacts.
B°
Staff has prepared a preliminary estimate of noise impacts on the Union
Avenue residential areas. Utilizing the assumptions contained in the
Staff Report - Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -4-
May 22,1990
noise study for the research and development project, a destination
commercial use will increase noise levels by approximately 1.4 decibels.
Three decibels is the minimum perceptible change in noise level.
Co
The draft development policies for this amendment state that the future
project should be designed to minimize noise impacts on the adjoining
residential parcels. Possible techniques to implement this requirement
are location of loading areas and mechanical equipment away from
residences, construction of acoustical walls, and limitation of hours of
operation.
Site Landscaping
go
Future development should utilize landscaping along the western
property line to provide an attractive appearance from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping should also be provided along property lines
adjoining residential development to block views of the commercial
facility.
Bo
Commercial developments have extensive parking areas. Landscape
planters should be provided within the parking areas to provide visual
relief from the paved surfaces.
Environmental Review
Based on the Initial Study and Discussion of Environmental Impacts (see
attached), staff has identified four potentially significant environmental
impacts -- traffic, noise, land use, and parking. The Discussion of
Environmental Impacts discusses measures that should be required to
mitigate the potential impacts. The major mitigation measures have been
cited in the previous sections on traffic and noise. These measures have also
been included in the development policies for this GPA.
Development Policies
Staff has prepared the attached development policies which are designed to
accompany the GPA and rezoning actions. These policies elaborate general
planning and design principals which will provide guidance to the future
developer on land use, traffic improvements; landscaping and related issues.
They also include the previously discussed mitigation measures.
ALTERNATIVE LAND USES
Although the City Council has only authorized a GPA for a commercial
designation, it is useful to briefly list the positive and negative aspects of
Staff Report - Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -5-
May 22, 1990
other uses. Staff has evaluated land uses for the Winchester Drive-in site in
terms of traffic, access and visibility, compatibility with adjoining uses, and
costs and benefits to the City.
Residential
Residential land uses place a high demand on City services and produce little
City revenue. Staff also anticipates that marketing a residential development
on this site would be difficult, given its access through the McGlincey
industrial area. The design of a higher density housing project would require
great sensitivity to avoid impacts on the abutting mobile home park.
Industrial
go
Industrial is the site's existing land use designation. As mentioned, a
420,000 square foot research and development project was previously
approved on the subject site.
Bo
Under the existing zoning and General Plan, a development of greater
intensity could be constructed. The existing designation allows building
heights of up to six stories, which would be incompatible with the
surrounding uses. Further, such a development would produce
substantial traffic in both the AM and PM peak periods.
Co
Industrial uses do not require a great deal of city services, but they also do
not produce significant revenues.
General Commercial
General commercial uses include the typical retail shopping or discount
center developments. Commercial uses produce considerable sales tax
revenue while requiring a relatively limited amount of municipal services.
However, staff believes a shopping center is an infeasible use on this site due
to its lack of visibility and access from major streets. General commercial also
generates among the highest traffic levels.
COMMUNITY INPUT
go
Staff has met with the Cambrian Council twice. The Council has
submitted a letter requesting that Planning Commission continue these
applications for one month. The Council desires time to research
optional land uses for this site and to provide a recommendation to the
Planning Commission. It appears their major concern is traffic. Staff has
also scheduled a meeting with the representatives of the adjoining Paseo
Staff Report - Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -6-
May 22,1990
de Palomas mobile home park prior to the Planning Commission
hearing.
Bo
Staff recommends that Commission open the public hearing to receive
testimony on the applications. After the hearing, staff believes it would
be appropriate for the Commission to continue the application to allow
the Cambrian Council full input and participation in the decision-
making process.
Co
The Commission will note that this GPA is paired with the NOCA
General Plan Amendment in the current round of General Plan
hearings. Staff feels that it would be ideal to implement NOCA as soon
as possible. State law prohibits cities from amending their general plan
more than four times a year. Staff recommends that the two GPAs
remain paired, as one amendment has been approved this year and staff
anticipates two additional amendments. Therefore, staff recommends a
three week continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of June
12,1990.
Do
Staff has met with representatives of Western Federal Savings to inform
them of the City's preference for destination commercial development
on this site. Staff has also met with Western Federal's planning and
economic consultants and provided them with information to allow
them to conduct their own study of the site.
SUMMARY
go
Staff believes that a commercial land use designation with development
policies requiring a destination-type commercial is the most appropriate
land use for the Winchester Drive-in site. In addition, staff has prepared
a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that the application, as
modified by mitigation measures, will have no significant impacts on
the environment. Additional environmental studies will be required
when development plans are prepared.
Bo
If Planning Commission believes a continuance is warranted, Staff
recommends that the applications be continued to the meeting of June
12, 1990.
Staff Report - Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -7-
May 22,1990
Attachments
Exhibit A.
Exhibit B.
Exhibit C.
Exhibit D.
Exhibit E.
Exhibit F.
Exhibit G.
Exhibit H.
Exhibit I
Findings of Approval
Development Policies
General Plan Map
Zoning Map
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Discussion of Environmental Impacts and attachments
Letter from the Cambrian Council dated May 16, 1990
Vicinity Map
Prepared by:
Approved by:
Randal R. Tsuda, Senior Planner
e Piagecki,
Director of Planning
pcgpg0-3.rpt(mc2)
E~B~N
EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 1990
2
GP 90-03/
ZC 90-03
City-initiated
Continued Public Heating to consider the City-initiated
application to amend the General Plan changing the Land
Use Designation from Industrial to Commercial; and, a Zone
Change from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to PD (Planned
development) on property located at 535 Westchester Drive,
the former Winchester Drive-in site
(Tentative City Council Date: July 17, 1990)
Chairperson Perrine read the application into the record.
Staff Presentation: Senior Planner Tsuda explained that the application was continued from
the May 22, 1990 Planning Commission meeting to allow both Western Federal Savings
and the Cambrian Community Council time to examine the application in greater detail and
to formulate individual recommendations. He then summarized the progress of the
application since the May 22, 1990 Commission meeting as follows (see Background and
Discussion):
(1) Staff found both the Traffic Impact Study and the Fiscal Impact Analysis
(submitted by Western Federal Savings) "generally consistent" with
Staff's previous findings.
(2) Western Federal Savings submitted a letter (dated June 26, 1990) in
support of a Mixed Use development, however, stated a willingness to
market the site as Destination Commercial. The letter also addressed the
intent of Western Federal Savings to market its property as Mixed Use if
the Destination Commercial classification did not generate enough
interest.
(3)
(4)
The Cambrian Community Council also submitted a letter (received June
22, 1990) in support of a Mixed Use designation, consisting of both
Destination Commercial coupled with a "low traffic-generating use."
The City of San Jose submitted a letter (dated June 19, 1990)
requesting a "complete traffic analysis" which would include a study of
several additional intersections in the City. Senior Planner Tsuda
explained that Staff could not prepare a detailed traffic study at this time,
however, such an analysis would take place at the Planned Development
Permit stage. He also pointed out that a previous traffic analysis did
already take into account several San Jose intersections and indicated
that the neighboring road system could accommodate a Destination
Commercial designation.
Senior Planner Tsuda concluded his report by supporting the proposed Destination
Commercial use as "the most appropriate" use of the site for the following reasons:
(1) It will cause less traffic impacts than the current Industrial use.
(2) It imposes Floor Area Ratio limitations.
(3) Noise buffers (i.e. sound walls, landscape buffers) could be used based
upon the forecasts of a detailed traffic impact study.
(4) It would provide a "substantial fiscal benefit to the City" (as confirrned
by the Keyser Marston Associates Fiscal Impact Analysis).
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of June 26,1990
Page -2-
(5) It will have minimal impacts on adjoining residential uses.
Senior Planner further recommended the approval of a Negative Declaration of the
proposed General Plan Amendment (GP 90-03) and the pro.posed Zone Change (ZC 90-
03) to be forwarded to the July 17, 1990 City Council meeting.
Commissioner Alne asked whether Staff communicated the City's intention to achieve the
maximum fiscal benefits to Property Owner Western Federal Savings (as indicated in the
Western Federal Savings letter, page 2, paragraph 1). Senior Planner Tsuda pointed out
that future fiscal benefits were just one of the many opportunities possible through the
Destination Commercial designation. He repeated that the Mixed Use Development option
(as supported by Western Federal Saving.s) would result in a greater traffic impact to the
neighboring area than would the Destinauon Commercial option.
Commissioner Alne then referred to Western Federal's request that the City "...provide the
necessary approvals, financial assistance and staff support to mitigate the traffic and obtain
the necessary right of ways..." (Western Federal Savings letter, page 2 paragraph 5) and
asked if Staff supported this statement. Planning Director Piasecki responded that although
Staff did not get into specifics, eminent domain powers could be implemented to obtain
sufficient access to the site. He confirmed Commission Alne's suggestion that Staff's
willingness to support the application was defined too narrowly by the Property Owner.
Senior Planner Tsuda also mentioned that the Planning Commission's action, at this stage,
would not lock the City into any financial obligations.
Commissioner Olszewski asked if nearby areas could also benefit from a City-initiated
General Plan and Zone change. Senior Planner Tsuda responded that Staff was not
directed to research other areas. Planning Director Piasecki suggested that an additional
General Plan Amendment could be addressed at the request of the subsequent Developer,
as in the example of a "box retail" development.
Commissioner Olszewski observed the site could establish a desired street frontage by
incorporating the pocket of land abutting McGlincey Lane. Senior Planner Tsuda explained
that Staff addressed the "sensitivity" of the Destination Commercial use to the lack of a
street frontage and despite the current lack of direct access, several developers "expressed
interest" in the site. He further pointed out that Western Federal Savings also owned sites
adjacent to the site enu'ance which could help to resolve the access problem.
Commissioner Olszewski brought up a concern over "spot zoning" and "spot General Plan
changes" and asked to what degree were developers interested in the site. Planning
Director Piasecki stated that the Property Owner was currently working with one "box
retailer," and that Staff also had been in contact with "box retail" brokers who were
interested in the site.
Commissioner Olszewski then asked what "benefits" would come to the City, and whether
Destination Commercial was the "best possible recommendation from Staff" for the people
living in the area. Senior Planner Tsuda again indicated that a Destination Commercial zone
would draw fiscal benefits to the City, as well as direct the following adverse effects away
from the adjoining land uses: taller structures, more intense development, increased
privacy impacts, and multi-family development. Commissioner Olszewski was still not
convinced that Destination Commercial was conducive to the nearby residences, however,
did not favor the current Industrial zone.
Commissioner Olszewski referred again to the "pocket" of land abutting McGlincey,
observing that more prosperous developers would be attracted to a site with a frontage.
Chairperson Perrine asked if a developer could pursue this idea of acquiring a larger site.
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of June 26,1990
Page -3-
Senior Planner Tsuda conf'u-med that the "pocket" could be acquired through an additional
General Plan Amendment. Commissioner Olszewski pointed out that such a move would
result in additional "orphan pockets" that, under the Industrial zone, would be too small to
develop.
Commissioner Alne asked if everything south to the City Limits (down to Cristich Lane, to
and including McGlincey) could be included in the proposed zoning change. Planning
Director Piasecki explained that such an attempt would require a number of small parcel
owners to work together without a motive or public purpose to develop Destination
Commercial uses. He also pointed out that many of the current property owners were
content with their current Industrial zone status. Commissioner Christ also reminded
Commissioner/klne that a zoning change would yield little or no benefit to the surrounding
area which consisted of percolation pond.
Commissioner Christ then commented that whatever land was determined for a General
Plan Amendment, access remained limited through Curmer and McGlincey via Cristich
Lane, as well as through Union. He then pointed out that 'D', 'E', and 'F' traffic-level
problems would make an already bad situation worse. He observed that Staff's
recommendation to zone to Destination Commercial was "the least worst scenario," and that
no "magical solutions" exist.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked what negative impacts, if any, existed with the proposed
zone change. Planning Director Piasecld responded that all potentially impacted areas
would be researched and that such negative impacts would be mitigated, but agreed with
Commissioner Wilkinson's comment that the zoning change would allow greater
flexibility.
Chairperson Perrine and Planning Director Piasecki stressed that a detailed traffic impact
study, as well as a number of different strategies would eventually be determined once a
specific developer and plan was implemented. Specific mitigation measures would also be
researched at that time.
Chairperson Perrine then asked if a Mixed Use designation could be proposed on-site once
it passed at this init/al stage. Senior Planner Tsuda said a Mixed Use designation would
not be allowed without subsequent General Plan and rezoning amendments. Therefore,
residential use, as an example, would not be allowed
Commissioner Wilkinson then asked what would be a General Plan designation for Mixed
Use. Planning Director Piasecki answered that all land use types are listed in the General
Plan designation. He then cited NOCA (North of Campbell Avenue) as a recent example of
Mixed Use. He pointed out that although Staff could not possibly identify all the possible
mixed uses for the site, it supported the Destination Commercial use; he further reiterated
that a developer could come back with an later idea for mixed use(s). Commissioner
Wilkinson clarified that the General Plan designation for Mixed Use (as suggested by the
Property Owner and the Cambrian Community Council) included a combination Office/
Commercial/Retail use.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked if why no consideration to broaden the use of the site
existed if only four General Plan Amendments were allowed per year. Senior Planner
Tsuda explained that Staff planned to "take back" this General Plan Amendment along with
the recently approved NOCA General Plan Amendment and combine the two projects into
one General Plan Amendment. He explained that mixed use had been considered;
however, City Council elected not to proceed with that option at this time.
The Planning Hearing was opened.
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of June 26,1990
Page -4-
Mr. Steve Ulett, Cambrian Community Council Vice-Chair, 2640 Curmer Glenn Court,
presented the views of the Cambrian Community Council as follows:
(1) Recommended a Mixed Use zone change for opportunities like one "box
retailer" (i.e. Costco) and an affordable senior housing development.
(2) Pointed out that residences also existed in the area along with industrial
sites.
(3) Stated that Costco has been interested in the site for the last two years,
and that staff neglected to research the impact of traffic in areas
surrounding Costco outlets in both South Bay & East Bay locations
before and after their development.
(4) Referred to the City of San Jose letter (dated June 19, 1990) which
states: "The typical Costco trip generation rate of 3.75 proposed by
Wilbur Smith Associates appears to be low based on our experience
with similar land use, i.e., the Story/McLaughlin Price Club used a 5.6
generation rate for the P.M. peak hour."
Mr. Ulett concluded that the development of more than one "box retailer" would mm the
community bounded by Camden, Curmer, McGlincey, and Union into a "parking lot." He
emphasized the need for a comprehensive traffic plan which also addressed the future
traffic created at the completion of Highway 85.
Mr. Peter Evenhuis, Campbell Chamber of Commerce President Elect, spoke in favor of a
possible Costco outlet at the site. He acknowledged the impact of traffic, however,
identified the opportunities for tremendous sales tax revenues (noting that the average
Costco purchase is $150.00) as well as job opportunities for young people (ages 18 - 20).
He emphasized that the Chamber of Commerce did not take an official board of directors
vote, and that individual members did express reservations about the traffic impact.
Commissioner Christ asked if a Costco could possibly further hinder sales to existing
Campbell retailers similar to the way sales have been presumably affected by renovations to
both the Westgate and Valley Fair shopping malls. President Elect Evenhuis speculated
that the impact would probably be "half and half."
Commissioner Olszewski speculated that the costs to mitigate the future traffic impact might
make the venture undesirable. President Elect Evenhuis cited the concern over traffic as
why the Chamber of Commerce did not yet release an official stand, however, did
acknowledge the great potential in revenues that such a business could bring.
Ms. Karen Ensel, 955 Stolehurst Way, voiced the following concerns:
(1) Traffic impacting the currently small size and poor condition of Curtner.
(2) The possible expansion of the site which could possibly lead to further
"pockets" in the area (as observed earlier by Commissioner Olszewsld).
(3) The lack of open space in that area.
Ms. Ensel requested the Planning Commission look into the development of a park in
addition to the Commercial use.
Commissioner Christ asked if the General Plan Amendment allowed for.a public facility
under the proposed Destination Commercial designation. Planning Director Piasecki
admitted that an open space feature would probably not be contrary to the stated General
Plan, but questioned the location of the area for a public facility.
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of June 26,1990
PaF;e -5-
Commissioner Fox asked approximately how many acres does it take to construct a "box
retail" facility. Senior Planner Tsuda cited that a Price Club required anywhere from 14 to
16 acres.
Commissioner Fox then commented that the site was "oddly shaped," and wondered if the
previously discussed residential developments in addition to a "box retail" was even a
possible consideration. Planning Director Piasecki identified the "non-rectalinear" shape of
the site as one reason for Staffs lack of support for a Mixed Use. He identified the
irregular shape of the site as problem in previous 1984 development.
Commissioner Olszewski mentioned the delicate responsibility of the City to provide
housing "for all economic sectors of the community," and asked if the site could be zoned
entirely for housing. Senior Planner Tsuda explained that Staff did research the impact that
the proposed development would have on the availability, of future housing and concluded
instead that the South of Campbell Avenue (SOCA) area ~s a optimal location for
redevelopment, indicating its proximity to both the downtown area as well as the Los Gatos
Creek recreational ar~ He reported that the SOCA report will include a General Plan
Amendment and Rezoning to Change the SOCA designation from Industrial to Residential.
He also mentioned other opportunities for housing within the NOCA project, as well as the
potential for multi-family residential dwellings at the Hamilton School site.
Mr. Ken Pearsall, Cambrian Village Homeowners President and Cambrian Community
Council member, pointed out that the current level "F" traffic rating at Camden and San
Thomas would cause weekend gridlocks if a Costco was installed on the site. He
recounted a similar traffic situation when the old Winchester Drive-in occupied the site.
Mr. Pearsall also observed that streets would be further impacted if Highway 85 did not
mitigate traffic as anticipated. He expressed support for a mixed use of residential and
small retail shops in the area.
Mr. John La Rue, Western Federal Savings Senior Vice President (Manager, Real Estate
Group), presented the views of Western Federal Savings as follows:
(1) Expressed willingness as the Prop¢rty Owner to work under the
conditions of the Staff proposal.
(2) Stated that Western Federal Savings had lost millions of dollars on the
property.
(3) Admitted that the site was not big enough to accommodate all the needs
proposed.
(4) Acknowledged that several "box retailers" have expressed interest in
developing on the site.
(5) Anticipated a specific plan given the proper timing and a developer.
(6) Stressed Western Federal Saying's longevity and participation in the
community
(7) Referred to the Nolte & Associates Traffic Impact Study that concluded
similar results between both Destination Commercial as well as Mixed
Use.
Commissioner Fox asked if Western Federal Savings could get sufficient revenues from
current Staff proposal of Destination Commercial. Mr. La Rue speculated two "box
retailers" would be easier to market and would generate more revenues.
Commissioner Fox then asked if Western Federal Savings honestly supported the currently
proposed application and whether or not it would "vigorously market" the site as
Destination Commercial. Mr. La Rue responded with a preference to first market the site,
then return with a specific plan. He repeated that perhaps two "box retailers" could yield
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of June 26,1990
Pa~e -6-
enough profits for Western Federal Savings, however, pointed out that only 4 to 5 known
retailers exist.
Commissioner Fox then asked if 2 similar "box retailers," such as a Price Club and a
Costco, would be willing to exist on the same site. Senior Planner Tsuda said that this
would not be an ideal combination, however, noted that a consumer-oriented "box retailer"
could be marketed with a home-improvement (i.e. Home Club) retailer.
Commissioner/kine asked if the present value of the site is considerably less than it would
be with adequate access to a street frontage. Mr. Russell B. Arnold, Western Federal
Savings Assistant Vice President (Asset Manger), explained that the difference between an
accessible versus a non-accessible property relied on the costs involved in obtaining the
access. He identified an entrance to McGlincey Lane through one of the three adjacent
properties that Western Federal Savings holds interests in which could lend to a better
access to the property.
Commissioner Alne referred to the Western Federal Savings letter (page 2, paragraph 5)
and asked if Western Federal Savings expected the City to supply the funding for an
enhanced access to the site, and whether Western Federal Savings also planned to benefit in
the subsequently increased commercial value of the property. Mr. La Rue stressed the
intent of Western Federal Savings to build a viable project through a cooperative effort with
the City. He further mentioned the loss of millions of dollars in the investment of the site.
Commissioner Christ voiced a similar concern to Commissioner Alne's over the City's
anticipated participation in off-site improvements. He speculated that the City could use its
powers of eminent domain at the sole benefit to Western Federal Savings. He stated the
City will not pay for traffic re-signalization in San Jose and asked if Western Federal
Savings was willing to finance such off-site improvements. Mr. La Rue informed
Commissioner Christ that Western Federal Savings had lost two-million dollars in the last
eight months, and that its shareholders would not be willing to pay for any such
improvements without a viable reason to so.
Chairperson Perrine cautioned the Commissioners that a discussion over who would pay
for off-site improvements was beyond the level of the current plan. He acknowledged the
Property Owner's willingness to work cooperatively with the City and admitted that
Western Federal Savings may have been too detailed in its letter in terms of which party
would incur the costs.
Chairperson Perrine then referred to the Traffic an0 Access in the Develovment Policies
(page 2, Item C), involving the following in a future phase of the application:
(1) "Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis..." which
would happen at the time of the specific proposal.
(2) "In conjunction with a development application ....the applicant shall
submit information regarding off-site improvements..." as indicated
earlier by Commissioner Christ.
Commissioner Olszewski agreed that discussion was getting far-reaching, however, noted
that a Price Club or a Costco would greatly affect the rural feel of the McGlincey area. He
then highlighted two central questions:
(1) Is the current Industrial zone what the City wants?
(2) If the zoning can be changed and traffic mitigation can be
accommodated, is Destination Commercial the right way to go, and if
so, is Planned Development the right way to go.
Commissioner Olszewski spoke out in favor of Planned Development to allow the
developer the greatest amount of flexibility. He further stated that the Planning
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of June 26,1990
Pa~e -7-
Commission was concerned with the quality of life in that area and communicated this to
the Property Owner.
Commissioner Fox followed Commissioner Olszewski's concerns and wondered if the
Destination Commercial designation will be too inflexible for the site to be marketed by the
Property Owner. Chairperson Perrine responded again with Staff's full support of the
Destination Commercial, in addition to Western Federal Saying's option to later work
under a Mixed Use zone if the Destination Commercial does not succeed.
Planning Director added that the area was not prepared to accommodate a residential
development without a full redesign under the suggested Mixed Use option; Mixed Use
would also ensure the failure of two "box retailers" on the site. He then explained that an
all-Commercial use would provide the opportunity for other options such as an auto-mall,
and a whole-sale warehouse district, and not just for "box retailers."
Commissioner Alne wondered if the site is simply undevelopable, based on its location to
streets such as Camden and Union which are currently under considerable traffic strain.
He suggested widening Curmer to four lanes
Mr. Steve Ulett, Cambrian Community Council Vice-Chair, responded to Commissioner
Alne's suggestion by commenting that three jurisdictions exist along Curmer between
Bascom and McGlincey, and felt that these jurisdictions would never agree to widening of
Curtner.
M/S Olszewski/Alne
Motioned to close the Public Heating.
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
Commissioners Christ, Fox, Alne, Meyer,
Wilkinson, Olszewski, Perrine.
None.
None.
None.
M/S
Wilkinson/Meyer
Motioned to adopt Resolutions 2677 and
2678, subject to Staff Recommendations.
Fin6ings For Approval, and ~
Policies. Also recommended that the City
Council Approve Resolutions 2677 and
2678.
Commissioner Alne stated that the proposed General Plan Amendment will give the City
greater control of the site development.
Commissioner Christ also stated that the Destination Commercial use was the "lesser of the
two evils" when compared to the Mixed Use option. He repeated his concern over how the
off-site mitigation would be addressed.
Vice-Chairperson Meyer also supported the decision for Destination Commercial, stating
her opposition to residential development on the "landlocked" site. She thanked Staff for
its comprehensive report.
Commissioner Olszewski assured that specific plans would be carefully analyzed at a later
phase of the application process. He underlined the word "general" in General Plan. He
believed that the current zoning of Industrial is unworkable and that something needs to be
done. He also favored the Destination Commercial zone.
Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of June 26,1990
PaRe -8-
Chairperson Perrine commented that the site is one of the few remaining large parcels of
land in the City. He highlighted the Staff Report as helpful in reaching his decision. He
stated the Destination Commercial zone would give the City more control in obtaining a
workable development on the site.
VOTE: Ayes: Commissioners Christ, Fox, Alne, Meyer,
Wilkinson, Olszewski, Perrine.
Noes: None.
Abstain: None.
Absent: None.
Chairperson Perrine announced a ten-minute break.
gp90-3minexcerpt(mc2)
EXCERPT OF P.C. MINUTES
EXHIBIT O
PLANNING COI~IISSION KINDTES
CITY OF CAmPBeLL, CALIFORNIA
7:30 p.m.
CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY
MAY 22, 1990
GP 90-03
ZC 90-03
Public Hearing to consider the following City
initiated applications for the former Winchester
Drive-in site: (a) General Plan Amendment to change
the land use designation from Industrial to
Commercial, and (b) Zone Change to change the
zoning designation from M-i-S (Light Industrial) to
P-D (Planned Development). (Tentative City Council
Meeting of Thursday, 6/21/90)·
Staff Presentation: Director Piasecki presented overview of
application, followed by Senior Planner, Randy Tsuda, giving the
particulars and specifics of the application.
Commissioners Christ and Alne's concerns:
· Traffic access to Cristich
Signalization
Staff comments:
Possibility of making Cristich Lane a public street and the
widening McGlincey Lane; traffic mitigation analysis would take
place for this project by the Public Works Department;
Commissioner Olszewski asked: · What the interest of Cambrian Community Council is to this
application;
· Does the EIR include - traffic access, landscaping, etc.
· Would a EIR be required, and if so why since there is no
mixed use?
Mr. Tsuda informed the Commission that the Cambrian Community Council
is a group of concerned citizens who advise and support the interests
of homeowners in the Cambrian area and that their position is not
clear.
Discussion continued between Commissioner Olszewski and Chairperson
Perrine relating to:
Building coverage and maximum height
Entrances to buildings
City Engineer Helms explains:
· Judgment would be reserved until after a proposal is
submitted.
· Cristich Lane - city standards would provide obtaining it
as public street
The Public Hearing was then opened.
Mr. Bob Dotch - opposed the proposal for parking reasons.
GP 90-02/ZC 90-03 continued
page 2
Mr. Lopas, President of Paseo de Palomas, Inc., 295 Union Avenue,
Campbell, supports application with following conditions:
· Noise - provide buffer between properties.
· Proper setbacks.
· Landscaping.
· Air pollution controls.
· Adequate lighting to provide safety.
· Provision of safety measures and maintenance during and
after construction.
· Continued communication to residents on all phases of
construction.
· No access/impact on entrance to mobile home property.
· Loading dock/dumpster areas to be kept away from property
line of mobile home park.
· Proposed buildings should be one-story.
Mr. Steve Ullan, 2640 Curtner Glen Court, Campbell. member of the
Cambrian Community Council, requested a continuance to allow the
Cambrian Community council adequate time to study the Traffic Report
submitted by the Public Works Department.
Mr. John LaRue, Western Federal Savings and Loan, Marina del Rey,
California, representing the property owner, requests a continuance
and presented consultants who offered the following comments:
· Deborah Kir, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., San
Francisco, noted that the purpose of their assignment was
to:
- establish feasible development alternatives.
- establish site value.
- assess City fiscal impacts.
- assess the nature and cost of off-site improvements.
Noted findings were:
· The site would support any of the following:
- 300 townhomes
- 620 apartments
- 155 townhomes and 1 warehouse retail store
- 325 apartments and 1 warehouse retail store
- 2 warehouse retailers and ancillary shop space; or
- 115 single family homes.
- Survey of box retailers ~showed that of the $
interviewed, 5 would be interested.
- Fiscal Impact Findings illustrated that box
retailers have the highest income, with
townhomes-apartment retail following; that the land
use alternatives generating the least amount of
revenue would be high density apartments.
Mr. Carl Springer of Nolte & Associates, 60 S. Market, San Francisco,
addressed the Commission and discussed his company's assignment which
was to conduct a traffic study; lower grade service levels; and,
access to site.
page 3 of GP 90-03/Zc 90-03
The following findings were noted:
· Box retail would have the highest impact (12.5K vehicles
per day), followed by townhome/apartment (6.5K vehicles
per day)
· Cost of acquiring and improving Cristich Lane is
approximately $500K, and additional off-site improvements
to McGlincey Lane would cost approximately $250K.
Commissioners Alne, Fox and Christ had the following concerns: - Accuracy of report.
- McGlincey/Curtner 2-3way stop - stacking of traffic.
- Was report generated during peak hours?
- Easement along Highway 17 - possible access?
- AM peak hours would not have too much of impact on area,
but PM definitely would.
- Requested more qualifications regarding peak hours.
Mr. Springer reported that City Staff had prepared the report and
assumed that the error rate would be small; that no one had asked the
question regarding McGlincey/Curtner; and, that the report was based
upon peak hours.
Director Piasecki commented Cal Trans has reviewed the easement
question; however, no action is forthcoming at the present time.
Mr. Larue asked the Commission for a minimum continuance of five
weeks in order that they may better review the information received
at this meeting.
Mr. Ken Pearsall, 945 Norin Court, Campbell, President of Cambrian
Village Homeowners' Association, requested more information relating
to traffic since congestion is a problem especially freeway traffic.
Mr. Tom Tanner, 2871 Benjamin Avenue, San Jose, requested a
continuance to provide necessary time for the Cambrian Community
Council to review the issue.
MOTION
SECOND:
VOTE:
Commissioner Fox moved to continue the Public Hearing on
GP 90-03 to the regular scheduled meeting of the Planning
Commission of June 26, 1990.
Commissioner Meyer
Unanimously approved
LETTER TO SAN JOSE
EXI-IIBIT P
August 8, 1990
Mayor Tom McEnery
City of San Jose
801 North First Street
San Jose, CA 95110
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment for Winchester Drive-in Site
Dear Mayor McEnery;
Thank you for your letter of June 19, 1990 commenting on the proposed
General Plan amendment on the former Winchester Drive-In site.
The City initiated application proposed to change the General Plan land use
designation for this site from Industrial to Destination Commercial and
modify the zoning from Light Industrial to Planned Development. These
applications established a range of possible commercial land use options and
policies to guide future development.
The amendments were City initiated and not coupled with a specific proposal
from a project applicant. City of Campbell staff prepared a traffic analysis
based on a range of land use options, including a "box retail" destination
commercial use. The analysis also examined a worst-case alternative
consisting of 750,000 square feet of office space which could have been allowed
under the existing Industrial designation.
Staff concluded that the proposed commercial designation will have traffic
impacts which are similar to the previous application for a 420,000 square foot
research and development facility (approved in 1984) and will have less
impacts than the possible build-out scenario under the existing Industrial
designation. Also, the proposed commercial options will significantly reduce
potential traffic impacts during the morning commute period.
Letter to Mayor Tom McEnery
Pane -2-
The subsequent developer of the site will be required to file a separate
application for a Planned Development Permit to obtain approval for a
specific project. At that time, the specific land uses will be defined and a
detailed traffic analysis will be prepared. The proposed General Plan policies
require the traffic study include intersections within adjoining jurisdictions.
Thus, we will contact City of San Jose staff when a project is submitted to
determine appropriate San Jose intersections and areas for the study.
The City Council concluded that the proposed uses have significant
advantages over the industrial designation and approved the General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change for the Winchester Drive-in site.
If the Campbell staff or I can be of further assistance or provide additional
information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Once again, thank you for
your interest. The City of Campbell looks forward to working with San Jose
when a precise development application is submitted.
Sincerely,
John J. Ashworth
Mayor
tmce.let(mc2)
Wa TERN FEDERAL SAVi.. S
June 26, 1990
Mr. Ray Perrine
Chairman
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
RE: WINCHESTER DRIVE - IN
CAMPBET~, CALIFORNIA
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 - 03
ZONING CHANGE 90 - 03
Dear Mr. Perrine:
On May 22, 1990, Western Federal requested a five week postponement
of the public hearings on the referenced General Plan Amendment and
Zoning Change. The additional time was required for Western
Federal to review its recently completed consultant's reports,
determine a highest and best use, discuss that use with city staff
and also discuss our conclusions with community organizations.
Western Federal had determined that a mixed use project of one
destination retailer and the balance of the site for medium to high
density multi-family residential would generate a higher potential
land value and provide the city with increased revenues. This
designation would provide Western Federal with the flexibility of
marketing a portion of the property to residential developers. As
you know, Western Federal took ownership by foreclosure in November
1989 and has no present intention of being the ultimate developer
or user for the site. Western Federal's strategy for resolution
of the site was to complete feasibility and traffic studies and
then market the project based upon the determined highest and best
use.
It has been made clear that the City of Campbell initiated this
General Plan Amendment to maximize the amount of potential sale tax
revenues generated by development on the site. The destination
retail zoning does not necessarily coincide with Western Federal's
opinion of maximized land value, however we have respected the
city's needs along with our marketing goals with a mixed use
project.
WESTERN FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION
THE REAL ESTATE GROUP
13160 MINDANAO WAY, SUITE 210
MARINA DEL REY, CALIFORNIA 90295-2395
(213) 301-6788
Mr. Ray Perrine
June 26, 1990
Page 2
We have shared our traffic and fiscal impact studies with both city
staff and community groups. In our meeting with city staff on June
15th, we presented arguments in favor of a mixed use development.
We were unable to convince the staff that they should amend the
General Plan Amendment. While they did agree that our proposed use
may well be viable, it did not generate the highest possible sales
tax revenues that the city desires from two destination retailers.
Based upon this response from city staff, Western Federal inquired
as to the type of support the city would provide for destination
retail users at the site. The staff indicated to us a willingness
on the city's part to provide support because of the economic
benefit to be derived from the potential revenues.
Western Federal will attempt to sell the project to destination
retailers. However, the primary response from developers
interested in the site is that the access needs to be improved
before any type of development will be possible. Western Federal
is concerned over the site's limited access but, based upon the
staff and City Counsel's expected support to mitigate these needs
it should be overcome. The staff has also indicated that they will
expedite a user's plans to construct their structures. These are
important matters to address and resolve prior to marketing the
site.
If after a reasonable period of time, Western Federal is unable to
locate destination retailers for the site, we request that the
site's zoning designation be changed to either medium to high
density multi-family residential or the multi-use designation we
proposed. Afterall, the site's ability to generate sales tax
revenue for the City of Campbell will be directly tied to the
success of the overall project. An unsuccessful project will be
a greater demand on city services than the current land use.
This project must be a high priority for the City of Campbell.
Western Federal is pledging its sincere effort to market the
project. In return, the city must provide the necessary approvals,
financial assistance and staff support to mitigate the traffic and
obtain the necessary right of ways to make this a viable
development. With a combined effort, Western Federal believes that
all parties can reach their respective goals.
Mr. Ray Perrine
June 26, 1990
Page 3
Western Federal looks forward to your comments to this letter and
will be in attendance at the June 26th Planning Commission meeting
to answer any questions.
Sincere ly,
WESTE'~t~ FED RA~"~A LOAN ASSOCIATION
:/JQ~"~'~B.,~ad~d~: Russell B. Arnold
~-~e~ior Vi~C~ Pre~/ident Assistant Vice President
Manager, Real Estate Group Asset Manager
CC:
Mayor John Ashworth
Steve Piasecki
Donald Wimberly
Robert Kass
Barry Weiss, Esq.
ITEM NO. 2
STAFF REPORT -- PLANNING COMMISSION MEEfING OF JUNE 26, 1990
GP 90-03/ZC 90-03
Continued Public Hearing to consider the following
applications by the City of Campbell for the former
Winchester Drive-in site located at 535 Westchester
Drive (APN: 412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35):
General Plan Amendment to change the land
use designation from Industrial to Commercial.
File No. GP 90-3.
Zone Change to change the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development). File No. ZC 90-3.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following actions:
Recommend that City Council adopt a Negative Declaration for
Application GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3.
Recommend that City Council approve Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-
3.
BACKGROUND
go
The subject applications were first heard at the Planning Commission
meeting of May 22, 1990. Consultants retained by Western Federal
Savings, the property owner, made presentations on the traffic and fiscal
impacts of the proposal. Western Federal Savings requested a
continuance to allow them additional time to review their consultants'
reports to determine their preferred use. The Cambrian Community
Council also stated that a continuance would allow them an opportunity
to develop a recommendation for land use on the site.
Bo
The Commission continued the hearing for five weeks to allow the
interested parties time to review the applications and to allow staff time
to analyze the reports by Western Federal Savings' consultants.
Planning Commissie ~ aff Report - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Pa~e -2-
June 26,1990
Western Federal Savings
Ao
The property owner has provided staff with the Traffic Impact Study by
Nolte and Associates and a Fiscal Impact Analysis by Keyser Marston
Associates (see Exhibits L and M).
Bo
The Traffic Impact Study generally supports staff's previous traffic
analysis. It should be noted that the study found that a full destination
commercial project will result in less intersection delay than a mixed use
destination commercial/multiple family project during the PM peak
hour. In addition, a destination commercial use results in less
intersection delay at most intersections than an apartment project during
the PM peak hour.
Co
The Fiscal Impact Analysis is consistent with staff's previous findings.
Destination commercial generates significantly greater City revenues
than does residential or mixed-uses with minimal City service costs.
Do
Staff met with Western Federal Savings since the previous public
hearing. Western Federal Savings is currently evaluating its position
regarding the proposed destination commercial land use
Cambrian Community Council
go
Staff met with Cambrian Community Council representatives on June
19, 1990. A letter from the group is enclosed as Exhibit J. The group
recommends a mixed use designation for the site consisting of
destination commercial and senior housing or a park.
Bo
Staff does not believe that the subject site is an appropriate location for a
senior housing project. Such a project should be proximate to public
transit routes and be near neighborhood shopping areas for convenience.
Co
The site is also not a desirable location for a park as the site would have
no direct access to a public street and not centrally located to the
reamainder of the Union Avenue neighborhood. A park on this site is
also undesirable from a security standpoint. Drive-by police surveillance
of the site would be difficult. Lack of public visibility is often a factor
leading to security and vandalism problems at parks. The City is
currently in the process of revising its Open Space Element which will
establish criteria to prioritize open space and parkland acquisition.
Planning Commissiov Craft Report - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Pal~e -3-
June 26,1990
City of San Jose
Ao
The City of San Jose requested that a "complete traffic analysis, preferably
in the context of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR)," be provided
prior to approval of the subject applications (see Exhibit H). Their letter
addresses technical issues in the preliminary traffic analysis and
identifies additional San Jose intersections that should be evaluated.
Bo
This General Plan Amendment and rezoning action will establish a
general range of destination commercial uses that will be allowed on the
site. Traffic impacts cannot be precisely assessed until a specific
development project is proposed. Under staff's proposed approach, a
detailed traffic study will be performed when a development application
is submitted for a Planned Development Permit. The proposed
development policies require the study to analyze traffic impacts on
intersections in adjoining jurisdictions.
Co
An EIR was prepared for the previously approved research and
development park. Staff's preliminary traffic analysis evaluated impacts
of alternate land uses on the street network and included several
intersections in San Jose. The report indicates that the impacts of a
destination commercial use would be similar or less than those
associated with the research and development park and that destination
commercial traffic can be accommodated by the road system. Staff's
analysis also showed that build-out of this site under the existing
General Plan designation represents a worst-case scenario and would
have greater traffic impacts than the proposed General Plan
Amendment.
Do
Staff believes that while detailed traffic studies are appropriate when the
development plans are submitted, it is not necessary at this General Plan
Amendment stage where general land uses and development policies
are being established and a range of build-out scenarios are possible.
ge
The previous staff report which describes the proposal in detail is
attached for reference (see Exhibit N). Staff continues to support
destination commercial as the land use most suitable for the site in
terms of traffic, access and visibility, compatibility with adjoining uses,
and fiscal impacts to the City.
Be
Staff believes that the a full Environmental Impact Report is not
appropriate at this juncture; the proposed development policies require
detailed studies during the Planned Development Permit process. Staff
has prepared a Draft Negative Declaration finding that the application, as
aff Report - GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3 June 26,1990
Planning Commissi¢
Parle -4-
C
modified by development policies, will have no significant impacts on
the environment.
Staff recommends that Planning Commission forward the Draft
Negative Declaration and Applications GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 to the City
Council with a recommendation for approval. The application would be
tentatively scheduled on the City Council meeting of July 17, 1990 with
the NOCA General Plan Amendments.
Prepared by:
Planner
Approved by:
§~eve Piasecki, Director of Planning
Attachments
Exhibit A.
Exhibit B.
Exhibit C.
Exhibit D.
Exhibit E.
Exhibit F.
Exhibit G.
Exhibit H.
Exhibit I.
Exhibit J.
Exhibit K.
Exhibit L.
Exhibit M.
Exhibit N.
Exhibit O.
Findings of Approval
Development Policies
General Plan Map
Zoning Map
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Discussion of Environmental Impacts
Vicinity Map
Letter from the City of San Jose dated June 19, 1990
Letter from Cambrian Council dated June 11, 1990
Letter from Paseo de Palomas Board of Directors dated May 22,
1990
Fiscal Impact Analysis by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Traffic Impact Study by Nolte and Associates
Staff Report dated May 22, 1990
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes of May 22, 1990
pcgp90-3/2.rpt(mc2)
PROPOSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
GP 90-02
ZC 90-02
CITY INITIATED
Exhibit A
o
o
The proposed amendment will reduce the allowable building intensity
on the subject site.
The proposed development policies will ensure that future
development is compatible with the adjacent residential uses.
The destination commercial use will provide a substantial fiscal benefit
to the City.
The amendment will not be harmful to the public health, safety, or
welfare.
The proposed zone change and development policies are consistent with
the proposed General Plan Amendment.
No substantial evidence has been presented which show that the project,
as modified by the mitigation measures contained in the Discussion of
Environmental Impacts and the development policies, would have a
significant adverse impact on the environment.
The development policies require additional detailed environmental
studies to be submitted in conjunction with the Planned Development
Permit process.
pcgp90-3/2.rpt(mc2)
Exhibit B
DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP 90-03
ZONE CHANGE ZC 90-03
FORMER WINCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE
The land use is limited to destination commercial uses. Destination
commercial is defined as a retail or retail/wholesale use which
relies on the public's knowledge of the store's location through
marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-mouth
advertising. Such uses serve a market area beyond Campbell due to
the large-scale or specialization of the use
2. Examples of destination commercial uses are:
a. membership-type retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods
in bulk quantities ("box retail")
b. factory discount outlets
c. automobile-dealer malls
d. other uses which meet the definition contained in A.1
o
The future planned development permit application shall master
plan development of the entire site.
B. Development Intensity
A floor area ratio (FAR) of approximately .30 is anticipated for this
site. In conjunction with consideration a specific development
application and a public hearing, the City Council may authorize a
FAR of up to .35 with the following findings:
a. the additional FAR will not adversely affect the adjoining
USES.
b. the additional FAR will not adversely affect the local
circulation system.
c. the use characteristics are substantially similar to those
envisioned by this General Plan Amendment.
d. adequate parking can be provided on-site.
Development Policie, GP 90-3 & ZC 90-3
Page -3-
June 26,1990
Fo
Go
o
Landscaping should be provided throughout the parking areas to
provide shade and visual relief. The developer is encouraged to
provide planters at the ends of parking aisles and to intersperse
planters within the aisles.
o
Landscaping should also be provided to filter views of the building
mass.
Parkin~
The developer should provide data on the parking demand for the
specific use. The City may impose a more restrictive parking ratio
than the standard commercial ratio of 1 space/200 square feet.
$ignage
The developer shall submit a sign program with a development
proposal for the site. The City shall evaluate the need for freeway-
oriented signage in conjunction with sign program proposal to
increase facilitate public convenience and awareness of the site
location.
pcgp90-3/2.rpt(mc2)
SP 90-3 & ZC 90-3 June 26,1990
Development Policie
Parle -2-
C. Traffic and Access
Do
Eo
Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis which
studies project traffic impacts on the local circulation network
including appropriate intersections and neighborhoods in adjoining
jurisdictions. The City should consult with the adjoining
jurisdictions to identify the intersections and neighborhoods to be
studied.
°
In conjunction with a development application for this site, the
applicant shall submit information regarding off-site
improvements proposed to mitigate traffic impacts and to improve
site access. Details shall be provided on road improvement and
intersection modifications.
o
The developer shall examine methods to ensure safe and
convenient pedestrian linkage to the neighboring residential areas
Noise
Noise-generating facilities such as loading docks and mechanical
equipment should be located away and/or buffered from residential
areas.
°
The future developer shall submit a noise study evaluating impacts
in two areas:
ao
impact of site generated noise on adjoining residential
uses, and
noise impacts of project traffic on residential streets used to
access the site, such as Union Avenue.
A sound wall shall be constructed where the site adjoins residential
uses.
Landscaping
The future development should provide a landscape buffer along
the westerly property line to create an attractive appearance when
viewed from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping shall be provided along property lines abutting
residential uses. The landscaping should block views of the
development and ensure privacy for residents.
PD
J
;-2-O
R-3-S
P-D
R-3-S
R-3-S
407/8
Zone Change to change the zoning
designation from M-1-S (Light
Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development)
96/45
$380
ZONING MAP /
EXHIBIT D
ZC 90-03
High Density Residential
(21-27 du/ac)
,:.:.:.:,
i General Plan Amendment to change the
Land Use Element designation
_ Industrial to Commercial
III
Mobile Home Park · · · ·
8 I Ii
we5~
Public/Semi-Public
...... ~: ~ .... ~ :. :.'.... :'. · ·: :..,::::::: :,~,~
~.*.,..~o~* .......
.~:::.::::::..:..p~
;:::: ............... ~ , ~.- ~ - ~ ~, /
....................
......
..................... ~_ ~ - ~; ,
GENERAL PLAN MAP
EXHIBIT C
GP 90-03
· ":'IT--- ~, /
IlY A IPI3ELL
70 NORTH FIRST STREET
CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008
(408) 866-2100
FAX # (408) 379-2572
Depadment:
Planning
DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Exhibit E
FILE NO:
GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
APPLICANT:
City of Campbell
ADDRESS:
535 Westchester Drive, Campbell
APN:
412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
City-initiated application for the 23 +/- acre
former Winchester Drive-in site. General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation
from Industrial to Commercial. Zone Change
application to modify the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
Pursuant to the applicable sections of the California Environmental Quality
Act and City of Campbell Resolution No. 5164; and
After review of plans and information supplied by the applicant pertaining to
the subject project, and after completing the attached initial study, the City of
Campbell does hereby determine that the subject project, as modified by the
mitigation measures contained within the initial study, will have no
significant effect on the environment within the terms and meaning of said
Act and Resolution.
Executed at Campbell, California this day of June, 1990.
Randal R. Tsuda
Senior Planner
gp90-3.nd(mcl)
Exhibit F
Initial Study
£NV ! ~NTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TO BE USED BY THE CITY OF CAMPEIEL3. IN MAKING 1INITIAL STUDY
PROPONENT:
ADDRESS OF PROPONEN
!!.
£N~ ! RCX~B4E:N~A/. IM]=AC~S
(£XPI-ANATIONS OF A].I- Y~S AND ~ ANSWERS ARE REQUIRED ON ATTACHED SHEET)
YES MAYBE NO
1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
d. The destruction, covering or modification of
any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or. off ~he site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean
or any bay, inlet or lake?
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
X
MAYBE NO
2. AIR. Will proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of
ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or tempera-
ture, or any change in climate, either locally
or regionally?
3. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any altera-
tion of surface water quality, including but not
limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity?
f. Alteration to the direction or rate of f Iow
of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species or number
of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment
of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
[]
o
[]
[]
n
n
2 of 6 pages
Y~S M)LY~E: NO
5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms, insects or microfauna) ?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the migration
or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habi tat ?
6. NOISE. Will the pro~sal result in:
We
10.
11.
12.
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new
light or glare?
LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial
alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area?
9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in:
be
Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
RISK OF UPSET. Does the proposal involve a risk
of an explosion or the release of hazardous sub-
stances (including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population ofan area?
HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing?
[] []
3 of 6 pages
13.
14.
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement.
b. Effects on existingparking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Co~u,dnications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm waterdrainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
o
0
o
o
0
n
o
4 of 6 pages
llAYBE NO
17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in:
18.
19.
20.
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health) ?
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the
obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open to public
view?
RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?
ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL. Will the proposal result
in an alteration of a significant archeological or
historical site, structure, object or building?
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? (A short-term impact on
the environment is one which occurs in a rela-
tively brief, definitive period of time while
long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.)
c. Does the project have impacts which are indiv-
idually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(A project may impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on each resource
is relatively small, but where the effect of
the total of those impacts on the environment
is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
o X
5 of 6 pages
! i !. DISCUS$1C~ C~ G3~V'i~AL Lc'VALI=IATIC~N
L_
IV. DETERMINATION
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the miti-
gation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect
on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required.
s ! GNATUR~ ~_~
6 of 6 pages
Exhibit G
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FILE NO:
iAPPLICANT:
ADDRESS:
APN:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
City of Campbell
535 Westchester Drive, Campbell
412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35
City-initiated application for the 23 +/- acre
former Winchester Drive-in site. General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation
from Industrial to Commercial. Zone Change
application to modify the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
la.
3b.
6a.
Will the proposal result in disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
Will the proposal result in changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
Discussion:
Currently, the site is almost entirely paved with asphalt. Future
development is likely to reduce the amount of paved suface on site, as
the City requires on site landscaping. Therefore, overcovering of the soil
will be reduced and absorption rates will increase.
Mitigation:
None required.
Will the proposal result in increases in existing noise levels?
Will the proposal result in exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Discussion:
Charles M. Solter Associates prepared a noise study for the previously
ntal Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 4/19/90
Discussion of Enviro
Page -2-
approved research and development park. The study concluded that
project-generated traffic would increase noise levels in Union Avenue
residential areas by a maximum of 1 dBA in the AM peak period and 0.8
dBA in the PM peak period. These figures are based upon a traffic
analysis prepared by George S. Nolte and Associates which determined
that the project would generate 617 trips in the peak periods.
The Campbell Public Works Department traffic analysis anticipates that
destination commercial uses will generate 1,032 trips in the PM peak.
Utilizing the assumptions contained within the Solter Associates study,
the project is likely to increase noise levels in the Union Avenue
residential by approximately 1.4 dBA in the PM peak period--a 0.4 dBA
increase from a project allowed under the existing General Plan and
zoning designations. A 3dBA change is the minimum perceptible
change in noise level. A 5dBA increase is generally considered to the
threshold for a significant impact. The commercial designation will
improve the AM peak noise level as no trips are generated during that
period.
Mitigation Measures:
A noise analysis should be required at the development plan stage
to verify that no significant noise impact will occur along
residential streets.
Project review at the development plan state should ensure that on-
site noise impacts on adjoining residential uses are mitigated.
Potential mitigation techniques may include the following:
ao
location of loading areas away from residential uses
location of parking areas away from residential uses
construction of a noise attenuation wall
limitation on hours of operation
o
Construction activity should be limited to normal weekday working
hours to minimize short-term impacts on adjoining residential
areas.
Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Discussion
The site is currently designated for Industrial uses. The proposal will
change the land use designation to Commercial. The proposal will also
Discussion of Enviro ,ntal Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 4/19/90
Pase -3-
13a.
modify the zoning from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
A key land use issue is compatibility with the adjacent residentially
designated uses to the north and east of the subject site. The range of
commercial uses is generally more compatible with residential uses than
is industrial. Industrial uses, more often than commercial uses, generate
higher noise levels and odors and may utilize hazardous materials. A
commercial use can have the following impacts on residential uses:
1. noise
2. traffic
3. aesthetics/visual impacts
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are contained within than discussion of questions
6a, 6b, 13a, and 18.
Will the proposal result in generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
Discussion
The Campbell Department of Public Works has prepared a traffic analysis
of the proposal (a copy is attached). The report concludes that a
destination commercial use will generate 1,032 trips during the PM peak
period. Approximately 25% of the trips will be existing trips diverted
from other arterials. Therefore, this proposal will create about 775 new
PM peak period trips. The analysis also evaluated alternative uses for
the site. Destination commercial results in the least number of new trips
in the peak direction of traffic.
The previously approved research and development project would have
produced approximately 617 trips in the PM peak period. The proposal
will result in a net increase of 158 trips.
Mitigation Measures
The traffic analysis specifies the following measures can be utilized to
mitigate project impacts:
Signal coordination on Camden Avenue between Union Avenue
and the San Tomas Expressway/Highway 17 off-ramp.
.'ntal Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 4/19/90
Discussion of Envirc
Page -4-
o
Geometric and operational improvements and the intersection of
Bascom and Union Avenues.
o
Improvement of Cristich, McGlincey, and Curtner to a cross-section
of 44 feet from curb-to-curb from the site to Camden Avenue.
The report states that these measures will fully mitigate project traffic
impacts and will even improve existing traffic conditions. The report
further anticipates that, when constructed, Highway 85 will improve
traffic conditions throughout the area.
A detailed traffic analysis should be required in conjunction with a
development plan application to evaluate traffic impacts of the specific
project. The report should also analyze the impact of project traffic on
the Curtner Avenue residential area. The report should specify
techniques required to discourage cut-through traffic on Curtner
Avenue.
Will the proposal result in effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
Discussion
18.
Campbell's parking standards require one space for every 200 square feet
of building area. Assuming 300,000 square feet of building is constructed,
1500 parking spaces will be required. For comparison purposes, the
previously approved 420,000 square foot research and development
facility provided was required to have 1680 parking spaces.
Mitigation Measure
Adequate parking should be provided on-site to avoid impacts on
adjoining properties.
Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to public view?
Discussion
The site currently is vacant and in disrepair. In the past, the site has
contained large amount of trash, debris, and abandoned vehicles
requiring nuisance abatement actions. Development of the site will
improve the aesthetics by removing a vacant site susceptible to illegal
dumping.
Discussion of Envirc ental Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 4/19/90
Page -5-
Mitigation Measures
At the project review stage, particular attention should be paid to
screening the parking areas and the building with landscaping to provide
visual relief. Loading docks should be screened or oriented away from
public view.
gp90-3.dei(mcl)
Discussion of Enviro. ntal Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 4/19/90
Page -6-
REFERENCE MATERIALS
1. Traffic Noise Assessment for Application, Charles M. Solter Associates,
Inc., July 25, 1983
2. Traffic Analysis of Campbell Business Park, George S. Note and
Associates, July 1983
3. Winchester Drive In Site: Traffic Analysis, Campbell Department of
Public Works, February 27, 1990
4. Documentation of Costco Trip Generation Rates, Wilber Smith
Associates, December 5, 1988
5. Assessment of Costco Trip Generation at Fostoria Way Site, Wilbur
Smith Associates, Feburary 17, 1988
6. Site Approval Application S 83-13, Equireal Development Corporation
VATE
OOL
407/8
General Plan Amendment to change the
Land Use Element designation from-
Industrial to Commercial
AVE. ·
17/04
VICINITY MAP
EXHIBIT H
GP 90-03/ZC 90-03
FROM:SAN JOSE CITY PLA~' 'h~
TO: a0a 3?9 2572 Jow LETI'ER FROM SAN JOSE
EXI-UBIT I
CITY OI= BAN 0.O~.~, CALI.,F=O. RNIA
June 19, 1990
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
70 N. First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
Dear Commissioners:
We have appreciated the opportunity to review your city's proposal for a
General Plan amendment and rezoning of the former Winchester Drive-In site,
file numbers GP90-03 and ZC90-03. We understand Campbell's interest in
pursuing these changes but feel that the probable traffic impacts of this
project, particularly as they might affect San Jose, have not been clearly
identified. Given the magnitude of the project and its location in an area of
limited traffic capacity, we ask that a complete traffic analysis, preferably
in the context of a full EIR, be provided to San Jose prior to any approval of
the pending projects.
Our transportation Planning Division of Public Works has reviewed the
documents provided and concludes that they raise as many questions as they
answer. Perhaps because the traffic analysis is apparently provided only in
summary form, it is not clear: 1) if there is any long-term (i.e., General
Plan level) analysis included; 2) to what extent the 1983 traffic analysis
work was relied upon; and 3) how trips were distributed in the model. It is
clear, however, that several at risk intersections in San Jose were not
included in the analysis.
Public Works' Comments
General Plan level traffic analysis should include information which
answers the following questions;
1. What is the forecasted time frame of the TMODEL2 traffic analyses? Is
it year 1990, 20OD, or 2020?
2. What is the analysis area of the TMODEL2 Traffic Analysis? How much
of San Jose is included.
3. Does the TMODEL2 traffic forecasting model consider any existing or
proposed construction which will generate trips when completed?
1Staff Report-Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1990; Exhibit E-Draft
Negative Declaration; Environmental Assessment-Campbell Business Park
F~OM:SA~ JOSE CITY PL~ NG TO: 4~8 ~79 25?2 JUN 21, 19~ 8:~AM P.O~
PlaKning Commission
City of Campbell
June lg, lggO
page Two
A detailed traffic report addressing the zoning phase of the project
should include the following information;
1. Analysis and mitigation for those San Jose intersections which are
likely to be affected by this project.
City of San Jose intersections:
Dry Creek/Leigh Curtner/Leigh
Foxworthy/Leigh Hillsdale/Letgh
Union/Hillsdale Foxworthy/Union
Curtner/Union
These intersections are operating at a LOS of D, [, or F. The
traffic report should include trip generation rates for the
proposed land use(s) and micro/macro trip distributions.
Use City of San Jose Level of Service methodology in the traffic
report for intersections located within the City of San Jose
jurisdiction.
Include the approved trips inventory (ATI) for approved projects
that have not been built but have been approved for construction.
City of San Jose will provide ATI for its area.
d. Mitigation measures should be included for the near term impact of
the project.
2. A clarification of the commercial land use is needed. Is it one
and/or a combination of land uses show in Table 1 (auto, office,
residential, industrial, etc.)? Since the specific land use is not
known at this time, a "worst case" land use scenarios should be
analyzed.
3. The typical Costco trip generation rate of 3.75 proposed by Wilbur
Smith Associates appears to be low based on our experience with
similar land use, i.e., the Story/McLaughlin Price Club used a 5.6
trip generation rate for the P.M. peak hour.
It appears that the additional site access via an overcrossing over
State Route 17 to Railway needs further analyses at this time. What
trips are distributed to this route? Has Caltrans been contacted to
determine the feasibility of this proposal?
5. What is the proposed timing of construction for the subject property?
Will it be after the completion of Route 85/87?
.-FROM:SRN JOSE CITY PLR~"'TNr
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
June 19, 1990
Page Three
TO: ~08 3?9 25?2 IUN 21. 19~0 8:~OAM
P. 84
6. What is the justification for using a 25% diverted trip reduction for
the destination-commercial land use? What land use is this applied to?
7. What is the boundary of the Curtner Avenue residential area?
In addition, we concur with the recommendations in the City of Campbell's
staff report which require that the developer of a s~ecific project submit
a detailed traffic analysis with specific mitigation when applications for
development permits are filed. Such analysis should identify all off-site
impacts and traffic improvements required to mitigate project traffic.
This analysis should be submitted to the San Jose Department of Public
Works' for review before developmen~ permits are approved.
We ask that full general plan and rezoning level traffic analysis be referred
to San Jose's Department of Public Works for review prior to approval of the
pending general plan amendment and rezontng. Ralph Quells, Director of Public
Works, may be contacted at (408) 277-4333 if there are any questions regarding
these comments or any supplemental material which might be useful. Thank you
for your cooperation in this matter; we look forward to an early resolution of
these issue~.
Sincere_l_y~ ........... ~
Tom McEnery ~
Mayor ~
The_Cambrian Co mm u
June 11, 1990
Jay Parrine, Chair
Campbell Planning Commission
City of Campbell
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
LETTER FROM CAMBRIAN
COUNCIL
EXHIBIT J
- - JUN 1990 -
RE: GP90-03/ZC90-03
Dear Mayor Ashworth:
The Cambrian Community Council would like to recommend % Mixed
use zoning for the Winchester Drive-In site. This would include
Destination Commercial (one business only-Costco) with the balance
of the acetate to include other options which would have a minimum
traffic impact. Such options could include senior housing and a
small park with'access to the County Park with a pedestrian overpass
over Highway 17.
With only Destination Commercial zoning (Cosco and other
commercial establishments), cut-through traffic in residential
neighborhoods could be unbearable with an additional 16,000 trips
per day projected. In addition, PM traffic would undoubtedly back
up on Highway 17/ Camden avenue exit. As you know, San Jose and the
County would also have to be involved in traffic mitigation for this
project.
As you are aware, the Campbell Planning Commission has delayed
making a decision on the General Plan amendment for the Winchester
Drive-In until June 26, 1990. Whatever is zoned for that site will
require an extremely well thought out plan for handling almost
double the daily number of trips that Curtner and McGlincey now
carry. In the case of Route 85, the desinRnation of Just major
commercial development could exacerbate the traffic problems on
Bascom, Curtner and Union Avenues. Because of this, we urge that
any area wide traffic study include a minimum of 13 intersections.
Members of the Cambrian Community Council feel strongly that
this is a regional issue and an area wide study is imperative. We
appreciate the opportunity to participate in this very important
project.
Sincerely,
Steve Ulett
Vice-chair, Cambrian Community Council
SU:nw
cc: Councilmember Jim Beall, City of San Jose, District 9
Supervisor Rod Diridon
Don Wimberl¥, Director of Public Works, City of Campbell
Ralph Quails, Director of Public Works, City of San Jose
Ron Shields, Director of Public Works, Santa Clara County
'- DE
Paseo De Palomas Inc
ETTER FROM PASEO
.'ALOMAS
EXHIBIT K
May 22~ 1990
To: Planning Commission, City of Campbell
From: Board of Directors, Paseo de Palomas, Inc.
Mobile Home Park, 29S Union Aveo~ Campbell,CA 9~008
Subject:
2~ UNION AVENUE CAMPBELL CA 9500~ (408) 371-2922
Cements of Paseo de Palomas~ Inc. to the General Plan
Amendment fov the fopmev Winchester D~ive-In:
File No. GP 90-3.
The Board of Directors of Paseo de Palomas, Inc.w acting on behalf
of the shareholders/residents of Paseo de Palomas Mobile Home
Park, does not object to the rezoning of the Winchester Drive-In
property from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (PIanned Develop-
ment)-Commercia], as recommended by Staff---Provided that the
following conditions/concerns are addressed and met in the
deveIopment of the property.
I. Noise/lAir PoIIution
A. As per the Staff Report, we want to go on record as
insisting on proper noise abatement measures.
B. There ~ust be an accousticaI buffer between the
developed property to our westw including adequate setback and
appropriate landscaping. A freeway/type wall between six and
eight feet high on the property line is requested.
C. There must be attention given to car exhaust fumes and
other air pollution factors impacting our residents.
II. Lighting/Safety
Ac Lighting of the area must be kept low and directed so
that it will not affect tho residents of Paseo.
B. Adequate policing of the entire property needs to be
provided at all times.
C. Adequate policing and maintenance of the entire
property ~ust be provided prior to and during the period of
development and construction.
III. Site DeveIopment
A. Adequate dialogue between the city, tho developer and
Paseo ~ust occur during planning and construction as changes are
made in the plans. We understand that access to tho property will
have no impact upon Pasco or our entrance road. We must be kept
informed of any and all proposed changes.
B. We are~ of course, concerned regarding building height
and building location on the property. The configuration of the
development must be done in a way to minimize any impact on
Paseo.
C. The building(s) should be one story and the loading
dock/dumpster a~eas be kept away from our property line.
Conclusion: We thank the Alarm:rig Staff fo~' their efforts to
keep our res.[dents/o~qners ]nfor'med and congratulate thom on the
repot? as published.
EXHIBIT L
· JUN-08-1~O 1~:~5 ~RO~ '~_STERN TO ~1408~7~57~ ....
: ~" ' · : 4 . ' ' '~" ' % .' ' :'v~"''t :~"': ~-'~'"~ v "~'"','~'"':'~"':?~':~'~, ~ ? "~""'; ~ ..~ ..'.,,6":~ :'~7 ,~.~....,.~t ?~::~ j., . . , ....
!UN-08-I990 15:48 FROM SSTERN TO 914085?925?2 P.05
~mot~y ¢.
A. Serry Keyser
Kate Earle Fu~k
Rob~t ;. ~o~
Mich,el Conlon
D~e E ~nl~
Richard L. Botti
C~lvin ~ Hollis, II
Kathleen H, Head
SAN DIF230 619/9~2.0380
Heinz A. ScMlli~$
Key_serMars_tonAssoc_ i ates In.c.
Golden Gateway Commow
55 PacCo Avcnue Mall
San Francisco, CalEomia 94111
415/398.3050 Fax 415/397-5065
Mr. RusscU B. Arnold
Assistant Vice President
Asset Manager
Western ;Federal Savings & Loan Association, Thc Real E~tatc Group
Keyscr Marston Associates, Inc.
Date: May 31, 1990
Subi_ect:
Revenue and Cost Impacts on the City of Campbell to be Generated by
Development of the Winchester Drive-In Site
L ~ODUCTION
In accordance with your request, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) has estimated the
revenues and costs which ~ accrue to thc City of Campbell ns a result of the development
of thc approximate 23 acre site, commonly referred to as thc "W/nchester Drive-In site".
As shown on the following regional and vicinity maps, the site is located on the east side of
Highway 1% between Campbell and Curtner Avenues in the City of Campbell. The site has
not been used since the late 1970%, when thc drive-in theater closed. Western Federal
Savings & Loan assumed ownership of the site ~ November of 1989 and is currently in the
process of evaluating possible' development opportunities. The City of Campbell has initiated
an effort to rezone the site fi.om M-1-S (light industrial) to P-D (Planned Development),
with a commercial land use designation. The purpose of this analysis is to assist Western
]Federal Savings & Loan in its evaluation of development opportunities and the city's
proposed zone change by providing an indication of the impacts on the CiW of Campbell that
would likely be generated through the development of the site with various land uses,
including a box retail use as proposed by the city.
R _e. aiEstate l:'~d~lo~¢nt & Eval uatlon Se rvlces
JUN-OB- 1990 13: 48 FROM ?:;TERN ,140~,~ r ~,-~ ~ -, F'. 04
'JUN-08-1990 1~:49 FRO~
~t ~1 i I'~"i1 I, 1 I~tr=-----~ /
~STERN TO 91~085792572
PRtv&?c
SCHOOL
Based on the findings of a separate analysis, box retail and residential land uses have been
identified as the most feasible land uses for the site. The fiscal impact analysis evaluates six
combinations of these two uses. A detailed specification of the alternatives is presented in
Table 1. In summary, they are as follows:
A1 - $00 Townhomes
A2 - 620 Apartments
BI - 155 Townhomes & 1 Warehouse Retail Store (11%000 so
B2 - 325 Apartments & I Warehouse Retail Store (117,000 si)
C - 2 Warehouse Retailers & Ancillary Shop Space (270,000 st')
D - 115 Single F~mily Homes
1I. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The k~y findin/s of the a~aI~is are as follows:
Five o£ the six alternatives are estimated to generate a net gain to the City of
Campbell.
Box retail uses are estimated to generate a s/~nificantly larger net gain than
residential uses~ due primarily to the substantial amount o£ sales tax revenues that
box retailers generate, The value differential is more a reflection of the level of
revenues associated with box retail than it is of the level of city services required
by residential uses.
As shown on Table 2, the "100% Box Retail" alternative (Alt, C) is estimated to
generate the greatest amount of net annual city revenues, with a total of
approximately $850,000 of net annual revenues to the C/ty of Campbell.
Assuming a capitali?~tion rate of 8%, this annual net revenue stream represents
a net positive value to the city of approximately $10.6 million.
The "100% Apartment" alternative (Alt. A2) is the only alternative estimated to
generate a net loss of city revenues, with an estimated annual loss of
approximately $62,000.
The Townhome and Single Family alternatives (Alt. A1 & D) are estimated to
generate net annual city revenues totaling approximately $33,000 and $40,000,
respectively.
~UN-0@-1998 i3;51 F~Or ;STE~N TO 914083792572 P.O?
.ffUN-OS-i998 13=51 FRO~ ;STERN TO 914083?925?2 F'.OS
Il!__: APPROACH
A. As.se.ssment of Revenues and Costs
The analysis/ncludes an assessment of annual city revenues, annual city serv/ce costs, and the
need for capital improvements attn'butable to each of the six scopes of d~velopment. The
impacts on other local jurisdictions, such as the Campbell School District hav~ not been.
assessed.
City revenue sources and service departments to be impacted by development on the site
have been identified through a review of city documents and /nterv/ews with department
representatives. Documents of particular relevahce/ncluded the "1990 M/d Year Budget
Status Report", the "5 Year Capital Improvement Plan", and applicable tax resolution fee
schedules. These documents identified current operating budgets for the various deparUnents
and anticipated capital improvements needed to service the city's future needs.
Repr~entatives from the following departments were interviewed: Planning, Finance,
Redevelopment, Fire, Police, Recreation and Community Services, and Public Works.
Based on the in/ormation available, it has been determined that the following revenue sources
and city departments would be impacted by development on the site:
Property Tax~s
Sales Taxes
Frsnch/sc Taxes
Business Licenses Fees
Motor Vehicle Taxes
Cigarette Taxes
S_erv/ce Departments
Police
Fire
Recreation and Community Services
While development would also generate building perm/t and park revenue fees, it has been
assumed that these fees are off-set by processing expenses and the cost to acquire additional
park improvements. They have, therefore, been excluded from the analysis. Development
of the site would also require off-site in/rastructure improvements. The nature and extent
of needed improvcment~ wiIl be a function of the final scope of development selccted for the
site. As a scope of development has not been established, it is premature to estimate these
costs and they also have not been included in this analysis..
TABLE 3 '
ESTINATED ANNUAL CITY REVENUES
FISCAL IIk~ACT ANALYSIS
gINCHESTER DRIV~-IN $IYE
CAKPBELL, CA
PROPERTY TAX RECEIPTS (1)
~:LES TAX
RESZDEHTiAL
RETAIL
TOTAL SALES TAX RECEIPTS
FRANCHISE TAX RECEIPTS
ELECTRIC, GAS
RESIDENTIAL
RETAIL (5)
CABLE TV
TOTAL FRANCHTSE TAX REVENUES
BUSINESS LICENSE F~ES (7)
APART#ENT$
RETAIL
TOTAL BUSINESS L%CENSE FEES
)(OTC~ VEHICLE AND CIGAreTTE
TAXES (8)
TOTAL ANNUAL CITY REVE/~J~$
A1 A2
TO~NHONE$/
TOVNHONE$ APART~NTS ~ RETAIL
S90,000 S69,000 ~,000
$19,000 S~.6,000 $10,000
SO S0 ~56,300
$19,000 S26,000 $466,$00
APARTI, IENTS/
BOX RETAIL
~4,9,,000
C
~OX
RrrAZL
ti31.000
$13,000
s469,300
~0
S855,550
$,855,550
S6,100 S1~,600 S3,ZO0 $6,600 SO
SO $0 SZ,O00 $2,000 ~r~,~O0
$2,000 S4,200 SI,0OO ~.,200 SO
S8,100 S16,800 S6,ZO0 $~0,800
SINGLE FAI'IZLY ~
SO Sl,300 $0 $~0
$0 SO $100 $100
SO S1,$00 S100 ~00
S16,000
0.00
516,000
$26,200 $54,300 $13,700 $28,500 SO S10,]00
$I~3,300 5166,100 55&6,200 S557,600 $890,750 S83,400
(1) SEE TABLE A'I FO~ CALCULATION,
(2) SEE TABLE A-5 FOR CALCULATIOH.
(~) SEE TABLE A-3 FO~ CALCULATION.
(4) B~$~D O~ CURRENT PER HOUBENOLD REVENUES OF APPROXXI~TELY 520,35.
(5) SAS~:) ON EST. OF CURRENT PER ACRE REVENUES OF APPROXINATELY S18&.00.
(6) BASED O# CURRENT PER HOUSE~OLD REVENUES OF
(7) APARTMENT FEES ARE $18 FOR 1ST UNIT AND S~ FOR EACH ADDITIONAL UMZT.
RETAIL FEES ARE S87 PER YEAR.
(8~ BASEO OH CURRENT PER RESIDENT REVENUES OF
SOURCE= CITY OF CA,qPBELL;
KEYS'ER HARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.
FILE NAIVE: FIS~L
I~AY 1990
JUN-08-1990 13:5] FROI. SSTERN TO 9140837~257~
B. Assumptions
The conclusions derived fa'om this analysis are partially based on a series of reasonable
assumptions and qualifications. Thc basic assumptions of this analysis are as follows:
1. Ail revenues and costs are expressed in 1990 dollars.
Per capita multipliers have been used to estimate annual operating expenses and
certain annual revenues. Thc multipliers are a f~ction of current operating
expenses (and revenues), as reported in the City's Budget, and current daytime
and residential population csti__m_ates. The Association of Bay Area Governments
has estimated that approximately 36,000 people res/de in Campbell. The city's
daytime population (excluding residents) is estimated at 21,260. The total
number of households is estimated at approximately 15,350.
The number of new Campbell residents estimated to be generated by each of the
residential components is based on an assumed 1995 average household size of
2.31, as estimated by the Association o£ Bay Area Oovernments.
The revenue estimates for each alternative assume that thc project is well
received by the marketplace and is successful.- It is assumed that the retail
tenants will generate sales volumes commensurate with the levels being achieved
by succcss~l competitors currently operating in the market'place.
in_ CITY IMPAC'I'S
A. City Revenues
KMA has estimated direct and indirect revenues wkich might be generated by the six
alternatives and received by the city of Campbell. Table 3 presents a summary of projected
city revenues, assuming that the development has been fully absorbed and reached stabilized
sales volumes. As shown, total annual city revenues are estimated to range from $83,400 for
thc "Single Family" alternative to $890,750' for the "100% Box Retail" alternative.
It must be noted that the revenue estimates contained herein arc based on industry standards
and/or certain extrapolations, and should therefore be interpreted as order of magnitude
estimates for these types of developments. A brief description of the taxes analyzed, and
assumptions and methodology employed, is discussed below.
1. Property Tax Receipts
The City of Campbell would receive approximately 13.35% of 1% of the assessed value
of any development on the site. As shown on Appendix Table A-l, the assessed value
of the townhome and single family components have been assumed to be equal to the
estimated sales prices of the homes. Based on a survey of for-sale residential product
in the area, it is estimated that the townhomes and single family residences would be
priced at approximately $225,000, and $350,000 respectively. Assessed value estimates
for the apartment and retail components have been based on the cost of developing
similar project~ in northern California.
2. Sales Tax Receipts
The city receives 1% of total taxable sales within the city. The sales tax revenues to
be generated by the retail components have been estimated based on the sales volumes
of other box retail and home improvement anchors in northern California. It must be
noted that the sales volumes of box retailers varies dramatically between the different
-tenants. As shown on Appendix Table A-2, the average Price Club generated an
annual sales volume of $1,137 per square foot of building area. In comparison, Costco
generated an average volume of $543 per square foot. For purposes of this analysis,
it has been assumed that the warehouse retail store would generate an average volume
of $600 per square foot of building area. Also based on industry standards, it has been
assumed that approximately 65% of the warehouse retailer's sales would be taxable and
generate city sales tax receipts. Sales volumes of $275 and $225 per square foot have
been assumed for the home improvement store and other retail stores, respectively.
The estimated average sales volumes and city sales tax receipts to be generated by
each store type is presented in Appendix Table A-3. The sales tax revenue estimates
assume that 100% of the revenues represent net "new'* receipts to the City of
Campbell. In reality, a certain percentage of the revenues would probably be
generated by sales transferred from other stores currently in Campbell. The magnitude
of transfer sales has not been assessed as it was beyond thc scope of this assignment.
Sales tax revenues, to be generated by the new residents of the residential components
have been estimated based on the anticipaied incomes of the residents and their
expenditures on goods and services. The calculation of anticipated expenditures is
presented in Appendix Tables A-4 and A-5.
JUN-08-19~O 15:54 FROM ESTERN TO
TABLE 4
ESTII4ATEO ANNUAL CITY OPERATING AND CAPITAl.
FZ~L I~ADT ~ALYSI5
~LL, ~
ARHUAL OPERATI#G COSTS
REC. AN~ CONNTY. BVC.
POLICE
FIRE (3)
TOTAL OPERATING CO~TS
ANNUAL DEBT BER¥ICE FOe
CAPITAL COSTS
FIRE
POLICE
TOTAL ANI~JAL DEBT SERVIC~
TOTAL ANNUAL CITY COSTS
S20,000 $41,500 $10,400 $Z1,800
$~9,000 $101,~00 S34,&00 S62,100 S23,400
:~T6,600 $~,800 S25,T00 ~46,400 $1T,$00
$105,600 S~18,800 $?0,S00 S130,300
S3,200 S6,700 $2,300 $4,100 $1,500
$1 ,&O0 $2,900 $1, COO $I,?00
t~, 600 $9,600 $3,300 $5.8~ ~, 200
SI,300 . -,
S1
~$,100 ...
C1) CURRENT BUDGET EXPEHSE I$ $1,039,860.
CZ) CURRENT IIUOGET EXPENSE ZSS4,057,150.
EXPENSE I$ $71.00.
ASSU~ING A RESIDENT PC)~LATION OF $6,000, THE COST PER RESIDENT IS S~.9.00.
ASSLMINO A DAY AND NIG~TTIHE POPULATION BASE OF $7,260, THE PER CAPITA
C$) CURRENT BUOGET EXPENSE IS $3,036,755. ASSL~lZNG A DAY AND NZOHTTIHE POPULATION EASE OF 57, Z60, THE PER CAPITA
EXPENSE tS $53.00.
(&) EBTINATE$ REFLECT PROJECT'S SHARE OF COST OF ADDING A 3RD STATION AND TRUCK. TOTAL CAPITAL COST IS
ESTINATED AT $1,$15,2~0 (PER BLGG~T). ASSUKING A 30 YEAR LOAN AT 82 INTEREST, THE ANNUAL DEET SERVICE
gOULD BE APPRoXIFULTELY $13&,000. THE PROJECT'S BI, ARE ~S BASED ON CURRENT PER CAPITA SERVICE
LEVELS. CURRENTLY ONE STATION ~ERVE$ APPRDXZKATELY 28,6~0 DAY AND #IGHTTZKE RESIDENTS.
C5) ESTIMATES REFLECT PROdECT*S BKAR~ OF COST OF ADDING ADDITIONAL POLICE CARS PROPORTIONATE TO CURRENT
PER CAPITA SERVICE LEVELS. THERE IS CURRENTLY ¶ CAR PER EYERY 3~010 DAY AND NIG~TTZN~ RESIDENT.
COSTS REFLECT ASSUI(EO COST PER VE~:LE OF $20,000 AND A ~ YEAR LOAN AT 82: INTEREST.
SOURCE: CITY OF CAN,OBELL;
KEYSER NARBTON ASSOCIATes, INC.
FILE NA/4E: FISCAL
NAY 1990
$19,~00
$14,300
D '1
SINGLE FANILY
3. Franch/se Tax Receipts
a. Elearic, Gas, and Refuse
In fiscal year 1989-1990, these city franchise revenues arc estimated to total
approximately $520,700. The average revenues generated by each household and
retail business have been estimated based on the land use acreage distn'bution
in Campbell, as provided by the Campbell planning department. Assuming that
residential developments occupy approximately 60% of the acreage in Campbell,
it is estimated that the average ho~ehoId currently generates approximately
$20.35 in annual dry electric, gas and refuse franchise tax revenues. Similarly,
assuming that retail development occupies 11% of the land area, it is estimated
that retail uses generate, on average, $184 per acre in annual franchise revenues.
b. Cable TV
Cable TV franchise revenues totaled approximately $103,240 in fiscal year 1989-
1990. This represents an average household payment of $6.73.
4. Business l_icense Fees
Business license fee estimates are based on the fee schedule provided by dry staff.
Fees for retail businesses are currently $87.00 per year. Fees for apartment owners
are based on the number of units in the development. The fee is $18.00 per year for
'the first unit and $2.00 per year for each additional unit.
$. Motor Vehicle and Cigarette Receipts
These revenues totaled approximately $1,370,985 in 1989-1990. Assuming a total
resident population base of. 36,000, the average annual revenue per resident is
estimated at $38.00.
B. City Costs
The estimated impacts on annual city service operating costs and capital debt service costs
are presented in Table 4. As sho,,,m, total annual city costs are estimated to range from
$43,100 for the Box Retail and Single Fam~y alternatives (Alt. C and D), to approximately
$228,400 for the Apartment Alternative (Alt. Al).
~UN-08-1990 1~:55 FRO~ '~STERN TO 91408~?~2~72 P,14
Given that thc City of Campbell docs not have specified servke requirements, costs have
been attributed to the alternatives on a per capita multiplier basis. Under this methodology,
current per resident or day/nighttime population c6sts are applied to the estimated number
of hew residents/workers associated with each alternative to estimate the total cost impact
of each alternative.
1. Annual City Service Costs
Based on K.MA's experience in analyzing the impacts on city services associated with
residential and retail developments in many other California communities, we have
found that the most heav~y impacted departments consist o£ the fire, ponce, and
community servicei departments. The estimated annual cost o£ providing these services
to meet the needs of each alternative is presented in Table 4.
2. Annual Debt Service Costs for Capital Improvements
.Discussions with city staff and a review of the city's 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan
indicate that the primary service capacity impacts will bc on the fire and police
departments. The city is currently planning to fund the construction of a third fire
station and the purchase of a third fire truck to serve future growth. As shown on
Table 4, the portion of the fire station debt service costs attn'butable to each alternative
has been estimated based on the assumption that the two existing fire stations have
reached their maximum service capacity but adequately serve existing development.
The cost of purchasing needed additional patrol cars has also been estimated and
allocated to each development alternative based on current per capita service levels.
WFEDO'~.M~M 1 ~,
~UN-08-1990 1~:55 FROI iSTERN TO 91~08~792572 F'.15
Appendix
KeyserMarstonAss..ociateslnc.
TABLE
ESTINATEDANNUAL CITY PROPERTY TAX RECEfPTS
FISCAL Z~PACT ANALYSIS
VlNCHESTER DRIVE-IH SITE
CAHPBELL, CA
.................................. ALTERNATIVES
A1 A2 B1 B2 C
VALUATION ESTI#ATES
PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT (I)
PER $F OF RETAIL (2)
s~.~, ooo s~3,000
$2;~,000 $83,000 $350,000
S86.00 ~6.00 $~.00
RESIDENTIAL UNITS 299.00 621.00 t56.00 3Z4.00 0.00 115.00
RETAIL SF 0.00 0.00 11T,000 117,00D 270,000 0.00
TOTAL RES~DENTZAL VALUE
TOTAL RETAIL VALUE
S~7,2~,000 $S1,5~$,000 ~5,100,000 $26,892,000 SO ~O,ZSO, O00
SO ~0 $10,062,000 $10,062,000 ~,~0,000 SO
SO?,2TS,0OO $$1,545,000 S¢5,162,000 $36,9S&,000 S~3,220,000 20,250,000
TOTAL ESTUiATED VALUE
ANN. CITT PROPERTY TAX RECEIPTS
CITY R~GEIVES l~.3&g&% OF 1~
OF ASSESS~ VALUE
$90,000 S69,000 S~O,O00 S~9,000 S31,000 $54,000
C1) VaLue est;m~tes for to.haMS end s~ngLe femily resJdence~ mre~s~m ~(~ ~L~s
of c~rab~e ~tts Jn the mrkeC area. VaLue ~tlmtes for .~rt~ts ere ~s~ ~
~tJ~t~ ~veio~nt costs.
VaLue estimates for eetait are I~$ed c~ estJmted devetopnc,~t costs.
SOURCE; K~YSER /iARST(:W ASSOCIATES INC.
Date: #ay 1990
Fire n.YM: fiscal
'JUN-08-199~ 1~:56 FROI SSTERN TO 9140857~2572
TABLE
AVERAGE SALES VOLUIqE$ OF DEST~NA?~O~ RETAIL ANCHORS
UINC#E~¥ER DR]VE-I~
CANPgELL, CA
I~J~E#OU~ CLUBS (1989 EST.)
PAC~ ~r;h~p ~arehou~e
Price CL~
~ar~e
The~otesiLe Ct~
AVERAGE
SALES VOLUNE
PER $F
$5~3'
$$?2
$1,137
~.~13
$2~I
Average ~81
#OFIE ]~PROVEHENT STORES (1989 E~T.)
· Su~tders $cluare $167
g~inger $1~
H~ C~ 1207
B~O~t $289
Averege
S211
#THE gAR~HOUSE CLUB iNDUSTRY", T#E APPRAISAL dOURgAL, APRIL
KEYSER HARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.
RA~: FISCAL
3UN-~8-1998 1~:57 ~ROF '~STERN TO 91~8837'~2572 P.l~:
TABLE A-3
AtMUAL CITY SALES TAX RECEIPTS TO BE GENERATEO BY RETAIL CGqPON~NT
~IilCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE
C/~q~LL, CA
AVERAGE
ANNUAL
SALES VOLU~
PER tF
$6OO
$225
$(~UARE
FEET
117,000
110,000
PERGENT
TAXABLE
65
100.00'~
100.00'4
TOTAL
ANNUAL
TAXABLE r~ALE$
~5,630,000
~30o~0,000
$9,67~, 000
AgNUAL
CITY RECEIPTS
(1 ~)
t~56,300
$302,500
$96,750
SOURCe: I~YSER HARSTO~ ASSOC]ATES, INC.
FILE NA~E: F]SCAL
RAY 1990.
TABLI~ A-~
ESTZKATF. D DI$CRETZOf~R¥ Z~Ct~E
VINCI'I~ST£R DRIVE-IN
S~5,000
EST. UN~'T PRICES
iqORTGAG~ It 802
I'~TGAGE/REI4T PAY~I~T C1)
~TflLY PAYNENT S1,~7
~L PAINT S19,~8
EST. ~ OF
E~TED RE~RED AN~AL
T~ES & ~N~R ~SING ~STS
ESTZ~TED IN~E S56, 000
(LE~) ~T~ENT PAY~NT 19,~8
(LESS)-T~E$/O~NER HSG. ~STS
ESTI~TED DIS~ETZ~y
S180,000
$~NGLE FAH~LY
$3S0,000
~,561
735
S88,000
30~
$~,000
~0,735
26,L00
$30,865
APARTHENT$
NA
$1,03~
$12,420
3~.00~
20.00X
$35,000
12,~20
?,000
$1~,580
(1) #or~g~ge Payment ceLcuto~io~$ o$$~ne · SO-year te~n at 10.5X f'nte~est.
Kon~hty apartment rental rote ~s based on e sur~ey of ~artmeflt Projects
tn the area.
SOURCE: I~YSER KARSTON A$SOCZATES IWC,
Dire: #~y 1990
'JUN-O@-lgg~ 13~57 FRO~. ~ESTERI'q TO ~0837~2572 P.20
TabLe A-S
ESTI/~.TE~ AKHUAL CITY SALES TAX REYE#UES GENERATED BY RESIDEnTiAL ~E~TS
FZ~L ~A~ ~ALYS~S
UZgCHESTER DRIP-IN ~ZTE
~PBELL, ~
6.00~ 6.00~ 6.25:~
80.00~ 60.002 80.OOX
S2,688 S~,22& $I,?'50
CO(¢~N ~'ER~E (NO~-TAXABLE)
OF TOTAL iNCOME ~..00~ &.OOX
CAPTURED BY CITY 0.00~ 0.00~
TAXABLE SALES S0 $0
EATIWG AND
OF D%SCRETZONARY iNCOl~ &.OOX 4.00X
~C/d~TURED IY CITY 20.00~ 20.00~
TAXABLE SALES t158
OF TOTAL ZNCC)~
CAPTURED BY CITY
TAXABLE SALE;
¢.10~
0.00~
SO
$99
I&.OC~ 14.00~ 1G.ODX
35.00~ 35.00~ 35.00X
OTHER/TAXABLE
~ OF TOTAL ifl~qE &.50~ &.$O~
~ CAPTURED BY CiTY $5.01~ 35.00~
TAXABLE SALES ~ $1,~
PER HOU~HOLD SALES CAPTURED
BY CITY $6, L72 $10,168
PER UNIT SALES TAX E 1~ $6~.7~ SI01.68
B2
APART/RETAIL
324.00
Al A2
TOgNI~S APARTI~T$ TOgS/RETAiL
~99. OO 6~1.00 156.00
SALES TAX GENERATED BY
RE$iDE#TIAL COKOONENTS OF
EACH SCENARIO
UNITS
TOTAL AN~. C~TY SALES
RE~IPTS
S19,000 S26,000 $10,000 S15,000
G.50~
35.00~
S,~,116
S41.t6
C
RETAIL
0.00
(1) SEE T,~BLE a-~.
SOl.~CE: GYSER KARSTON ASSOCIATES
Date: I~y 1990
File f'~n~z f~$cet
FRO~ dESTERN TO ~l-~oo,'o~-,=
EXHIBIT M
TRAFFIC LMPA~ STUDY
WINCHESTma DRIVE-IN SITE
IN T~E CITY OF CAMPBELL
FINAL I~PORT
~tll~l 2, 1990
NOLTE arid ASSOCIATES
186-90-00
EXECUTIVE SUI~Y
WINCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE 'tl~AFFiC STUDY
The 25 acre site ts located east of Route 17 north of
CurtnerAvenue on the vacated Winchester Drive-In
site in the City of Campbell.
The five alternative project developments will
generate between 224 and 1,033 PM peak hour trips
onto the local street system.
~Fo~ect l~_acts:
PM peak hour tmpmcts t~_t~e sev~p s~le~ tntersec-
locations, and add marginal traffic del~y at the
other four. Three of the intersections already are
heavily congested, and operate at LOS E or F with
extsttng traffic volumes. The LOS results are sum-
ma~tzed in Table A. Local streets near the site,
such as ~Gltncey and C~tsttch, will be&r most of the
added pmJect traffic.
Planned I.mmve~
]IilUiJ,~: ..... A Jqtnt effort between the City of Campbell, Santa
Clara'County, and Calt6ans to co-ordinate traffic
signals along the Camden Avenue corridor Is expected
to ease poor peak hour flows between Route 17 and
BascomAvenue. Also, after Routes 85 and 87 a~e
completed,'the CuKlen Avenu~ corrjdor.~ expected to
decrease by 10 to eO percen& which wou~o provide
substantial additional reltef,
The identified mitigations below will tmp~ove access
to the site and add capacity to local intersections.
-Additional mitigations may be recommended by the City
of San Jose for tmp~cts at Bascom/Unton and Bas-
com/Cmden.
e
e
Traffic signml at McGltncey/Union,
Traffic signal and minor tmprmvements at
Hc$11ncey/Curtner.
Restrtptng and m~nor improvements ~t McGltn-
cey/Cristtch.
Restripe NcGltncey Lane t~ pr?ide ~.wo-~ay left
turn lane along business ?~on%age an~ mi
intersections. The re-striping will require
some on-street parking removal.
Improve Cristich L~ne to public collector
street standards.
Improve extstlng 4s foot easement fromM C$1~n-
cey Lane Just south of Westchester Drive to
public collector street standards.
: JUN-OS-1898 16:29 FROh' WESTERN
J~JN ~l 'BO $:~1 ~M NOLTE S.J.
TO
TABLE A: SIJI~U~Y OF INTERSECTION LOS ANALYSIS
PRO~ECT I)£V£LOPNENT ALTERNATIVES
EXIIE'J'ING_ _.
~F RES./
APARTNEN~ BOX RE'I'ATL
]_NTERSECTION
)4cSLINCEY/UNION
McGLINCEY/CURTNER A
STEX/17 SE) OFF
CAMDEN/CURTNER
CAMPBELL/UNION
BASCOH/1JNION
' BASCOM/CA~IDEN
-Note: LOS (SEC)
LOS .($EC1 LOS
LOS
B (8.30)B (9.ZO) B (]0,3) B (7.8)
N/A $ N/A B N/A C H/A
E (47.0) E (49.8) E (52.5) E (47.6)
C (24.6) .D (e$.9)' O (30.3) O
D (30,5) D (33,2) D (36.0) D (30.6)
t (54,7) E (56.7) E ($8.1) F (69.8)
F (63.7) F ~4.e) F (65.3) F (76.$)
'lifo
___B~)X RETAZL
LOS (SE~ 1
B (11,9)
0 N/A
E (47.3)
o (es.e)
F (es.o)
Level of Service (del~y ~n seconds pe~ vehicle)
IENOlgT-P
2
S'fU~Y pORPOSE
This traffic study evaluates the impacts related to the proposed develop-
meet of the Winchester Drive-In site located in the City of Campbell. The
traffic t~ctS on the l~ml City steers a~ intersections will be
tvmluat~ for five p~poseq develop~nt ~ltern*rives, l~a~ftc circulation
and safety will be revtewe~ fo~ each ~lt~rnattw, ~d, whe~e tn~dmqu~te
~erv(ca ts expected, m(t~gmtton ~asur~s w~ll be reco~nded.
pROJECT D~CRIPTIONAND PRO~ECTLOCATION
The ~$ &crc Winchester Drive~Xn site (Figure 1) is being evaluated for
five different development alternatives as listed in Table 1. This stte
is located in the City of Campbell approximately half a mile north from
the intersection of Camden Avenue and Curtner Avenue. The current land
uses around the site ~re multi-family residences to the north, Pasco de
palomas mobile home park to the east, Santa Clara County Water District
percolation ponds to the south and Ro~t? 17 to theist.
TABLE 1-' PRO~ECT ALTERNAIIVE$
UNITS , ,,NO, OF UNITS
tiLT. LANO_USE . ,,, I
A1 Low-Medium Residential Owelttng Units Zgg
(Townhomes)
A2
Owell tng Units 621
High· Residential
(Apartments)
BI Low.Medium Residential Owelltng Units 156
Destination Retail Floor Area (S.F.) 1~7,000.
BZ High Residential 117,000
Oesttnatton Retail
227,000
C Destination Retail 43,000
General Retail
Owelltng Units_
· Floor Area (S.F.)
Floor Area (S.F.)
Floor Area.(S.F.)
A~CESS DISCUSSION
There are three ~osstble access roads that immediately serve the site;
Ctlstich Lane which is a rtvate ro~d at the present time; an exes%trig 45
foot wide e~sement off ofP~Gltncey Lane; and Westchester O~lve which
'al road standers. The first two ro~ds will ,requt~
improved t9 ~ndustr).__ _ --A ~c stteet st~nd~s. Cr~stt~h
substantial mprove~ent) t~.)a~s[~_c:cl...b~n. for the adjacent bus~-
Lane is · private street wlln on-)~r~ ~-~ · .
nesSes. To become a viable access toad, the City must 'pUrchase sufficien:
EMOt67
..... .~,,., .. =- ~.~':.~_.~._.~,~.~.~',.'~- - . ..... . . : .......
JUN-I~IS-lC~90 16: 50 FROM. ~dESTERN TO '-d1408~ ...... r9~5 r.-. F'. 06
right-of-way, and the parktng must be relocated o¢ off-street lots. The
¢5-foot easenmnt near Westchester Drtve can be fully l~roved wt~
relat~vel~ ~ess c~nfl~cts s~nca there a~ no ex~st~ng businesses a~ong ~t
~ontage, All three access connec~ to ~cG14nce~ Line. ~14nce~ Lane has
access ~o Un,on Avenue to the node. h. ~nd:Cu~tna~ Avenue end'~tmdan Awful',
re.the sou~h.
JUN-05-1990 16:~0 FROM, ~dESTERN TO 'B14C~Sz-]?'B2572 P.O?
b~-~ .,,EORGE S. NOLTE & ASSOCIATES
SITE
~-~
PROJECT LOCATION
...... j..:,_-._. ~tGURE ...t .
JUN-05-1990 15:21 FROM, ~dESTERN TO 914085?925?2 P. 02
TABLE e'- STUDY INTERSECTIONS
LOCATION .. .,.
t~cGLINCEY/UNIOH
McGL I NC EY/CURTN£R
STEX/17 SB OFF
CA~4DEN/CURTN£R
CAMPB£LL/UNION
BASCOt~/UNION
BASCOfl/CAMOEN
_~URISOiCTION._
City of Campbell
City of Campbell
Cat frans/CoUnty
City of Campbell
Ctty of Campbel 1
City of San'Oose
TRAFFIC CONTROL
1-NaY stop sign
3-W~y stop signs
Traffic signal
Traffic signal
Traffic signal
Traffic signal
Traffic s4gnal
EXISTII~ TRAFFIC CI;RtDITIONS
As shown tn Table 4 under the EXISTING heading, three lo~Ittons are
heavily congested during the PM peak hour (LOS E or below) with slow
travel speeds, and excessive delays:
CONGESTED LOCATIONS (LOS E or LOS F)
l- 8ascom/Union
· B~sc~C~en, and
· San ~omas Exp~ssw~oute [7 southbound off-ramp.
All of these congested intersections a~ outside of the City of Campbell's
jurisdiction.
T~ tnte?ect(ons are operating close to or at LOS 0 which is the p~fer-
red serwce level for u~an traffic co. talons. Under LOS 0 co. talons,
traffic vol~es are high with ~arate travel speeds and del~s, ~ere is
m small ma~in of unused c~pacity available at the study locations befo~
these beco~ congestS.
N~R PREF~RED ~PACI~ (LOS O)
· Ca~en/Curtner, and
· Campbell~nion.
The two unslgnalized (ntersecttons are currently carrying enough ~ peak
hour traffic volu~s to warrant installation of traffic signal control.
Additional studies ~f traffic safety and overall daily volu~ trends ts
necessary to determine tf signal control ts justified.
' TRAEFIC SI~S W~R~TEO (PM ,P~ HOU~ · ~al tncey/Unton
· McGt tncey/Curtner
The LOS calculation shown tn Table 4 assumes that traffic signal contml
7 ~o187~
~UN-85-1998 15:22
is in place at these two locations ~htch t~plcally understates actual
delay conditions. Field observations tn the PM peak hour showed moderate
delays at both HcGltncey/Un~on and ~Gllncey/Curtner for an average
vehicle to clear.the interSeCtiOn.
TRAFFXC COIIOITIONS ¥IlliN)OED PROJECT VOLUMES
The five project alternatives (Table 1) were evaluated'to detemine the
volume o~ new traffic added by each alternative, and then to analyze the
consequence of the addlttona] traffic to the local street system.
~LANNED.[MPROYEMENTS
Two m~jor projects wtll Significantly enhance traffic service in the study
area. The first ts a Joint effort between the City of Campbell, County of
Santa Clara, City of San Jose, and Caltrans to establish co-ordinated
signal timing on Camden Avenue between Route ~7 and Bascom Avenue. This
signal timing project wtll provide new time-based st. al to.ordination
hardware and multtple ttetng plans to adjust for tra~tc flow variations
over the day. The second major project is the construction of Routes 85
and 87 which, when completed, is expected to divert from 10 to 20 per~:ent
of the Camden Avenue corridor volumes onto these new fi~(lftles. These
two pro,act taken together will provide significant relief to the current
congested peak period conditions.
~or the purpose of this study, these two improvement hav[ not been_..as~_.umed
~o be in ola¢~. The succeeding 1apect analysts consfders o~ly existing
street capacities and control patterns.
ll~]P GEIiERJ~T~ OH
The daily and PM peak hour traffic generated from the five alternative
development plans (Table 3) show a wide range or trip
stty. The lowest trip generation total ts for townhonms (Alternative
which generates 224 P~ peak hour trips and Z,Z43 dat~y t~!ps~.t~e ht~hest
generator is the Box Retail/$eneral Retail (Alternative c) which proauces
[,033 PM peak hour trips and 12,$$~ daily trips. The other three altera-
tire trip totals are in between these limits.
t'RI P 0 ISTRI BU3'IOH _'AND ASSIGNMETtT
The trip generation values for each project alternative were fed into the
City's TMODEL~ traffic model to determine the site trip distribution and
assignment patterns. Using the model, City staff prepared ~ peak hour
volumes at each study ~ntersection for Existing + A~pmved Project +
Proposed Project Alternative for Alternatives A1 and A2. I~act results
for Alternatives BZ/B3 and C were taken from a previous City staff traffic
study report on the Winchester Orive-In site (February 27, l~gO).
An adjustment was made for the site retail related trips to account ~or
"pass-by" trips which arm shopping trips that already travel the local
streets but would shop at the new project site. City staff estimated th~s
8
~acto~ to be Z~oet, c~nt Of the r~ta~q Lrlus, which corresponds ~th
published research by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
P~anned traffic growth fro~ approved projects ~n San ~ose were collected
fro~ the CJty of San 0ose TPansportatton Planning st~ff~ and these
app~ ~ed to the model Pesu~ts supplied by the C~ty of Campbell.
TABLE ~: PRO~£CT A~TERWAT~VE TR~P G~ERATION SUtW~Y
13ay ~ {{IYt(~:~) ~ (~:~) ..
~.5 ~,~ 10 (7 : ~) ~4 (1~: ~)
7.5 1~170 10
(2)* 43.0
12,5~ 1,033 (51~ : 516)
PROJECT _IMPA_~_T_S
.The impact of the project alternatives on the study intersections mhd
local streets are discussed in the following section. LOS calculations
were made using the forecasted intersection volumes provided by City
staff. The LOS results are summarized in Table ¢ below with the tn-
d(vfdual worksheets attached in Appendix B.
Overall, the current PM peak hour LOS conditions will be impacted at three
locations by the additional project traffic. The other four locations
have varying degrees of added del~, but not enough to lower the current
LOS rating.
IMPACTED )NTERSFLCTION~_(DEGRADED_PM PEAK HOUR LD~
~- ~Gltncey/Curtner (LOS A -> LOS B, C or O)
· Cemden/Curtner (LOS C -> LOS D)
· Bascom/Unton (LOS E -> LOS F) '*
..TLIN-05-1998 15: 23 FR~OP1 ~,IE~TEI~N TO 9148837'~257.--" F'. ~.35
IiARf'.INAL OR NO..IMPACT INTERSECTIONS.
· ~G1 tncey/Union
· San Tomes Expressway/Route 17 SB off-ramp
· Campbell/Union
· Bas¢om/C&mden
~lternat(ves Al.a~d A2 (Townhomes or.A~artments)generate the least site
traffic volumes but add to the existing dt~eCtt0nal traffic patterns.
This compounding affect will occur at STEX/17 SB OFF, CAMOEN/CURTN£R, and
CAHPBELL/UNION where the added delay is relatively greater than for the
retail oriented alternatives. However, only one of these locations,
CAMOEN/CURTNER is significantly impacted, and the resultant LOS O condi-
tion is generally acceptable for urban traffic service.
The streets ½mmediately serving the site, ~$ttncey Lane, Crtstich Lane
and Curtner Avenue (between HcG1 tnce. y and Ca~en) will have increases of
1,0oo to 2,000.vehicles per day. S~nce' the fronting uses on these two
streets are primarily non-residential, the added ~rafftc volumes should be
adequately served by improving Crtsttch Lane to public street standards,
and providing separate turn left pockets from ~csltncey Lane at the site
access road intersections. Because the volumes on Crtst~ch Lane would be
low, on.street parking could be retained there. ''
Alter_natives BI ..and B2.. (Mul_tt-famt] v_Residential and Retail COn~ercial)_
.w~il $tgnificanti impact ~GLINCEY/CURTNER and ~)A$COM/UNION in the PM
peak hour. It will also add delay to the heavily congested I)A$C~/CAFiOiN
intersection in the City of San ~lose.
lhe added daily traffic to ~ltncey Lane, C:rtsttch Lane ~nd Curtner
Avenue (between ~gl incey ~nd Camden) will be two times that for the
residential alternatives or ~,000 to ¢,000 vehicles daily. Traffic
condtt(ons on these local streets will be acceptable with the same
improvements stated for Alt. A1 and A~.
Alternative C (All Retail1 generates the highest site traffic volumes
during {he peak hours, an~ will significantly impact ~GLINCEY/CURTNER and
EL~SCOM/UNION intersect ions.
The added local street daily volumes on t4c$11ncey Lane, Crtsttch Lane and
Curtner Avenue {between ~lincey and Cmmden) will be about four times
that for the residential alternatives or $,000 to O,000 vehicles daily.
In addition to the local street improvements cited above, on.street
parking on Crtsttch Lane and ~ltncey Lane will likely need to be
prohibited to enhance the street capacity and reduce parking conflicts.
.~UN-05-1990 1S:2~ ~ROM
~ESTERN TO
F'. 06
TABLE 4:' SUI~Y OF INTERSECTION LOS ANALYSIS
EXISTING
! IrrERSECTI ON _ _ .LOS_~:S.[CK-
McGLINCEY/UNION B (8.30)
~GLINCEY/CURTNER A N/A
STEX/17 S8 OFF E (47.0)
CAHOEN/CURTNER
CAMPBELL/UNION
BASCOM/UNIOH
BASCOM/CAHOEN
_ Note: =
c
o
E
LOS (SEC)
PR~£CT DEVELOPNENTALTERNATIVES
....... ,F RES./ T~
T~ .... AP_AR"INENT BOI{~RETAYL
LOS fSEC~ LOS fSEC3 LOS fSEC). LOS fSEC)
B (m,20) B (10.3) 8 (7,a) B (Il,g)
B N/A B N/A C N/A O N/A
E (49,8) £ ($e,5) E (47,6) E (¢7,3)
.D (Z6,9) D (30,3) O (Z6,]) O
O (35,2) O (3e,O) O (SO,e) 0 (30,5)
E (56.7) E (58,1) F (69.8) F (67,2)
F (64.6) F (65.3) F'(~6.$) ,F (65.0)
Level of Service (delay in seconds per vehicle).
SITE ACCES$
There are three possible access to the site: Cr~sttch Lane,
Drive and a 4S-foot easement off of ~al~ncey Lane. A13 these access
roads connect McGltncey Lane to the project site border. Earlier studies
consWered a new ramp or overcrosstng to Route 17 to provide s{~e access.
The genera3 concqus~on of these studies was that the cost of these
~mprovemen~s would not be economtca11~ ~easSble for ~ust the ~5~acre
drtve-ln's~te development, but would have to be spread over
development area. In addition, new freew~ ramps addacent to the s~te
would be too close to the Camden Avenue ramps according to Caltrans
standards, and would l{kely not be approved for construction.
~. Cr~sttch Lane Is a private street approxtm~tel~ 1600 feet
long and p~ralle3 to Route ~? ~n or, er to be used as afl ~ccess road to
the site, It will have to become a public street and be t~roved to City
street standards. This will requited &O-foot right-of-Nay w~11 be
ac utred from several add, thing light industrial parcels. The existing
--~-+a.. ~ ai,ennal oark~n~ {long Crest{ch Lane will bq
limited parallel parking. Any addttNonal parking demand
accommodated on off-street 3ets.
Westchester Dr{ye. The existing {ndustr{a3 roadwa~y ts fully {nq~roved and
serves a few businesses between ~cGllncey L~ne and its current te~mtnus at
the site property l~ne. On-street pataqle3 pa~k~ng is provided for
passenger vehicles and tractor/trailer co~b{nations. Westchester Drive
intersects Mc$1tnfey Lane about ~OOO feet west of Union Avenue.
15:~5 ~RDM, 'dESTERN TO '914~8379~572
Exij~l(na 45-footeasement off of NcGltnce? Lane. This unimproved road
Will requlr~ full roadway improvements to become a public road. There is
a residence along this road from which some right-of-way acquisition (n
the frontage may be required. The easement tntersmcts McSlincey Lane
about 400 feet west of Westchester Ortve.
REC_OI~IMENDATLILON
For any of the alternatives including ~etail uses, it is recommended that
Cristtch Lane be used as the primary access road since it gives the most
direct route for site traffic to and f~om the Route 17 via Camden Avenue
and Curtner Avenue. The intervening light industrial and strip commercial
uses would be compatible with the site destination. The secondary access
road could be either the easement or Westchester Ortve although the
easement is preferred since added traffic would not disrupt the existing
businesses aqd on-street parking on Westchester Drive.
For the exclusively residential alternatives, a single access road could
be provided along the easement with a second&fy access for emergency
vehicles only. Since these alternatives are relatively low traffic
generators, two access roads a~m not required for safe and efficient
traffic movement, although a second route is reqbtred fo~ alternative
emergency vehicle access should the first be obstructed.
~UN-05-1998 15:25 FRO~ IESTERN TO 9~40S3792572 F'.08
.14XTIGATIOfl MEASU~£$
eased on the foregoing impact analYs~s and access discussion, a list of
off-site attlgatton improvements have been developed for each of the
Project Alternatives as indicated in Table.S. Note that in the ft~st two
cases, the re¢°mmnded improvement should be made even if no pr~Sect is
completed. These improvements ~ill relieve the significant impacts
.identified tn the.pro3ect analysts with two exceptions, The on-going
stgnal co-ordination effort on Camden Avenue w~s previoUsly reported by
City staff ss being sufficient to mitigate excessive delays in that
corridor. No additional improvements have been recommencled. Also, no
improvements ware recommended for the two intersections located in City of
San Oose jurisdiction at Bascom/Un!o~ and Bascom/Camden. The estimated
costs of these improvements is listeo below in Table 6.
TABLE S: OFF-SITE IRPROYE~EI(I'S
PRO,,1ECT ALTERNATIVE
OFF.S[~E
] ~trA1 incey/Union siqnml
2. ~G1 incey/Curtner signal
NO Al A2' B1/B2 C
X X X X X
X X X X x
_3.
v
Restrtpe I~c$1tncey to provide
two.way left turn lane along
businesses, and left turn
pockets ~t intersections
Improve' 45-f~ot easement between
McGlincey Lane and site to
collector street standards
X X X X
X X X X
Improve fristtch Lane as collector
street and install 3-Way stop sign
at ~Gltncey Lane intersection
X X
Widen north leg of.~Gltncey/
Curtner to provide free right
turn movement for ftcGlincey.
Extend left turn storage on
Cu~tner at McGlincey
X X
TABLE 6: ESTIFATED COST FOR OFF-SITE IIMPROV~S
II~PF<O_V_EI~iNT
1. Signal at l~cG1 tncey/Union
2. Signal at ticGltnce¥/Curtner
3. Re-Stripe l~cGlincey
4, Road Improvement (Easement)
5. Crist~ch Lane Improvement
6. blcGlincey/Curtner widening
COST
$ oo,ooo
100,000
~0,000
'13~,000
51,0~000
75,000
E#OtS?-O
.. ' .... ~::.~" .... 2- ........ " ' _ .... T,..'..* ': .....
APPENOIX A:
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
The Level of Service (LOS)is a qualitattvemeasurethat represents the
traffic conditions in terms of interruptions, speed, travel time, comfort
and convenience provided by a romdw&y. The following provides a general
description of the service lmvels for intersect(ohS along with the
associated average delay in seconds pervehlcle:I
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION
LOS DESCRIPTION AVG. DELAY
A
Free flow conditions. Low volbmes and high
travel speeds. Little or no restrictions in
maneuverability due to other vehicles.
B
Flows ara stable, but speeds are beginning to be
restricted by traffic conditions. 'Drivers still
have reasonable freedom of movement, and traffic
flow is seldom restricted.
C
Stable flow; Drivers are restricted in lane
seqection and speed. Relatively satisfactory
operating speeds, with service volumes suitable
for urban design practice.
Approaching unstable flow. Little rom drivers
to maneuver. Fluctuations in volume and tem-
porary restrictions may cause substantial drops
in operating speeds. Conditions can be toler-
ated, however, for short periods of time.
E
Unstable flow with short stoppages, Volumes at
or near capacity of the roadway.
F
Forced flow operation at low speeds. These
conditions usually result from queues of vehi-
cles backing up from a restriction downstream.
Stoppages may occur for short Or long periods of
time from the downstream congestion.
0.0 - S.O
I$.! - 2S.O
2S.1 - 40.0
40.1 - 60.0
Over 60.0
Transportation Research Board, Nig~ay Capacfty Nanua), 1985.
JUN-05-1990 15:27 FROM 'IESTERN TO 9140839925?2 P.10
APPENDIX Il: LEVEl. OF SERVICE CAL~LATZON
JUN-~S-19~ 15:~? FRor' ' !ESTERN
JUN ~ ~'~0 IB:~0 t.- .... ~ NOLT~ $. J,
TO
PROM WESTERN TO 91408~ ~ ~F__~ ,~ P.
C) 0 0 ~
E~B~N
ITEM NO. 2
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 22, 1990
GP 90-03/ZC 90-03
Public Hearing to consider the following
applications by the City of Campbell for the former
Winchester Drive-in site located at 535 Westchester
Drive (APN: 412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35):
General Plan Amendment to change the land
use designation from Industrial to Commercial.
File No. GP 90-3.
Zone Change to change the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development). File No. ZC 90-3.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following actions:
1. Open the public hearing to receive testimony on the subject application.
o
Withhold action on the application and continue the hearing to the
Planning Commission meeting of June 12, 1990. The Cambrian Council
has submitted the request for continuance (see discussion on Page 6).
BACKGROUND
Site Description
go
The 23 +/- acre Winchester Drive-In site is the largest single
undeveloped site remaining in the City of Campbell. The site is
bordered by Highway 17 to the west, multi-family residential to the
north, the Paseo de Palomas mobile home park to the east, and the Santa
Clara Valley Water District percolation ponds to the south. In addition,
several industrial parcels adjoin the site to the east and south.
Bo
Access to the site is limited. The only direct public street access is
provided over a small industrial parcel fronting Westchester Drive.
Secondary access is available via Cristich Lane, a private street, and from
a 45 foot wide access easement off of McGlincey Lane. All entrance
points lead to McGlincey Lane, which is accessed from Camden, Union
or Curtner Avenues. Camden and Union Avenues contain heavy traffic
volumes during peak hours; Curtner Avenue is a residential street.
ons GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Staff Report - Appl"
Page -2-
Site History
The site was utilized as a drive-in theater until the late 1970s. In 1984,
the City reviewed an environmental impact report and development
proposal to construct a 420,000 square foot research and development
complex. While approved by the City, the project has not been
constructed. The project approval expired in 1985.
Bo
In 1989, the City initiated an action to abate code violations related to the
dumping of debris and abandoned vehicles. Ownership of the parcel had
been under dispute for several years. In November 1989, Western
Federal Savings assumed ownership of the site through a foreclosure
action.
Co
The City Council authorized staff to conduct a land use study of the
Winchester Drive-In site as part of the budget goals for Fiscal Year 1989-
1990. For six months, staff evaluated alternate land uses and studied the
access, economics, and traffic implications.
De
Staff prepared a City Council report summarizing its findings on
alternative land uses for the subject site. Based on staff's
recommendation, City Council initiated a General Plan Amendment
(GPA) and rezoning application to change the land use designation from
industrial to commercial at their meeting of March 20, 1990. Council
also authorized staff to prepare policies to guide future development on
the site.
EVALUATION OF REOUEST
Land Use Description
go
The commercial land use designation ordinarily allows a wide range of
office and retail uses whose impacts vary depending on the particular
user. Staff proposes that use of the subject site be limited to destination
commercial. These users are less reliant on drive-by visibility and
convenient access to attract customers. Instead, customers typically will
seek-out destination commercial stores.
Bo
Destination commercial relies on the public's knowledge of the store's
location through marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-
mouth advertising. Some examples of destination commercial uses are
warehouse outlets, automobile parks, and membership-type
retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods in bulk quantities
C. Under the proposed designation, staff anticipates that the subject site can
accommodate approximately 300,000 square feet of building area.
Staff Report - Appl~c.aons GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pal~e -3-
May 22,1990
Traffic
The Public Works Department has prepared a traffic report assessing the
impacts of the proposal (see attachment). The report states that a
destination commercial use will generate approximately 1,032 trips
during the PM peak period. Approximately 25% of the trips will be
existing trips diverted from other arterials. This proposal, therefore, will
produce about 775 new PM peak period trips. The proposed use also
results in the fewest new trips in the peak direction of traffic.
Significantly, destination commercial does not produce traffic in the AM
peak period.
Bo
A traffic report was prepared for the research and development project
approved in 1984. That project would have produced 617 trips in the PM
peak period. A destination commercial use results in a net increase of
158 vehicular trips. It should be noted that under the present General
Plan and zoning, the site could be developed to an intensity greater than
the previously approved project. Such a development would create
traffic far in excess of the proposed commercial use.
Co
As a traffic mitigation measure, staff proposes that the site developer be
required to submit a detailed traffic analysis and plans for specific
mitigation measures in conjunction with a development application.
The developer will be required to address the following items at a
minimum:
Thorough evaluation of project traffic impacts on the Curtner
Avenue residential area and identification of alternative mitigation
techniques.
2. Improvements to be undertaken to provide safe access to the site.
Identification of all off-site impacts and traffic improvements
required to mitigate project traffic.
Noise Impacts
Ao
Development of the subject site may create noise impacts in two areas --
1) on adjoining residential parcels and 2) on residences along streets
used by motorists going to and from the site. Staff's environmental
assessment proposes that a noise study be required at the development
plan stage to evaluate noise impacts.
Bo
Staff has prepared a preliminary estimate of noise impacts on the Union
Avenue residential areas. Utilizing the assumptions contained in the
Staff Report - Appl~ 'ons GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pase -4-
May 22, 1990
noise study for the research and development project, a destination
commercial use will increase noise levels by approximately 1.4 decibels.
Three decibels is the minimum perceptible change in noise level.
The draft development policies for this amendment state that the future
project should be designed to minimize noise impacts on the adjoining
residential parcels. Possible techniques to implement this requirement
are location of loading areas and mechanical equipment away from
residences, construction of acoustical walls, and limitation of hours of
operation.
Site Landscaping
Future development should utilize landscaping along the western
property line to provide an attractive appearance from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping should also be provided along property lines
adjoining residential development to block views of the commercial
facility.
Bo
Commercial developments have extensive parking areas. Landscape
planters should be provided within the parking areas to provide visual
relief from the paved surfaces.
Environmental Review
Based on the Initial Study and Discussion of Environmental Impacts (see
attached), staff has identified four potentially significant environmental
impacts -- traffic, noise, land use, and parking. The Discussion of
Environmental Impacts discusses measures that should be required to
mitigate the potential impacts. The major mitigation measures have been
cited in the previous sections on traffic and noise. These measures have also
been included in the development policies for this GPA.
Development Policies
Staff has prepared the attached development policies which are designed to
accompany the GPA and rezoning actions. These policies elaborate general
planning and design principals which will provide guidance to the future
developer on land use, traffic improvements, landscaping and related issues.
They also include the previously discussed mitigation measures.
ALTERNATIVE LAND USES
Although the City Council has only authorized a GPA for a commercial
designation, it is useful to briefly list the positive and negative aspects of
ons GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Staff Report - AppL
Pal~e -5-
other uses. Staff has evaluated land uses for the Winchester Drive-in site in
terms of traffic, access and visibility, compatibility with adjoining uses, and
costs and benefits to the City.
Residential
Residential land uses place a high demand on City services and produce little
City revenue. Staff also anticipates that marketing a residential development
on this site would be difficult, given its access through the McGlincey
industrial area. The design of a higher density housing project would require
great sensitivity to avoid impacts on the abutting mobile home park.
Industrial
Ao
Industrial is the site's existing land use designation. As mentioned, a
420,000 square foot research and development project was previously
approved on the subject site.
Under the existing zoning and General Plan, a development of greater
intensity could be constructed. The existing designation allows building
heights of up to six stories, which would be incompatible with the
surrounding uses. Further, such a development would produce
substantial traffic in both the AM and PM peak periods.
Co
Industrial uses do not require a great deal of city services, but they also do
not produce significant revenues.
General Commercial
General commercial uses include the typical retail shopping or discount
center developments. Commercial uses produce considerable sales tax
revenue while requiring a relatively limited amount of municipal services.
However, staff believes a shopping center is an infeasible use on this site due
to its lack of visibility and access from major streets. General commercial also
generates among the highest traffic levels.
COMMUNITY INPUT
Staff has met with the Cambrian Council twice. The Council has
submitted a letter requesting that Planning Commission continue these
applications for one month. The Council desires time to research
optional land uses for this site and to provide a recommendation to the
Planning Commission. It appears their major concern is traffic. Staff has
also scheduled a meeting with the representatives of the adjoining Paseo
Staff Report - Appl' 'ons GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pal~e -6-
May 22, 1990
de Palomas mobile home park prior to the Planning Commission
hearing.
Staff recommends that Commission open the public hearing to receive
testimony on the applications. After the hearing, staff believes it would
be appropriate for the Commission to continue the application to allow
the Cambrian Council full input and participation in the decision-
making process.
C-
The Commission will note that this GPA is paired with the NOCA
General Plan Amendment in the current round of General Plan
hearings. Staff feels that it would be ideal to implement NOCA as soon
as possible. State law prohibits cities from amending their general plan
more than four times a year. Staff recommends that the two GPAs
remain paired, as one amendment has been approved this year and staff
anticipates two additional amendments. Therefore, staff recommends a
three week continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of June
12,1990.
Staff has met with representatives of Western Federal Savings to inform
them of the City's preference for destination commercial development
on this site. Staff has also met with Western Federal's planning and
economic consultants and provided them with information to allow
them to conduct their own study of the site.
SUMMARY
go
Staff believes that a commercial land use designation with development
policies requiring a destination-type commercial is the most appropriate
land use for the Winchester Drive-in site. In addition, staff has prepared
a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that the application, as
modified by mitigation measures, will have no significant impacts on
the environment. Additional environmental studies will be required
when development plans are prepared.
Bo
If Planning Commission believes a continuance is warranted, Staff
recommends that the applications be continued to the meeting of June
12, 1990.
ons GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Staff Report - Appl
Page -7-
Attachments
Exhibit A.
Exhibit B.
Exhibit C.
Exhibit D.
Exhibit E.
Exhibit F.
Exhibit G.
Exhibit H.
Exhibit I
Findings of Approval
Development Policies
General Plan Map
Zoning Map
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Discussion of Environmental Impacts and attachments
Letter from the Cambrian Coundl dated May 16, 1990
Vicinity Map
Prepared by:
Approved by:
~da, Senior Planner
Ste~~ Pi-~a ecki, Director of Planning
pcgp90-3.rpt(mc2)
ITEM NO. 2
STAFF REPORT -- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 22, 1990
GP 90-03/ZC 90-03
Public Hearing to consider the following
applications by the City of Campbell for the former
Winchester Drive-in site located at 535 Westchester
Drive (APN: 412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35):
General Plan Amendment to change the land
use designation from Industrial to Commercial.
File No. GP 90-3.
Zone Change to change the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development). File No. ZC 90-3.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following actions:
1. Open the public hearing to receive testimony on the subject application.
Withhold action on the application and continue the hearing to the
Planning Commission meeting of June 12, 1990. The Cambrian Council
has submitted the request for continuance (see discussion on Page 6).
BACKGROUND
Site Description
The 23 +/- acre Winchester Drive-In site is the largest single
undeveloped site remaining in the City of Campbell. The site is
bordered by Highway 17 to the west, multi-family residential to the
north, the Paseo de Palomas mobile home park to the east, and the Santa
Clara Valley Water District percolation ponds to the south. In addition,
several industrial parcels adjoin the site to the east and south.
Access to the site is limited. The only direct public street access is
'provided over a small industrial parcel fronting Westchester Drive.
Secondary access is available via Cristich Lane, a private street, and from
a 45 foot wide access easement off of McGlincey Lane. All entrance
points lead to McGlincey Lane, which is accessed from Camden, Union
or Curtner Avenues. Camden and Union Avenues contain heavy traffic
volumes during peak hours; Curtner Avenue is a residential street.
Staff Report - Applicatio..., GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -2-
May 22, 1990
Site History
Ao
The site was utilized as a drive-in theater until the late 1970s. In 1984,
the City reviewed an environmental impact report and development
proposal to construct a 420,000 square foot research and development
complex. While approved by the City, the project has not been
constructed. The project approval expired in 1985.
In 1989, the City initiated an action to abate code violations related to the
dumping of debris and abandoned vehicles. Ownership of the parcel had
been under dispute for several years. In November 1989, Western
Federal Savings assumed ownership of the site through a foreclosure
action.
C.
The City Council authorized staff to conduct a land use study of the
Winchester Drive-In site as part of the budget goals for Fiscal Year 1989-
1990. For six months, staff evaluated alternate land uses and studied the
access, economics, and traffic implications.
De
Staff prepared a City Council report summarizing its findings on
alternative land uses for the subject site. Based on staff's
recommendation, City Council initiated a General Plan Amendment
(GPA) and rezoning application to change the land use designation from
industrial to commercial at their meeting of March 20, 1990. Council
also authorized staff to prepare policies to guide future development on
the site.
EVALUATION OF REQUEST
Land Use Description
The commercial land use designation ordinarily allows a wide range of
office and retail uses whose impacts vary depending on the particular
user. Staff proposes that use of the subject site be limited to destination
commercial. These users are less reliant on drive-by visibility and
convenient access to attract customers. Instead, customers typically will
seek-out destination commercial stores.
Destination commercial relies on the public's knowledge of the store's
location through marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-
mouth advertising. Some examples of destination commercial uses are
warehouse outlets, automobile parks, and membership-type
retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods in bulk quantifies
C.
Under the proposed designation, staff anticipates that the subject site can
accommodate approximately 300,000 square feet of building area.
' G1) 90-3 and ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Staff Report - Applicati
Pase -3-
Traffic
The Public Works Department has prepared a traffic report assessing the
impacts of the proposal (see attachment). The report states that a
destination commercial use will generate approximately 1,032 trips
during the PM peak period. Approximately 25% of the trips will be
existing trips diverted from other arterials. This proposal, therefore, will
produce about 775 new PM peak period trips. The proposed use also
results in the fewest new trips in the peak direction of traffic.
Significantly, destination commercial does not produce traffic in the AM
peak period.
A traffic report was prepared for the research and development project
approved in 1984. That project would have produced 617 trips in the PM
peak period. A destination commercial use results in a net increase of
158 vehicular trips. It should be noted that under the present General
Plan and zoning, the site could be developed to an intensity greater than
the previously approved project. Such a development would create
traffic far in excess of the proposed commercial use.
C
As a traffic mitigation measure, staff proposes that the site developer be
required to submit a detailed traffic analysis and plans for specific
mitigation measures in conjunction with a development application.
The developer will be required to address the following items at a
minimum:
Thorough evaluation of project traffic impacts on the Curtner
Avenue residential area and identification of alternative mitigation
techniques.
2. Improvements to be undertaken to provide safe access to the site.
o
Identification of all off-site impacts and traffic improvements
required to mitigate project traffic.
Noise Impacts
Development of the subject site may create noise impacts in two areas -
1) on adjoining residential parcels and 2) on residences along streets
used by motorists going to and from the site. Staff's environmental
assessment proposes that a noise study be required at the development
plan stage to evaluate noise impacts.
B. Staff has prepared a preliminary estimate of noise impacts on the Union
Avenue residential areas. Utilizing the assumptions contained in the
Staff Report - Applicati, GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Pa~e -4-
noise study for the research and development project, a destination
commercial use will increase noise levels by approximately 1.4 decibels.
Three dedbels is the minimum perceptible change in noise level.
C.
The draft development polities for this amendment state that the future
project should be designed to minimize noise impacts on the adjoining
residential parcels. Possible techniques to implement this requirement
are location of loading areas and mechanical equipment away from
residences, construction of acoustical walls, and limitation of hours of
operation.
Site Landscaping
Future development should utilize landscaping along the western
property line to provide an attractive appearance from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping should also be provided along property lines
adjoining residential development to block views of the commercial
fadlity.
Commercial developments have extensive parking areas. Landscape
planters should be provided within the parking areas to provide visual
relief from the paved surfaces.
Environmental Review
Based on the Initial Study and Discussion of Environmental Impacts (see
attached), staff has identified four potentially significant environmental
impacts -- traffic, noise, land use, and parking. The Discussion of
Environmental Impacts discusses measures that should be required to
mitigate the potential impacts. The major mitigation measures have been
dted in the previous sections on traffic and noise. These measures have also
been included in the development policies for this GPA.
Development Policies
Staff has prepared the attached development policies which are designed to
accompany the GPA and rezoning actions. These policies elaborate general
planning and design principals which will provide guidance to the future
developer on land use, traffic improvements, landscaping and related issues.
They also include the previously discussed mitigation measures.
ALTERNATIVE LAND USES
Although the City Council has only authorized a GPA for a commercial
designation, it is useful to briefly list the positive and negative aspects of
May 22, 1990
Staff Report - Applicatic.., GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -5-
other uses. Staff has evaluated land uses for the Winchester Drive-in site in
terms of traffic, access and visibility, compatibility with adjoining uses, and
costs and benefits to the City.
Residential
Residential land uses place a high demand on City services and produce little
City revenue. Staff also anticipates that marketing a residential development
on this site would be difficult, given its access through the McGlincey
industrial area. The design of a higher density housing project would require
great sensitivity to avoid impacts on the abutting mobile home park.
Industrial
Industrial is the site's existing land use designation. As mentioned, a
420,000 square foot research and development project was previously
approved on the subject site.
Under the existing zoning and General Plan, a development of greater
intensity could be constructed. The existing designation allows building
heights of up to six stories, which would be incompatible with the
surrounding uses. Further, such a development would produce
substantial traffic in both the AM and PM peak periods.
C.
Industrial uses do not require a great deal of city services, but they also do
not produce significant revenues.
General Commercial
General commercial uses include the typical retail shopping or discount
center developments. Commercial uses produce considerable sales tax
revenue while requiring a relatively limited amount of municipal services.
However, staff believes a shopping center is an infeasible use on this site due
to its lack of visibility and access from major streets. General commercial also
generates among the highest traffic levels.
COMMUNITY INPUT
Staff has met with the Cambrian Council twice. The Council has
submitted a letter requesting that Planning Commission continue these
applications for one month. The Council desires time to research
optional land uses for this site and to provide a recommendation to the
Planning Commission. It appears their major concern is traffic. Staff has
also scheduled a meeting with the representatives of the adjoining Paseo
Staff Report - Applicati GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Page -6-
de Palomas mobile home park prior to the Planning Commission
hearing.
Staff recommends that Commission open the public hearing to receive
testimony on the applications. After the hearing, staff believes it would
be appropriate for the Commission to continue the application to allow
the Cambrian Council full input and participation in the decision-
making process.
The Commission will note that this GPA is paired with the NOCA
General Plan Amendment in the current round of General Plan
hearings. Staff feels that it would be ideal to implement NOCA as soon
as possible. State law prohibits ciries from amending their general plan
more than four times a year. Staff recommends that the two GPAs
remain paired, as one amendment has been approved this year and staff
anticipates two additional amendments. Therefore, staff recommends a
three week continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of June
12, 1990.
Staff has met with representatives of Western Federal Savings to inform
them of the City's preference for destination commercial development
on this site. Staff has also met with Western Federal's planning and
economic consultants and provided them with information to allow
them to conduct their own study of the site.
SUMMARY
Staff believes that a commercial land use designation with development
policies requiring a destination-type commercial is the most appropriate
land use for the Winchester Drive-in site. In addition, staff has prepared
a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that the application, as
modified by mitigation measures, will have no significant impacts on
the environment. Additional environmental studies will be required
when development plans are prepared.
If Planning Commission believes a continuance is warranted, Staff
recommends that the applications be continued to the meeting of June
12,1990.
90-3 and ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Staff Report - Applicatit
Pai~e -7-
Attachments
Exhibit A.
Exhibit B.
Exhibit C.
Exhibit D.
Exhibit E.
Exhibit F.
Exhibit G.
Exhibit H.
Exhibit I
Findings of Approval
Development Policies
General Plan Map
Zoning Map
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Discussion of Environmental Impacts and attachments
Letter from the Cambrian Council dated May 16, 1990
Vicinity Map
Prepared by:
Approved by:
~da, Senior Planner
Ste~~ Pi~a cki, Director of Planning
pcgp90-3.rpt(mc2)
PROPOSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
GP 90-02
ZC 90-02
CITY INITIATED
Exhibit A
The proposed amendment will reduce the allowable building intensity
on the subject site.
The proposed development policies will ensure that future
development is compatible with the adjacent residential uses.
The destination commercial use will provide a substantial fiscal benefit
to the City.
The amendment will not be harmful to the public health, safety, or
welfare.
The proposed zone change and development policies are consistent with
the proposed General Plan Amendment.
No substantial evidence has been presented which sow that the project,
as modified by the mitigation measures contained in the Discussion of
Environmental Impacts and the development policies, would have a
significant adverse impact on the environment.
pcsp90-3 .rpt
Exhibit B
DEVELOPMENT POLICIES
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP 90-03
ZONE CHANGE ZC 90-03
FORMER WINCHESTER DRIVE-IN SITE
The land use is limited to destination commercial uses. Destination
commercial is defined as a retail or retail/wholesale use which
relies on the public's knowledge of the store's location through
marketing strategies, repeat shopping, and word-of-mouth
advertising. Such uses serve a market area beyond Campbell due to
the large-scale or specialization of the use
2. Examples of destination commercial uses are:
ao
membership-type retail/wholesale outlets which sell goods
in bulk quantities ("box retail")
factory discount outlets
automobile-dealer malls
other uses which meet the definition contained in A.1
o
The future planned development permit application shall
encompass development of the entire site.
B. Development Intensity.
A floor area ratio (FAR) of approximately .30 is anticipated for this
site. In conjunction with consideration a specific development
application and a public hearing, the City Council may authorize a
FAR of up to .35 with the following findings:
a. the additional FAR will not adversely affect the adjoining
LISes.
b. the additional FAR will not adversely affect the local
circulation system.
c. the use characteristics are substantially similar to those
envisioned by this General Plan Amendment.
d. adequate parking can be provided on-site.
Development Policies - G~- ~0-3 & ZC 90-3
.Page -2-
May 22,1990
C. Traffic and Access
Do
Development on this site requires a detailed traffic analysis which
identifies project traffic impacts on the local circulation network
and specifies detailed mitigation measures to offset project impacts.
The report shall include an analysis of project traffic impacts on
Curtner Avenue and shall list specific mitigation measures.
o
In conjunction with a development application for this site, the
applicant shall submit information regarding off-site
improvements proposed to mitigate traffic impacts and to improve
site access. Details shall be provided on road improvement and
intersection modifications.
o
The developer shall examine methods to ensure safe and
convenient pedestrian linkage to the neighboring residential areas
Noise
Noise-generating facilities such as loading docks and mechanical
equipment should be located away from residential areas.
The future developer shall submit a noise study evaluating impacts
in two areas:
ao
impact of site generated noise on adjoining residential
uses, and
noise impacts of project traffic on residential streets used to
access the site, such as Union Avenue.
The future development should provide a landscape buffer along
the westerly property line to create an attractive appearance when
viewed from Highway 17.
Dense landscaping shall be provided along property lines abutting
residential uses. The landscaping should block views of the
development and ensure privacy for residents.
o
Landscaping should be provided throughout the parking areas to
provide shade and visual relief. The developer is encouraged to
provide planters at the ends of parking aisles and to interspers
planters within the aisles.
~0-3 & ZC 90-3 May 22, 1990
Development Policie~ -
Page -3-
Go
Landscaping should also be provided to filter views of the building
mass.
The developer should provide data on the parking demand for the
specific use. Staff may impose a more restrictive parking ratio than
the standard commercial ratio of 1 space/200 square feet.
The developer shall submit a sign program with a development
proposal for the site. The City shall evaluate the need for freeway-
oriented signage in conjunction with sign program proposal.
I .I Jl,lJ J
~4/~G
VAT~
OOL
General Plan Amendment to change the
Land U~e Element designation
Industrial to Commercial
17/04
· GENERAL PLAN MAP
EXHIBIT C
GP 90-03
PD
~$8/~0
P-F
tC
P-D
R-3-S
R-3-S
JJ~
407/8
Zone Change to change t~e zoning
designation from NI-1-S (Light
Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development)
ZONING MAP
EXHIBIT D
ZC 90-03 ~
t iIY OF I AMPBELL
70 NORTH FIRST STREET
CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008
(408) 866-2100
FAX # (408) 379-2572
Department:
Planning
DRAFT NEGATIVE DE~TION
Exhibit E
FILE NO:
GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
APPLICANT:
City of Campbell
ADDRESS:
535 Westchester Drive, Campbell
APN:
412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
City-initiated application for the 23 +/- acre
former Winchester Drive-in site. General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation
from Industrial to Commercial. Zone Change
application to modify the zoning designation
from M-I-$ (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
Pursuant to the applicable sections of the California Environmental Quality
Act and City of Campbell Resolution No. 5164; and
After review of plans and information supplied by the applicant pertaining to
the subject project, and after completing the attached initial study, the City of
Campbell does hereby determine that the subject project, as modified by the
mitigation measures contained within the initial study, will have no
significant effect on the environment within the terms and meaning of said
Act and Resolution.
Executed at Campbell, California this
day of June, 1990.
Randal R. Tsuda
Senior Planner
glV90-3.nd(mcl)
..1
Ii.
(£XPZ. ANATIONS OF' AL.L. ~ AND ~ ANSIERS AK REQUIKD ON ATTAC]-IE:D SHe"IT)
ii'lEI IIAY'IE: eeo
1. EARTH. Will the l~roposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
geologi c substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compact~om or
overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief
lea tures ?
d. The destruction, covering or ~dification of
anB unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or. Dff ~be site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of ~each
sands, or changes In siltation, deposition
or erosion which may a~if~ the channel of ....
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean ....
or any bay, inlet or lake? -
hazards such as earthguakes,
mu~$11~es, groun~ failure, or ~imtlar
I of 6 pages
2. AIR. Will proposal ~esult in:' ............................
a. L~bstantial air emfssions or deterioration of
ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
c. alteration of air movement, moisture or tempera-
ture, or any change in climate, either locall~
or regionally? . .
3. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or ~irect.~on
of water n~ve,~nts, in either marine or fresh
waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, ~/rainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. .Change in the ~,v3_unt of surface water in water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in an~ altera-
tion of surface water quality, includin9 but not
limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity?
f. Al'teration to the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantit~ of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer bW c~ts or
excavations ?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or propert~ to water related
hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversit~ of species or number
of anW species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic
plants) ?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area, or in a harrier to the normal replenish~nent
of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
1D
ID
ID
2 of 6pages
MAY'BE: NO
5. ~I~L LIFE. Will the proposal ~esult ~n:
Change in the diversitF of species, or n, nn~ers
I of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms, insects or microfauna) ? u 13 '~
b. Reduction of the numbers of anE nn~que, rare
~ ~r endangered species of animals? u D ~
c. ~ntroduction of new species of animals into an
area, or result /n a barrier to the migration
or ~vement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
HOISE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new
light or glare?
L~VD USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial
alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area ?
9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in:
Increase in the rate of use of an~ natural
resources?
Substantial depletion of an~ nonrenewable
natural resource?
10.
RISK OF UPSET. Does the proposal involve a risk
of an explosion or the release of hazardous sub-
stances (including, but not l;m~ted to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset ~ondit~ons?
11.
12.
POPUIRTION. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population of an area?
HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing?
3 of 6 pages
13..-TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULaTION. ~ill the proposal
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional veh/cular
movement.
b. Effects on existing parking £acilltles, 'or.
demand
for
new parking? ....
c,Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems?
Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of l~eople and/or goods?
i_ e. Alterations to waterborne,-rail or air traffic?
~ f. Increase in traffic hazards to mmtor vehicles,
14.
bicgclists or pedestrians?
PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schmols? ~
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energg?
Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy, or require the development
of new sources of energv?
UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need
for new svstems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications svstems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
4 of 6 pages
17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will ~he proposal result in:
18.
19.
20.
a. Creation of an~ health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding msntal health) ?
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
AESTHETICS. Will the prol~osal result in the
obstruction of ang scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aestheticall~ offensive site open to public
view?
RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the qualitE or quantity of existing recreational
opportuni ties?
ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL. Will the proposal result
in an alteration of a significant archeological or
historical site, structure, object or building?
21. M2[NDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the qualitE of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal commun~tE, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California histor~ or prehistorE?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? fA short-term impact on
the environment is one which occurs in a re/a-
tivelF brief, definitive period of time while
long-term impacts will endure well into the
future. )
c. Does the project have impacts which are indiv-
iduallE limited, but cumulatively considerable?
CA project maE impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on each resourc~
is relativelE small, but where the effect of
the total of those impacts on the environment
is significant.;
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directl~ or indirectly?
5 of 6 pages
Ill. DISCUSSION OF' E3qVI~AL. E*VALM~*rlCIq
IV. oE'ri:F~ I NAT IC~i
AFTER REVIEWING THE EIqVIi~ONMENTAL INFORMATION SUBIdlT'rf:D BY THE
APPLICANT, AND AFTER COMPLETING THE ENVIRONMENTAL CI.I~CKLIST USE
BY ~ CITY OF CAMI~B~I.L IN MAKING AN ~3qVII~:)IqME3qTAL ASSESSld~T
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGAT1TE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the miti-
gation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIFE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project WRY have a significant effect
on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL LMPACT REPORT
is required.
6 of 6 pages
Exhibit G
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FILE NO:
APPLICANT:
ADDRESS:
APN:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
City of Campbell
535 Westchester Drive, Campbell
412-29-05, 412-29-06, and 412-30-35
City-initiated application for the 23 +/- acre
former Winchester Drive-in site. General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation
from Industrial to Commercial. Zone Change
application to modify the zoning designation
from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
la. Will the proposal result in disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
3b. Will the proposal result in changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
Discussion:
Currently, the site is almost entirely paved with asphalt. Future
development is likely to reduce the amount of paved suface on site, as
the City requires on site landscaping. Therefore, overcovering of the soil
will be reduced and absorption rates will increase.
Mitigation:
None required.
6a. Will the proposal result in increases in existing noise levels?
6b. Will the proposal result in exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Discussion:
Charles M. Solter Associates prepared a noise study for the previously
Discussion of Environmc i Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3 4/19/90
Page -2-
o
approved research and development park. The study concluded that
project-generated traffic would increase noise levels in Union Avenue
residential areas by a maximum of 1 dBA in the AM peak period and 0.8
dBA in the PM peak period. These figures are based upon a traffic
analysis prepared by George S. Nolte and Associates which determined
that the project would generate 617 trips in the peak periods.
The Campbell Public Works Department traffic analysis anticipates that
destination commercial uses will generate 1,032 trips in the PM peak.
Utilizing the assumptions contained within the Solter Associates study,
the project is likely to increase noise levels in the Union Avenue
residential by approximately 1.4 dBA in the PM peak period-a 0.4 dBA
increase from a project allowed under the existing General Plan and
zoning designations. A 3dBA change is the minimum perceptible
change in noise level. A 5dBA increase is generally considered to the
threshold for a significant impact. The commercial designation will
improve the AM peak noise level as no trips are generated during that
period.
Mitigation Measures:
A noise analysis should be required at the development plan stage
to verify that no significant noise impact will occur along
residential streets.
Project review at the development plan state should ensure that on-
site noise impacts on adjoining residential uses are mitigated.
Potential mitigation techniques may include the following:
a. location of loading areas away from residential uses
b. location of parking areas away from residential uses
construction of a noise attenuation wall
d. limitation on hours of operation
Construction activity should be limited to normal weekday working
hours to minimize short-term impacts on adjoining residential
areas.
Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
Discussion
The site is currently designated for Industrial uses. The proposal will
change the land use designation to Commerdal. The proposal will also
Discussion of Environm~..~ Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -3-
4/19/90
13a.
modify the zoning from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to P-D (Planned
Development).
A key land use issue is compatibility with the adjacent residentially
designated uses to the north and east of the subject site. The range of
commerdal uses is generally more compatible with residential uses than
is industrial. Industrial uses, more often than commercial uses, generate
higher noise levels and odors and may utilize hazardous materials. A
commercial use can have the following impacts on residential uses:
1. noise
2. traffic
3. aesthetics/visual impacts
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures are contained within than discussion of questions
6a, 6b, 13a, and 18.
Will the proposal result in generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
Discussion
The Campbell Department of Public Works has prepared a traffic analysis
of the proposal (a copy is attached). The report concludes that a
destination commerdal use will generate 1,032 trips during the PM peak
period. Approximately 25% of the trips will be existing trips diverted
from other arterials. Therefore, this proposal will create about 775 new
PM peak period trips. The analysis also evaluated alternative uses for
the site. Destination commercial results in the least number of new trips
in the peak direction of traffic.
The previously approved research and development project would have
produced approximately 617 trips in the PM peak period. The proposal
will result in a net increase of 158 trips.
Mitigation Measures
The traffic analysis spedfies the following measures can be utilized to
mitigate project impacts:
Signal coordination on Camden Avenue between Union Avenue
and the San Tomas Expressway/Highway 17 off-ramp.
Discussion of Environrm...al Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -4-
4119190
18.
Geometric and operational improvements and the intersection of
Bascom and Union Avenues.
Improvement of Cristich, McGlincey, and Curtner to a cross-section
of 44 feet from curb-to-curb from the site to Camden Avenue.
The report states that these measures will fully mitigate project traffic
impacts and will even improve existing traffic conditions. The report
further anticipates that, when constructed, Highway 85 will improve
traffic conditions throughout the area.
A detailed traffic analysis should be required in conjunction with a
development plan application to evaluate traffic impacts of the specific
project. The report should also analyze the impact of project traffic on
the Curtner Avenue residential area. The report should specify
techniques required to discourage cut-through traffic on Curtner
Avenue.
Will the proposal result in effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
Discussion
Campbell's parking standards require one space for every 200 square feet
of building area. Assuming 300,000 square feet of building is constructed,
1500 parking spaces will be required. For comparison purposes, the
previously approved 420,000 square foot research and development
facility provided was required to have 1680 parking spaces.
Mitigation Measure
Adequate parking should be provided on-site to avoid impacts on
adjoining properties.
Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to public view?
Discussion
The site currently is vacant and in disrepair. In the past, the site has
contained large amount of trash, debris, and abandoned vehicles
requiring nuisance abatement actions. Development of the site will
improve the aesthetics by removing a vacant site susceptible to illegal
dumping.
Discussion of Environm~...al Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Page -5-
4119190
Mitigation Measures
At the project review stage, particular attention should be paid to
screening the parking areas and the building with landscaping to provide
visual relief. Loading docks should be screened or oriented away from
public view.
gp90-3.dei(mcl)
Discussion of Environmenud Impacts - GP 90-3 and ZC 90-3
Pa~e -6-
4119190
REFERENCE MATI~RIALS
l. Traffic Noise Assessment for Application, Charles M. Solter Assodates,
Inc., July 25,1983
2. Traffic Analysis of Campbell Business Park, George S. Note and
Associates, July 1983
3. Winchester Drive In Site: Traffic Analysis, Campbell Department of
Public Works, February 27, 1990
4. Documentation of Costco Trip Generation Rates, Wilber Smith
Associates, December 5, 1988
5. Assessment of Costco Trip Generation at Fostoria Way Site, Wilbur
Smith Associates, Feburary 17, 1988
6. Site Approval Application S 83-13, Equireal Development Corporation
20.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 20, 1990
Planning Department - Winchester Drive-In Site - request for initiation
of a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Change
Planning Director Piasecki - Staff Summary Report dated 3/20/90.
Mr. John LaRue, Sr. Vice President, Western Federal Savings and Loan
Association, addressed the City Council, stating that Western Federal has
reently acquired this site and is anxious to see it developed. He
requested, on behalf of Western Federal Savings and Loan Association, an
additional two months to complete studies to determine the best use for
this property.
The Council deliberated with staff regarding this request, and it was the
consensus to move ahead with the process as proposed.
H/S: Burr/¢onant - £o initiate a General Plan Amendment for Ehe
Winchester Drive-In site to consider: I) changing Ehe General Plan Land
Use Element designation from Industrial to Oommercial; 2) developing
special planning area policies concerning traffic, access, and siEe
planning; and 3) iniEiating a rezoning from M-1-S ~o BD. Motion adopEed
unanimously.
CITY OF CAMPBELL
COUNCIL REPORT
Meeting Date:
Category:
Initiating Dept:
Title:
March 20, 1990
Staff Reports
Planning Depa~h~ent
Winchester Drive-ln
Amendment Study
Item #
Site - Request for Initiation of a General Plan
STAFF RECOM]VIENDATION:
That the City Council initiate a General Plan Amendment for the Winchester Drive-In site to consider
the following:
1. Change the General Plan Land Use Element designation from Industrial to Commercial
2. Develop special planning area policies concerning traffic, access, and site planning
3. Initiate a rezoning from M-1-S (Light Industrial) to PD (Planned Development)
If authorized, the General Plan Amendment and rezoning will be heard by the Planning Commission on
April 24, 1990 and is tentatively scheduled for City Council hearing on May 21, 1990.
]~ACKGROUND
The City Council authorized staff to conduct a land use study of the Winchester Drive-In site as part of
the budget goals for Fiscal Year 1989-1990. Over the past six months, staff has evaluated alternate
land uses and has studied the access, economics, and traffic implications.
The 23 +/- acre Winchester Drive-in site is the largest single undeveloped site remaining in the City of
Campbell. The site was utilized as a drive-in theater until the late 1970s. In 1984, the City reviewed
an environmental impact report and development proposal to construct a 420,000 square foot research
and development complex. While approved by the City, the project has not been constructed. The
project approval expired in 1985.
In 1989, the City initiated an action to abate code violations related to the dumping of debris and
abandoned vehicles. Ownership of the parcel had been under dispute for several years. In November
1989, Western Federal Savings assumed ownership of through a foreclosure action.
The General Plan currently designates the site for Industrial uses and the property is zoned M-1-S
(Light Industrial District).
NEED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The property presents significant opportunities and constraints which are not currently addressed by
the generalized Industrial land use designation of the General Plan, nor by the M-1 zoning ordinance.
Development of the site with industrial uses may have a substantial traffic impact on the community
and may not realize the economic potential of the site. The General Plan Amendment will fulfill the
following objectives:
1. Review the benefits of alternate land uses compared to the existing Industrial designation.
2. Develop site-specific guidelines for development of the site.
3. Ensure that the future land use of the site is compatible with the surrounding development.
y - Winchester Drive-in Site
General Plan Amendment S,
.Pase -2-
4. Ensure that the future land use can function effectively within the site access constraints.
DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTSANDOPPOR~I
The following development constraints and opportunities should be considered in reviewing land use
options:
Ao
.LOCATION
The site is bordered by Highway 17 to the west, multi-family residential to the north, the 104
space Paseo de Palomas mobile home park to the east, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District
percolation ponds to the south. In addition, several industrial parcels adjoin the site to the east
and south.
ACCESS
Access to the site is limited. The only direct public street access is provided over a small industrial
parcel fronting Westchester Drive. Secondary access is available via Cristich Lane, a private
street, and from a 45 foot wide access easement off of McGlincey Lane. Ail entrance points lead to
McGlincey Lane, which is accessed from Camden, Union or Curtner Avenues. Camden and Union
Avenues contain heavy traffic volumes during peak hours; Curtner Avenue is a residential street.
In February 1989, City Council authorized an access study for the subject site (a summary of access
alternatives is attached). Based on that study, staff concluded that construction of an interchange
or overpass to improve access is unlikely in the short term due to the cost of the improvements.
While improved access is a long-term possibility, it cannot be relied upon to improve the site's land
use options in the foreseeable future.
Co
bITE PLANNING
The parcel poses several site planning challenges. Development of the property is limited by the
shape, access, and surrounding uses. Substantial landscape buffers and building setbacks will be
necessary along the north, west, and east property lines. The future project designs will be
influenced by and must be sensitive to these factors.
Do
LAND USE FEASIBILITY
Staff believes that poor site access limits the viability of the parcel for a major office or industrial
development. The site's potential for residential use is similarly constrained since the site is
accessed through an industrial area.
Staff has had several discussions with potential commercial developers. The developers propose
uses which are less reliant on direct vehicular access. The retailers believe the site is well-located
to capture the West Valley market.
LAND USE OPTIONS
Staff has reviewed numerous land use alternatives including residential, commercial, industrial, and
mixed uses. Copies of staffs preliminary traffic and economic analysis are attached. Staff will assess
land use alternatives during the environmental review process. A brief discussion of the major land use
alternatives follows:
Ao
RESIDENTIAL
Residential land uses place a high demand on City services and generate limited City revenues.
Residential uses also generate traffic in both the morning and evening peak periods and is
adversely affected by the aforementioned access constraints.
, - Winchester Drive-in Site 3/20190
General Plan Amendment St
Page -3-
INDUSTRIAL
Indush'ial uses do not produce substantial city revenues, although they do not require the amount of
city services necessary for residential. Industrial uses will likely generate significant vehicular
trips during AM and PM peak traffic periods. Further, industrial uses may not be compatible with
the abutting percolation ponds.
Co
(~OMMERCIAL
Most commercial uses provide considerable City tax revenues, primarily through the sales tax.
However, traffic impacts in the PM peak hour will vary according to the type of commercial use.
The access problems discussed above limit the feasibility of high activity commercial uses such as
regional shopping centers and enterl~xment.
Other types of commercial uses function as a destination point for major shopping trips and are less
affected by factors such as the access and shape of property. These so-called "destination
commercial" uses depend on the public's knowledge of their location through marketing efforts.
repeat shopping and word-of-mouth. Destination commercial tends to concentrate traffic during
off-peak periods and on the weekends. Examples of destination commercial uses are ~ox retailers"
(Costco, Price Club), warehouse outlets, and automobile malls. Traffic data collected by staff
documents the limited PM peak hour/peak direction trip generation of destination commercial uses.
A significant amount of the peak hour traffic count will be existing trips which have been diverted
from other streets. Commercial uses have the added advantage that they do not produce traffic
during the AM peak period.
RECOMMENDATION
Future land uses on the site should be responsive to the constraints and opportunities which
characterize the property. In this way the allowed land use will reflect the highest and best use of the
property for the entire community.
Staff recommends that City Council initiate a General Plan Amendment study of the Winchester
Drive-in site to change the land use designation from industrial to commercial and to develop specific
development guidelines. Council should also initiate a rezoning action to the zoning designation from
M-1 to PD.
Attachment~:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Access Study Alternatives
3. Economic Analysis
Approved by:
dat ~ 2/2/90
Steve Piasecki,'Director of Planning
ccwdi320.rpt(mcl)
IIIll'l'llllllllH
'1"1'17,11 I I I'
~¥dd ' Av~'
PRIVAT£
SCHOOL.
t'1olli$
Ill Avl,
these traffic constraints, the City of Campbell ~eks
odate development of the Drive-In site,
of ~ing heavy industrial uses on the west s~ the
freeway nd increased commercial potential of downtown
and Prune areas. At initial meetings with staff, the
following ~ives were established for project:
Provide
industrial
to the Drive-
te and adjacent
Improve access to
and the Pruneyard.
o Improve Route 17 c
o Minimize the upon the street network.
o Realize potential on sides of
the
impacts on Los Gatos Creek.
Minimize cost.
IV. ALTERNATIVE~
Three alternative configurations for an interchange and one
overcrossing configuration without freeway ramps were
presented ~o City staff in May. In each alternative the new
road crossing th? freeway was proposed as basically a two-lane
facility with widening where necessary for separate turning
on the west
lanes. The new street was proposed to terminate
side within the Drive-In property and not be connected to
Cristich Lane or Westchester Drive which presently provide
access to the Drive-In site. On this basis it has been
assumed that a two-lane facility will accommodate all trips
which are generated within the Drive-In site.
O ..... ==- ,~eh alternative connects to Railway Avenue,
n~ne eas~ ~u~,
which provides access to downtown Cgmp~el~ to.the .north ~d
to Winchester Boulevard via Kennedy Drive =o r_ne sou~n.
Although not directly a part of this study, each of these
concepts would involve upgrading of Railway Avenue and
modification of the intersection at Railway, Orchard City
Drive and Campbell Avenue.
........ = ..... ~-~native includes the construction of an
auxiliary lane approaching the southbound exit and auxiliary
lanes in both directions between the new crossing and Camden
southbound
Avenue, connecting to the existing.n~r~hbo.und and .
auxiliary lanes. With the propose~ Interchange spacing less
than CALTRAN's normal policy, only 0.86 miles between Camden
and the new structure, these auxiliary lanes will serve to
improve weaving operations.
The four alternatives initially presented to the City are
attached as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4 and described as follows:
The DIAMOND INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVE consists of a tight
diamond configuration with separate structures to carry
the new road across Route 17 and across Los Gatos Creek.
Due to limited room on the west side between the freeway
and the creek, the southbound ramps must be supported on
retaining walls adjacent the creek. The new street
crosses a corner of the City's service center and
intersects Railway Avenue about 400 feet northerly of
Kennedy. The cost of this alternative is estimated at
$7.6 million for construction and $3.5 million for right-
of-way for a total of $11.1. million.
The NORTH LOOP ALTERNATIVE has the northbound ramps
configured in a diamond similar to the diamond
interchange. The southbound ramps cross Los Gatos Creek
on separate structures northerly of the new street
crossing and loop back into the new street in the
vicinity of the existing City Service Center. With this
concept the Service Center would need to be relocated or
modified significantly. The cost of this alternative is
$9.2 million for construction and $4.3 million for right-
of-way for a total of $13.5 million. However, these
costs do not include modifications to the City Service
Center.
The SOUTH LOOP ALTERNATIVE includes diamond northbound
ramps, and has the southbound ramps configured in a
sweeping loop southerly of the new street with a separate
bridge crossing over Los Gatos Creek. The ramps are
aligned directly with the Railway Avenue extension
creating a four-way intersection with the new street and
the southerly leg of Railway Avenue. The cost of this
alternative is estimated to be $9.1 million for
construction and $3.4 million for right-of-way and a
total $12.5 million.
The OVERCROSSING ALTERNATIVE is a straight alignment
without ramps connecting to the freeway. Since the
interchange spacing and weaving issues do not dictate its
location, the structure is proposed near the southerly
end of the Drive-In site to allow greater on-site
flexibility. On the west side of Route 17 it connects
to the future extension o~ Railway southerly of Kennedy,
and just north of the Hidden Cove Mobile Park. This
alternative is estimated to cost $3.4 million for
construction plus $2.7 million for right-of-way,
totalling $6.1.
After review of these four alternatives, City staff indicated
a preference for the DIAMOND configuration and requested
further refinement of the concept. The updated preliminary
plan, profiles and typical sections are shown as Exhibit 5.
As these drawings indicate the new street includes only one
basic lane in each direction, but the overcrossing structure
is actually four lanes wide to accommodate parallel left turn
stacking pockets onto each onramp.
At the City's request, consideration has been given to
construction of the overcrossing without the ramps as a
interim first stage. In this scenario, we recommended
processing approval oft_he full interchange, but construction
of only a 40-foot wide freeway overcrossing and Los Gatos
Creek bridge to minimize costs. The approach fills should be
constructed to their ultimate width, but paving can be limited
to only the initial requirements.
Updated estimates of probable cost have been prepared for both
the full DIAMOND INTERCHANGE and the interim overcrossing.
As shown on Appendix 1, these estimates include probable
construction and right-of-way costs, as well as allowances for
engineering and environmental studies and contingencies. With
these allowances, approximate total project costs are
summarized as follows:
DIAMOND
INTERCHANG$
INTERIM
OVERCROSSING
Construction
Right-of-Way*
Engineering &
Environmental
$ 7,500,000 $ 3,800,000
3,700,000 3,000,000
1,800,000
1,100,000
TOTAL
$ 13,000,000
$ 7,900,000
Right-of-Way costs are based upon $20 per square foot for
land as provided by the City staff and include an
allowance for utility relocation.
PLANNING
The Route ;t Report for Route 17 include :ation
within -SC1-17, P.M. 0.0 ch extends
from the Santa anta C1 line to Hamilton
Avenue. It recommends ~ection of highway from the
vicinity of Los Gat~ 85) to Hamilton Avenue
be widened lanes in i ~ate configuration. The
Route Co Report states further Ls widening alone
we congestion, and that alterna .ansportation
, such as the Vasona Corridor LRT, must b, ~idered.
MEMORANDUM
To:
Distribution Date:
CITY OF CAMPBELL
February 2, 1990
From:
Subject:
Robert Kass~,-
Redevelopment Director
Economic Analysis of Potential Land Uses for the Drive-In Site
Recently, the DOGS agreed to a work plan and schedule regarding land use
options for the Drive-In site as indicated in the attached memorandum.
Public Works is conducting a traffic analysis of the seven land use
options. Redevelopment is completing the economic analysis, and Planning
will analyze the environmental review process and coordinate putting
together a recommendation to the City Manager. The Agency's economic
analysis has been completed and is discussed below.
The economic return from the various land use options has been analyzed in
terms of property tax generated to the City and Sales Tax Revenue
generated directly from the uses. One time revenues (construction tax,
building permit fees, etc.) have not been included in the analysis. The
site is not in a Redevelopment Project area, consequently no tax increment
revenues are generated. Spinoff revenues resulting from additional
persons working or living at the site have also not been included, as they
are relatively insignificant.
It should be noted that this analysis is very general, and only intended
to give a "ball park figure" of expected revenues from various land uses.
Property tax revenues have been calculated by estimating the land and
improvement values for the various land use options and then applying the
tax rate to it. Typically, the property tax rate is 1% of assessed
valuation. Of this 1% tax, the City receives about 13% with the remainder
going to the County and school districts. For example, a property with a
$1 million assessed valuation would pay about $10,000 in property taxes.
The City would receive about 13% of this, or $1,300 per year.
Sales tax revenue is calculated by estimating the probable taxable sales
generated from a use and then applying the tax rate. The City receives
revenue equal to 1% of the taxable sales, or one cent out of every
dollar. For example, for a use with annual taxable sales of $1 million,
the City would receive $10,000 per year.
The table below s,,mmarizes the estimated revenues for the various uses
which are detailed for the base year in the appendix to this report.
Economic Analysis of Potential Land
Uses for the Drive-In Site
Page 2
WINCKESTER DR/V~-~
SUMMARY OF ECONOMqC ANALYSIS OF LAND USE OFrIONS
Ba~ Ym
-~1~ Tax Prc~ny Tax Toul
FEBRUARY lggO
Y~r 10
Tax (l) Propcny Tax (2) Tool
Dffice
Low cl~nsity
Resicl~nlia]
M~li~m l~nsi~,
Other
l~dustrial/R & D
No~$:
(l) Assumes 5~ ann,~.l g~owth in sales.
(2) Assumes 2~ a~ntmI/~cr~se, plus additional 5~ ~nnua/incr~am for mocSum dz~siO7 r~siclentia] proper%, turnover.
Conclusion and Recommendation
From the above figures, it is apparent that the property tax revenue from
the site, regardless of the use, is not substantial. In addition, because
the site is currently assessed at $18.5 million, the assessed land value
will not increase substantially with most of the development scenarios.
The sales tax generation from the site with either a box retail or auto
dealership will greatly exceed any property tax revenues. Sales tax also
tends to keep pace with inflation much more directly than property tax
revenues.
Based on the economic return to the City, the Redevelopment Agency would
recommend designating the site "Commercial" on the General Plan~with a PD
(Planned Development) zoning classification. This will allow either a box
retail use or car dealerships, either of which must be ultimately approved
by the City Council by ordinance. At this time we believe there is a
market for box retail use on the site. The auto dealership use is less
certain.
If you have any questions regarding the above analysis, please feel free
to contact me. We look forward to discussing this and the Public Works
recommendations with you at the February 16, 1990 DOG meeting.
cc'
Don Wimberly
Steve Piasecki
Tara Adams
Marry Woodworth
APPENDIX
Commercial
250,000 to 300,000 sq. ft. of building
(may be box retail use)
Valuation
Land - 24 acres @ $15/sq. ft.
Building 275,000 sq. ft. at $35/sq. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue
Property Tax
Sales Tax(l) (Costco, Home Depot) and others
Total Annual Revenue
Commercial/Residential - 200,000 sq. ft. commercial
(box retail) and up to 200 housing units
. f27 units per acre)
Valuation
Land - 16 acres ~ $15/sq. ft.
8 acres at $20/sq. ft.
Building - Retail, 200,000 sq. ft. @ $35/sq. ft.
Housing, 200 units @ 1,O00/sq. ft.
each @ $70/sq. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue
Property Tax
Sales Tax(l) (Costco, Home Depot)
Total Annual Revenue
Auto Mall - 5 Dealerships at 5 acres each
Valuation
Land - 24 acres @ $15/sq. ft.
Building - 125,000 sq. ft. @ $50/sq. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue
Property Tax
Sales Tax
Total Annual Revenue
Base Year
$15,681,600
$ 9,625,000
$25,306,600
$ 32,898
$ 700,000
$ 732,898
$10,454,400
$ 6,969,000
$ 7,000,000
$14,000,000
$38,423,400
$ 49,950
$ 550,000
$ 599,950
$15,681,600
$ 6,250,000
$21,931,600
28,511
1,000,000
1,028,511
Note: (1) Estimates based on attached Schneider Commercial Real Estate
information and staff estimates.
Office, two options Base Year
Valuation (Option ~1)
Land 24 acres @ $20/sq. ft.
Building - 300,000 sq. ft. @ $100/sq. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue (Option
Property Tax
Valuation (Option ~2)
Land - 24 acres @ $25/sq. ft.
Building - 750,000 sq. ft. @ $100/sq. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue (Option ~2)
Property Tax
High Density Residential (27 Units per acre)
Valuation
Land - 24 acres @ $20/sq. ft.
Building - 650 units @ 1,000 sq. ft. each
@ $70/sq. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue
Property Tax
Low-Medium Density Residential (13 units per acre)
Valuation
Land - 24 acres @ $18/sq. ft.
Building 300 units at 1,500 sq. ft. each
@ $70/$q. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue
Property Tax
Industrial/R&D
Valuation
Land - 24 acres @ $15/sq. ft.
Building - 420,000 @ $50/sq. ft.
Total Valuation
Annual Revenue
Property Tax
$20,980,800
$30,000,000
$50,980,800
$ 66,274
$26,136,000
$75,000,000
$101,136,000
$ 131,476
$20,980,000
$45,5OO,OOO
$66,480,000
$ 86,320
$18,817,920
$31,500,000
$50,317,920
$ 65,413
$15,681,600
$21,000,000
$36,681,600
$ 47,686
f:drivin3
February 27, 1990
SUMMARY REPORT
WINCHESTER DR/Vi IN SITE: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Campbell Department of Public Works
Introduction:
The 25 acre Winchester Drive In site has several possib!e
uses for development. For most uses the significant traffic
issues are: 1) the present circuitous access routes over
substandard roads, 2) the possibility of the intrusion of
commercial/commuter traffic on neighborhood streets in both
Campbell and San Jose, and 3) a potential need to mitigate
traffic impacts from the traffic generated at the site. A traffic
impact study was conducted to assess these impacts as well as to
find any needed mitigation to accommodate development on the
site. This report presents the basic study methodology as well as
the significant findings.
Study Desiqn:
In order to select the highest trip generation land uses for
further study, all the potential land uses were evaluated in
terms of a.m. and p.m. peak vehicle trip generation using both
the ITE Trip Generation, 4th Edition reference as well as
supplemental trip generation data for destination-commercial type
stores (see Table 1, page 3). The most vehicle trip-intensive
permitted use is a research and development facility. The highest
traffic-intensive use of the site among the alternatives is the
office use with 1.35 p.m. peak trips per 1,000 square feet of
Gross Leasable Area (GLA), with 1.13 trips per 1,000 square feet
in the peak direction. The traffic analysis then assessed traffic
impacts for these three land uses: 1) the R&D Facility, 2)
destination-commercial, and 3) office uses. The a.m. peak rates
in these cases resulted in less total traffic at critical
intersections, and so further analysis was conducted only for
p.m. peak conditions for the three uses.
The city's TMODEL2 traffic forecasting model was used to
both generate and distribute trips from three alternate 1&nd
uses:
1) 420,000 sq. ft. research and development
2) 300,000 sq. ft. destination-commercial
3) 750,000 sq. ft. office
While the 300,000 square feet of destination-commercial
results in the highest volume of peak hour trips, it should be
noted that fully 25% of the trip generation will be diverted
GEK: CMBLRPRT.015
SUMMARY REPORT
WINCHESTER DRIVE IN TRAFFIC ACCESS STUDY
PAGE 2
trips from other arterial routes (ie. the trips would be on the
roads anyway, except that they would be oriented to other
locations for destination-commercial). Therefore, destination-
commercial results in ~ess peak hour trip generation than
potential office uses, and further, destination-commercial als0
results in the least number of new trips in the peak direction of
travel.
The model was run for two access plans:
1) all Winchester Drive In access via McGlincey at Cristich,
2) additional access via an overcrossing of SR 17 to Railway
which in turn is extended to both Old Camden and the
downtown loop streets.
The assignments for each of the six scenarios were compared
to the traffic assignment for existing land uses to create
factors to adjust actual traffic counts. The adjusted traffic
counts were then used in a capacity analysis to assess impacts. A
map is included showing the additional access.
Results:
There are several nearby, major intersections that are
operating at or near capacity: Southbound 17 off ramps at STEX,
Bascom & Camden, and Bascom & Union. All arterial intersections
in the area bounded by Hacienda, Bascom, Campbell and Winchester
were analyzed.
1. The Existing Road System:
Any one of the three land use alternatives significantly
increases delay at Campbell & Union, southbound 17 off at STEX,
Bascom & Union and Bascom & Camden.
2. The New Access Road System:
· The primary idea behind the analysis of a bridge over
Highway 17 was to afford better access to the site and not to
mitigate potential impacts. Regardless, the new bridge does
result in improvements over the existing system at southbound 17
off at STEX, but significantly worsens traffic conditions at.
Bascom & Camden and at Bascom & Union. The bridge obviously
serves as an alternate route over Highway 17, and much traffic on
Camden and on Union north of Bascom shifts to McGlincey and
Railway Avenue, not a desired outcome. Another analysis was made
by removing the connection of McGlincey between Cristich and
Union in an attempt to mitigate this undesirable impact. While it
GEK: CMBLRPRT.015
SUMMARY REPORT
WINCHESTER DRIVE IN TRAFFIC ACCESS STUDY
PAGE 3
does this, the new bridge still serves significant shortcut
traffic in the area. If a bridge were to be built over Highway
17, the development at the site would need to be designed in such
a way to discourage through trip movements.
The only apparent justification for a bridge to the site
would be if the developer desired one to serve as the site's
primary access rather than'develop and improve the Cristich-o
McGlincey connection to Camden. The potential reduction in
Camden/STEX/Highway 17 corridor traffic through opening Route 85
will fully mitigate traffic impacts from any of the likely
developments at the site.
Mitigation and Improvements for Development:
Any of the proposed uses in Table i below can be
accommodated in terms of traffic impacts, in that short term
impacts can be fully mitigated through signal coordination on
Camden, geometric and operational improvements at Bascom & Union,
signalization of McGlincey and Union and improvement of
Cristich/McGlincey/Curtner to a fully-developed cross section of
44 feet curb to curb (16 foot curb lanes, 12 foot center turn
lane/median) from the site to Camden Avenue. There is no need to
add lanes on Curtner at Camden. Table 2 and the discussion of
signal coordination preceding Table 2 explains this further.
Table 2 assumes a 25% discount for diverted trips for
destination-commercial uses (Table I shows full trip rates).
The signal coordination, signal installation and street
improvements defined above will fully mitigate, and can even
improve upon traffic conditions of today. Once Route 85 is
opened, traffic conditions throughout this area will be further
improved.
TABT.~ 1: TRIP GENERATION OF LAND USE ALTERNATIFF.~
a.m. peak p.m. peak
LandUse and Size in out total in out total
Dest-commcl, 300K sq. ft. NA
Auto Mall, 5 @ 5 acres
Office: 300K sq. ft.
Office: 750K sq. ft.
SF 200 DU
Condo/Apt, 300 DU
Condo/Apt, 650 DU
R&D, 420K sq. ft.
NA NA 507 525 1,032
139 191 330 168 222 310'
449 67 516 78 412 490
957 143 1,100 162 848 1,010-
41 110 151 124 74 201
20 108 128 106 52 158
38 200 238 202 100 302
634 62 696 72 532 604
GEK: CMBLRPRT.015
SUMMARY REPORT
WINCHESTER DRIVE IN TRAFFIC ACCESS STUDY
PAGE 4
An analysis was conducted of existing signal timing on
Camden between Union and the San Tomas Expressway/SB 17 off ramp
intersections. There is no coordination of these signals at
present. If the signals were to be coordinated with optimized.
timings, our analysis indicates that approximately half the total
delay on this route could be eliminated in both the morning and.
afternoon peaks. In that the total delay in the system is about 2
minutes per vehicle, about-60 seconds of delay could be
eliminated through signal coordination. This reduction far
exceeds the total capacity/delay traffic impacts from either the
destination-commercial or R&D alternatives.
At Bascom and Union, there is a need for intersection
improvements to mitigate traffic impacts from any of the proposed
uses.
TABLR 2:INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE, PM PEAK
Intersection
Present R&D Dest-Commercial
Exist** New*** Exist New*
Sec LOS* Sec LOS Sec LOS Sec LOS Sec LOS
Camden/Curtner
STEX/17 SB off
Campbell/Union
24.5 C
47.0 E
30.4 D
Campbell/Winchestr 35.9 D
Bascom/Union 54.7 E
McGlincey/Union '8.3 B****
Bascom/Camden 63.7 F
**
26.1 D 29.4 D 25.2 D 28.4 D
47.6 E 35.1 D 47.3 E 34.5 D
30.6 D 22.6 C 30.5 D 21.5 C
36.0 D 30.1 D 36.0 D 28.3 D
69.8 F 190.2 F 67.2 F 174.7 F
7.8 B 52.8 E 11.9 B 26.2 D
76.5 F 72.3 F 65.0 F 64.0 F
Sec = Seconds and LOS = Level of Service
Exist(ing) indicates streets in place today
New indicates the new bridge, Railway extension
McGlincey/Union evaluated as a signalized intersection
GEK: CMBLRPRT.015
· SKiL & MAKITA POWER TO01.$
J,,EJlTY qk QI'~ II.F
(3P'f.N lAT.
F.u PITTSBURGH .,., .,,,.
tAM. IH
· 0.T PAINTS
WINCHESTER HARDWARE
2127 WlKI~' Blvd., CaBHell PlleN 378-3076
r. Ma~ A ~
£#
KINTAIGU[
AY
AY