REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Title
Public Hearing: Action on an Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Rezone, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for the Property Located at 1957 Pruneridge Avenue to Allow the Development of 22 Detached Single-Family Residences and Associated On- and Off-Site Improvements
Report
COUNCIL PILLAR
Promote and Enhance Economic, Housing and Transportation Development
BACKGROUND
SCS Development Company filed an application for the subject proposal to allow for the development of a single-family residential development with 22 detached two-story homes on the 2.47-acre subject site. Implementation of the proposal requires a rezone of the property from B - Public, Quasi-Public, and Public Park or Recreation to PD - Planned Development and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the property into individual for-sale lots and four common lots. Fifteen percent of the total number of units (or 3.3 homes) are required to be provided as affordable housing units; the fractional unit may be addressed by providing one additional affordable unit or by payment of an in-lieu fee. Redevelopment of the property includes the demolition of all existing structures and site improvements.
The project was presented to the Planning Commission at a publicly noticed meeting on February 21, 2024. The Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 8) provides an analysis of the project’s consistency with the General Plan. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the project (7-0).
The City Council is being asked to conduct a public hearing and take three actions:
1. Certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopt the CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
2. Adopt a resolution approving a Rezone from B - Public, Quasi-Public, and Public Park or Recreation to PD - Planned Development.
3. Adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the land into 22 individual lots and four common lots.
DISCUSSION
At the February 21, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, staff presented an overview of the proposal and its conformance with the General Plan. The Assistant City Attorney also provided information on two conditions of approval related to the use of natural gas, B8 and P23. Condition B8 requires the developer to comply with the City’s “Reach Code” (Chapter 15.36 of the Santa Clara City Code), which requires new development to be “all electric” and not include natural gas infrastructure. The Assistant City Attorney explained that in recent discussions with the developer, the developer had also voluntarily committed to All-Electric Construction, regardless of the application of the City’s Reach Code, and that this was memorialized in condition P23.
At the Planning Commission Meeting, however, the developer requested a modification to the way that the All-Electric Construction commitment is memorialized. As drafted by staff, condition P23 states that the developer’s commitment to All-Electric Construction is an express basis for the City’s decision to rezone the property as Planned Development, and that if the developer sought to utilize methane at a later date, a revision to the PD zoning would be required. The Developer asked the Commission to modify condition P23 to remove the text which states that the approval is “issued in reliance upon the developer’s assurance that no natural gas infrastructure will be installed at any time, and is an express basis for granting the PD rezoning.” The Assistant City Attorney advised the Commission that this could make the condition more difficult to enforce, and so the Commission did not modify Condition P23.
The applicant provided a presentation that also concluded with a request to remove condition P5, which requires a “complete street” sidewalk section (sidewalk with a landscape strip at the curb) as it would not provide symmetry with the existing neighborhood. The complete street sidewalk section is a requirement of the City’s Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan, adopted by the Council in August 2022, which does not provide an exception process.
The Planning Commission asked questions regarding the proposed building height being 31 feet, when single-family building height is 25 feet, privacy concerns, electric vehicle (EV) charging, guest parking, and safety concerns about the driveway location being too close to the adjacent commercial strip center and the intersection of Winchester Boulevard.
One member of the public provided comments. The speaker noted that he did not receive the EIR Notice of Availability even though he commented on the EIR Notice of Preparation. His concerns included the possible existence of cremated remains on the site and that trees were already removed in May of 2023. The applicant responded to the comments stating that the cremated remains were all removed from the site by the church and the trees were removed by Silicon Valley Power as they were dying and interfering with powerlines. The Assistant City Attorney also stated that comments can still be provided on the project and the EIR until the City Council takes action at the public meeting.
The applicant stated that guest parking is available in each unit’s driveway, EV chargers will be provided, and that for privacy a landscape buffer is provided on the northern property line, as well as no private open space is located in that setback area.
The Commission then closed the public hearing. The Commission had a robust discussion on the safety of the location of the single driveway entrance/exit point for the site. Considerations included potential for a median in the right-of-way to prevent left in and out turning movements, no left turn signage, encouraging cut through traffic in the adjacent neighborhood, and changing the location of the driveway or adding a second driveway. There was also discussion on the applicability of complete streets and documentation on the human remains.
The Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the project (7-0). The Commission’s approval included the conditions on Complete Streets and All-Electric Construction as originally drafted by staff:
• P5: Developer shall construct a complete street section along the project frontage of Pruneridge Avenue to include a 5-foot landscape strip with 4.5-feet of clear planting width and a 5-foot sidewalk behind the landscape strip. The landscape strip is to include trees (minimum 24-inch box) and drought tolerant plantings.
• P23: This approval has been issued in reliance upon the developer’s assurance that no natural gas infrastructure will be installed at any time, and is an express basis for granting the PD rezoning. No natural gas infrastructure shall be installed on the project site. If the developer seeks to install natural gas infrastructure in the future, the developer must first seek an amendment to the PD zoning.
The Planning Commission also added two additional conditions to the project:
• Developer shall use reasonable efforts, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, to obtain documentation from the Diocese of the previous church on the site, Saint Mark’s, regarding the disposition of the human remains and details as to their new location.
• Provide “Right Turn Only During Peak Hours” signage for the project driveway.
The applicant found these to be acceptable and they have been added to the conditions of approval of the PD rezoning as conditions P24 and P25.
After the Planning Commission, the applicant shared with staff that they continue to not
support condition P5, which is regarding the need for the developer to install a complete
street frontage, which includes a separated sidewalk with a landscape strip for the
reasons stated earlier with the Planning Commission. Staff continues to support the
inclusion of this condition to be consistent with the City’s Pruneridge Avenue Complete
Streets Plan. The applicant also continues to not support the specific language of
condition P23. In particular, the applicant would like to remove the phrase “issued in
reliance upon the developer’s assurance that no natural gas infrastructure will be
installed at any time, and is an express basis for granting the PD rezoning.” from the
condition language:
P23 “This approval has been issued in reliance upon the developer’s assurance that no
natural gas infrastructure will be installed at any time, and is an express basis for
granting the PD rezoning. No natural gas infrastructure shall be installed on the project
site. If the developer seeks to install natural gas infrastructure in the future, the
developer must first seek an amendment to the PD zoning.”
The Greenhouse Gas (GHG), Air Quality, and Energy analysis in the EIR has relied upon the project being built as all electric. Should the applicant wish to pursue a project that uses natural gas, new GHG), Air Quality, and Energy analysis would be necessary, as well as the re-circulation of the EIR.
The inclusion of conditions P5 and P23 as currently drafted are part of the staff recommendation.
Staff recommends that the Council take the following three actions:
1. CEQA: Adopt the resolution certifying the EIR and related CEQA documents. This is a quasi-judicial decision, with required findings including that the EIR complies with CEQA and reflects the independent judgment of the Council.
2. Rezoning: Adopt the resolution approving the Rezone from B to PD. Although this is a legislative action, a PD rezoning requires the Council to make findings regarding the public benefits of the project, which include imaginative design, furthering City housing objectives and promoting City climate goals.
3. Adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (VTSM). The VTSM is a quasi-judicial decision with a long list of required findings, including that the site is suitable for the density and design of development, and that the project is consistent with the General Plan (including the Climate Action Plan).
The PD rezoning and VTSM include the conditions of approval in the form drafted by staff, as well as the two new conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the project by the environmental consultant firm David J. Powers & Associates, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and Notice of Availability were posted on the City’s website at Environmental Review/CEQA | City of Santa Clara (santaclaraca.gov) <https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/departments-a-f/community-development/planning-division/environmental-review-ceqa> and available for public review for 45-days between November 17, 2023 and January 2, 2024, in accordance with CEQA requirements. No public or agency comments on the DEIR were submitted during the 45-day review period.
The DEIR examined potential environmental impacts associated with project development and identified significant impacts on biological, cultural resources, and geology and soils. Mitigation measures were identified for implementation that would reduce most of the significant project development impacts to less than significant levels. However, significant unavoidable project level and cumulative cultural resources impacts were identified to remain with demolition of the church, which is identified as being eligible for listing as an architecturally significant local structure, to redevelop the site. All other resource areas would experience a less than significant impact with project development
In considering a project, CEQA requires decision-makers to balance economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. To approve a project that has a significant unavoidable environmental impact, decision-makers must make findings, supported by substantial evidence, that the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable environmental effects. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15124(b), the DEIR identifies project objectives for evaluation of the proposed project and the development of a range of alternatives for consideration in the findings or statement of overriding considerations
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City for processing the requested application other than administrative time and expense typically covered by processing fees paid by the applicant.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email clerk@santaclaraca.gov <mailto:clerk@santaclaraca.gov> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
On February 8, 2024, the notice of public hearing for this item was mailed to property owners within 1,000 feet of the project side boundaries and interested parties. Newspaper notice of this item was published in The Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation, on February 7, 2024. At the time of this staff report, no comments have been received by the Planning Department in support or opposition to the project.
Community Meetings
Virtual public outreach meetings were conducted by the Property Owner/Applicant on November 16, 2022 and August 30, 2023 to engage the neighborhood community in the planning process. Notices of the meetings were mailed by the Property Owner/Applicant to properties within 1,000 feet of the project site boundaries and posted on the City’s website. These meetings provided the community opportunities to review and comment on the proposal and revised changes made to the dwellings, site circulation and landscaping resulting from community input.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not certify the Environmental Impact Report or adopt the CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the 1957 Pruneridge Avenue Residential Project.
2. Deny the rezoning of the project site from Public, Quasi-Public, and Public Park or Recreation (B) to Planned Development (PD) to allow construction of residential development consisting of 22 detached two-story residences
3. Deny the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the land into 22 individual lots and four common lots.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
1. Adopt a resolution to certify the Environmental Impact Report and adopt the CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the 1957 Pruneridge Avenue Residential Project.
2. Adopt a resolution to approve a rezoning of the project site from Public, Quasi-Public, and Public Park or Recreation (B) to Planned Development (PD) to allow construction of residential development consisting of 22 detached two-story residences with attached and detached garages, landscaping, and on- and off-site improvements, subject to conditions of approval.
3. Adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the land into 22 individual lots and four common lots as a utility corridor, vehicle access, landscape open space and bioretention areas to serve the development, subject to conditions of approval.
Staff
Reviewed by: Reena Brilliot, Acting Director, Community Development Department
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Environmental Impact Report
2. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
3. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
4. Resolution Certifying the Environmental Impact Report
5. Resolution Approving the Rezone
6. Resolution Approving the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
7. Excerpt Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 21, 2024
8. Planning Commission Staff Report of February 21, 2024
9. Historical and Landmarks Commission meeting minutes of December 7, 2023
10. Historic and Landmarks Commission Staff Report December 7, 2023.
11. Conditions of Rezoning Approval
12. Conditions of Tentative Subdivision Map Approval
13. Development Plans
14. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map