Sa>aJos. Memorandum. FROM: Harry Freitas TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: September 21, 2015 COUNCIL DISTRICT: 6

Transcription

1 COUNCIL AGENDA: 9/22/15 ITEM: 11.2 Sa>aJos CITY OF ~ CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Memorandum FROM: Harry Freitas SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: September 21, 2015 Date SUPPLEMENTAL COUNCIL DISTRICT: 6 SUBJECT: FILE NO. PDC13-050: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING FROM THE A(PD) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT TO THE A(PD) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT TO EXPAND THE BOUNDARY OF A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT (SANTANA ROW), INCREASE THE ALLOWED COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE BY 565,641 SQUARE FEET, ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL 47 RESIDENTIAL UNITS (FOR A TOTAL OF 1,229 UNITS), INCREASE THE NUMBER OF HOTEL ROOMS BY SIX (TO CLARIFY THAT THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF ROOMS IS 220), AND MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CO~ER OF WINCHESTER BOULEVARD AND STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD, ON A GROSS ACRE SITE. REASON FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL On September 17, 2015, three Zoning Protests to protest the Planning Commission s recommendation of approval for the Santana Row Planned Development Rezoning File No. PDC were received, two submitted by Bill Zahrt (as an individual property o.wner at the Villas at Santana Park and as President of the Villas at Santana Park Homeowners Association) and one by Jim Toal (as an individual property owner at the Villas at Santana Park).

2 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL September 21, 2015 Subject: PDC Page 2 BACKGROUND A Majority,Protest occurs when the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement determines that written protests have been timely filed by the owners of sites bounded by either: 1. Fifty percent or more of the total length of the protest line; or 2. The owners of not less than 50 percent or more of the area of the subject property The portion of the boundaries filed by eligible adjacent property owners totals 833 feet, approximately 10.8% of the protest line (See Exhibit A). Therefore, these Zoning Protests are not a Majority Protest. In their protest applications (See ), the zoning protesters contend the FEIR fails to adequately analyze and mitigate for traffic, air quality, visual and aesthetic impacts, cumulative impacts, and project alternatives. These comments were also submitted as part of the EIR process. Staff responded to these comments as pm~ of the first Amendment to the Draft EIR, dated July These comments were not found to be substantive, as documented in staff s response in the first Amendment to the Draft EIR. CONCLUSION Under the Zoning Ordinance, when the Director determines a Majority Zoning Protest has been filed, the City Council must affirmatively Vote by a 2/3 majority (eight votes) to override the protest in order to consider a motion approving the proposed rezoning. However, the submitted Zoning Protest does not qualify as a Majority Protest. Therefore, the City Council may take action on the proposed rezoning without first taking a 2/3 majority vote to override a Majority Zoning Protest. Staff recommends that the City Council consider the Santana Row Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report, consider the adoption of the Statement of Overriding Considerations of the EIR and Protection of the Monroe/Stevens Creek Intersection, certify the EIR as completed in compliance with CEQA and reflecting the independent judgment and analysis of the City, and approve the Planned Development Rezoning. /s/ HARRY FREITAS, DIRECTOR Planning, Building and Code Enforcement For questions please contact Planning Official Steve McHarris at (408) Attachments: Exhibit A - Zoning Protest Applications

3 Exhibit A

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21