SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY

Transcription

1 COUNCIL AGENDA: 11/15/16 ITEM: \o 3L A- \V X. CITY OF Cr "3 SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY Memorandum TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: October 24, 2016 COUNCIL DISTRICT: 10 SUBJECT: GP AMENDMENT TO THE ENVISION SAN JOSE 2040 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION DIAGRAM DESIGNATION FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ON AN APPROXIMATELY 1.33 GROSS ACRE SITE, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALMADEN ROAD AND BURNSIDE DRIVE. C CONFORMING REZONING FROM THE R-l-2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT TO THE R-l-5 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT ON AN APPROXIMATELY 1.33 GROSS ACRE SITE. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission voted unanimously (7-0-0) to recommend to the City Council to adopt the Bertelsen Property Negative Declaration, to approve the General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram Amendment, and to approve the Rezoning as described in the attached Staff Reports. OUTCOME Should the City Council approve the proposed General Plan Amendment, the site's General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation would be changed from Rural Residential to Residential Neighborhood. Should the City Council approve the proposed Rezoning, the site's Zoning District would be changed from R-l-2 to R-l-5. Should the City Council deny the General Plan Amendment, the site would retain the Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation of Rural Residential. Should the City Council deny the Rezoning, the site's Zoning District would retain the R-l-2 Zoning District.

2 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL October 24, 2016 Subject: File Nos. GP and C Page 2 BACKGROUND On October 12, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezoning. The Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the Bertelsen Property Negative Declaration, approve the General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram Amendment request and approve the Rezoning permit. Staff Presentation Staff stated that the proposed General Plan Amendment and Conforming Rezoning were analyzed with respect to conformance with the General Plan and were found largely consistent with land use and implementation goals and policies. Changing the General Plan designation to Residential Neighborhood and the Zoning District to R-l-5 would allow infill development that closely conforms to the existing neighborhood character, as the subject site could have a density of up to 2.5 dwelling units per acre, allowing three units on the site. Public Testimony Following staffs presentation, the Commission received public testimony from one community member. The public speaker was a resident who lives near the subject site and had the following concerns: 1) interest in seeing a site plan regarding the future subdivision of the property; 2) whether the existing secondary unit on site qualifies as a secondary unit or an independent unit; and 3) the desire to preserve the existing trees on the property. In an effort to address these comments, the applicant stated that he has not drafted a site plan at this time and plans to preserve the large oak trees on his property. Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Ballard asked staff whether other members of the community voiced concern about the condition and preservation of the trees on the property at previous community meetings. Staff confirmed that other community members expressed interest in preserving the existing oak trees. Commissioner Abelite stated that the decision before the Planning Commission is in regards to a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, and asked staff if they typically addresses tree removal issues during the site development process. Staff responded that the applicant is currently not proposing to remove any trees at this time, and the tree removal was not evaluated as a part of either application. If the applicant proposes to remove trees on the property, the applicant would need to file a tree removal permit or go through the tree removal process during the tentative map process. Commissioner Allen asked staff to clarify the number of dwelling units that would be permitted on the property under the Residential Neighborhood land use designation. Staff responded that only three dwelling units would be permitted.

3 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL October 24, 2016 Subject: File Nos. GP and C Page 3 Commissioner Yesney stated that the first entitlement after the rezoning process is obtaining a tentative map. She stated that a single-family house probably would not have a plan showing where the buildings would be located on site or the grading; the tentative map would only show the proposed lot lines. The only remaining permit for the applicant to obtain is the building permit. As many homeowners demolish trees illegally, there would not be another process to determine the condition of the trees on site, and the City would need to rely on the integrity of the homeowner to either save the trees or go through the tree removal permit process if they wanted to remove them. Staff responded that through the tentative map process, the applicant would need to show the site's topography, tree locations, and building footprints. Public Works staff clarified that generally, a division of one parcel into three parcels does not require a Tentative and Final Map in order to subdivide; this process would only require a Parcel Map. The City Attorney agreed. Through the tentative map process, staff would evaluate the impacts of the proposed development, including tree removals. Although the building permit process is an administrative process, if the proposed buildings impact a tree, the permit would be flagged and that applicant could also be required to submit a tree removal permit application. Commissioner Bit-Badal asked for the distance of the noticing radius for tentative map permits. Staff responded that the noticing radius is 500 feet. Commissioner Bit-Badal made a motion to consider the negative declaration and recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment and the Rezoning application. Commissioner Allen seconded the motion. Commissioner Bit-Badal stated that she wanted to ensure the applicant will inform neighbors of the future site plans for the property and that the proposed buildings have a high quality design and conform to the neighborhood and design guidelines. Commissioner Abelite strongly suggested that the applicant pay great attention to the existing tree layouts when developing the lot lines on the property with the goal of saving the trees. If the applicant wishes to remove them, he stated that the applicant should go through the tree removal process. The Planning Commission voted to recommend to the City Council to adopt the Bertelsen Property Negative Declaration, approve the proposed General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram Amendment, and to approve the Rezoning. ANALYSIS A complete analysis of the issues regarding this General Plan Amendment and Rezoning is contained in the attached Planning Commission Staff Reports. EVALUATION AND FOLLOW UP If the Amendment is approved, the General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation on the subject site will change from Rural Residential to Residential

4 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL October 24, 2016 Subject: File Nos. GP and C Page 4 Neighborhood and the site's Zoning District will change from R-l-2 to R-l-5. This would allow the applicant to divide the property into three lots, subject to a Tentative Map permit. PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff followed Council Policy 6-30: Public Outreach Policy. The property owners and occupants within a 1,000 feet radius were sent public hearing notices for the Planning Commission and City Council hearing, as well as all members of the public who requested to be placed on the application's contact list. A notice of the public hearing was also published in the San Jose Post Record and on the City's website. The Planning Commission agenda was posted on the City of San Jose website, which included a copy of the staff report, and staff has been available to discuss the project with members of the public. COORDINATION Preparation of this memorandum has been coordinated with the City Attorney's Office. CEOA An Initial Study and Negative Declaration were prepared by the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for the subject General Plan Amendment and Rezoning. The IS/MND was circulated for a 20-day public review period from August 15, 2016, to September 4, One comment from the public was received and addressed in the Response to Comments. The ND states that the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezoning will not have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study, Negative Declaration, and the Response to Comments are available for review on the Planning website at: /s/ HARRY FREITAS, SECRETARY Planning Commission For questions please contact Steve McHarris, Planning Official, at Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report GP Planning Commission Staff Report CI6-007

5 CITY OF fir "3 SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY PC AGENDA: ITEM: 7.b. Deferredfrom 9/28/16 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT File No. GP Applicant David Bertelsen Location Almaden Road Existing General Plan Land Use Designation Rural Residential Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation Residential Neighborhood Existing Zoning Districts R-l-2 Single Family Residence Council District 10 Historic Resource No Annexation Date: July 29,1966 (Ryder No. 9) CEQA: Negative Declaration APPLICATION SUMMARY: General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use / Transportation Diagram land use designation from Rural Residential to Residential Neighborhood on an approximately 1.33 gross acre site. RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the Negative Declaration in accordance with CEQA and approve the resolution amending the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram land use designation for the site from Rural Residential to Residential Neighborhood. PROJECT DATA GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY Consistent Policies LU-9.8, LU-11, LU-11.6 Inconsistent Policies LU-2.3, LU-9.7 SURROUNDING USES General Plan Land Use Zoning Existing Use North Residential Neighborhood R-1-5(PD) Planned Single-family residential Development South Rural Residential R-1-2(PD) Planned Development Single-family residential East Rural Residential R-1-2(PD) Planned Single-family residential Development West Residential Neighborhood R-1-5(PD) Planned Development Almaden Expressway Single-family residential

6 File No. GP Page 2 of 7 RELATED APPROVALS Date Action 2015 Conforming Rezoning from the R-l-1 Single-Family Residence Zoning District to the R-l-2 Single-Family Residence Zoning District (File No. CI5-040). PROJECT DESCRIPTION Background In November 2015, the City Council approved a conforming rezoning for the subject site from R-l- 1 Single-Family Residence to R-l-2 Single-Family Residence, which allows up to two (2) residential units on the subject site. On February 23, 2016, David Bertelsen applied for a General Plan Amendment on February 23, 2016, to change the Land Use / Transportation Diagram land use designation of the subject site from Rural Residential to Residential Neighborhood. Changing the General Plan land use designation to Residential Neighborhood would allow residential development of up to 8 DU/AC or the prevailing neighborhood density, whichever is lower. The prevailing neighborhood density of the surrounding neighborhood is 2.5 dwelling units per acre (see Figure 1). At this density, up to three (3) units could potentially be allowed on the site. The applicant has submitted a conforming rezoning application (File No. CI6-007) to rezone the property from R-l-2 Single-Family Residence to R-l-5 Single-Family, which is being analyzed concurrently with the General Plan Amendment request. Site Location Figure 1. Surrounding Residential Densities The site is located on the southeast corner of Almaden Road and Burnside Drive and is surrounded by single-family residences to the north, east, west, and south. The site is not located within a General Plan Growth Area nor a Development Policy Area.

7 File No. GP Page 3 of 7 Figure 2: Site Location ANALYSIS Existing General Plan Land Use Designation: Rural Residential The Rural Residential land use designation is applied to areas already largely developed for residential use with a low density or rural character. Any new infill development should be limited to densities that match the established density, lot size, and character of surrounding properties. Properties with this designation that have existing zoning entitlements or traffic allocations in place may proceed with development of those entitlements, even if at a higher density than two DU/AC or existing land use pattern. New development in this designation may also be limited to densities lower than two DU/AC due to issues such as geologic conditions, grading limitations, proximity to creeks, or higher costs for provision of services. Since this designation is planned on the fringes of the City, the type and level of services required to support future developments in this category is expected to be less than that required for more urban land uses. Projects should minimize the demand for urban services and provide their own major funding for construction of service facilities necessitated for the project. Discretionary development permits should be required for new development and subdivisions in these areas as a mechanism to address public service levels, grading, geologic, environmental, aesthetics, and other issues. The Rural Residential land use designation allows a residential density up to two DU/AC and an FAR up to 0.35 (1 to 2.5 stories).

8 Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation: Residential Neighborhood File No. GP Page 4 of 7 The Residential Neighborhood land use designation is applied broadly throughout the City to encompass most of the established, single-family residential neighborhoods, including both the suburban and traditional residential neighborhood areas which comprise the majority of its developed land. The intent of this designation is to preserve the existing character of these neighborhoods and to strictly limit new development to infill projects which closely conform to the prevailing existing neighborhood character as defined by density, lot size and shape, massing and neighborhood form and pattern. New infill development should improve and/or enhance existing neighborhood conditions by completing the existing neighborhood pattern and bringing infill properties into general conformance with the quality and character of the surrounding neighborhood. New infill development should be integrated into the existing neighborhood pattern, continuing and, where applicable, extending or completing the existing street network. The average lot size, orientation, and form of new structures for any new infill development must therefore generally match the typical lot size and building form of any adjacent development, with particular emphasis given to maintaining consistency with other development that fronts onto a public street to be shared by the proposed new project. The Residential Neighborhood land use designation allows a residential density of typically eight DU/AC and a commercial FAR up to 0.7 (1 to 2.5 stories). Figure 3: Existing General Plan Land Use Designation Figure 4: Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation General Plan Conformance The proposed amendment was analyzed with respect to conformance with the goals and policies of the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the following General Plan goals and policies as discussed below: 1. High-Qualitv Living Environments Policy LU-9.8: When changes in residential densities in established neighborhoods are proposed, the City shall consider such factors as neighborhood character and identity; historic preservation; compatibility of land uses and impacts on livability; impacts on services and facilities, including schools, to the extent permitted by law; accessibility to transit facilities; and impacts on traffic levels on both neighborhood streets and major thoroughfares.

9 File No. GP Page 5 of 7 Analysis: The subject property is currently zoned R-l-2 Single-Family Residential, which allows up to two single-family homes. The proposed General Plan Land Use / Transportation Diagram Amendment to Residential Neighborhood would allow one additional single-family residential home (three total), consistent with the prevailing neighborhood density. The proposed General Plan land use designation is consistent with and compatible with surrounding uses in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the addition of one single-family home from what is currently allowed on the subject site would not result in an impact on local services or facilities. 2. Residential Neighborhoods Goal LU-11: Regulate the urban form, architectural quality and contextual compatibility of new construction and uses within the City's varied residential neighborhoods to promote a residential neighborhood environment conducive to a high quality of life for neighborhood residents and visitors. Residential Neighborhoods Policy LU-11.6: For new infill development, match the typical lot size and building form of any adjacent development, with particular emphasis given to maintaining consistency with other development that fronts onto a public street to be shared by the proposed new project. As an exception, for parcels already developed with more than one dwelling unit, new development may include up to the same number of dwelling units as the existing condition. The form of such new development should be compatible with and, to the degree feasible, consistent with the form of the surrounding neighborhood pattern. Analysis: The neighborhood surrounding the site consists solely of single-family detached residential buildings with an average density of 2.5 DU/acre (see Figure 1). The proposed Residential Neighborhood land use allows typically eight dwelling units per acre or a density that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood's character and building form, whichever is lower. Given the prevailing neighborhood density, the Residential Neighborhood land use designation would allow up to three dwelling units on the subject site, which would match typical lot sizes and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood pattern and densities. While the' proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with several General Plan goals and policies, the proposal is inconsistent with the following General Plan goals and policies: 1. Growth Areas Policy LU To support the intensification of identified Growth Areas, and to achieve various goals related to their development throughout the City, restrict new development on properties in non-growth Areas. High-Quality Living Environments Policy LU Limit residential development in established neighborhoods that are not identified growth areas to projects that conform to the site's Land Use / Transportation Diagram designation and meet Urban Design policies in this Plan. Analysis: Although the project site is not located within an identified Growth Area, the proposed Residential Neighborhood designation conforms to the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed land use designation does not significantly intensify the residential density of the property, and would be compatible in form and context of the existing neighborhood.

10 File No. GP Page 6 of 7 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) An Initial Study (IS) and Negative Declaration (ND) were prepared by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement for the subject General Plan Amendment. The documents were circulated for public review between August 15, 2016 and September 4, One public comment was received on the Negative Declaration by a representative of the property owner at 1087 Seth Court, whose property backs onto the subject property to the south. The commenter expressed concern about the potential effects of future construction on the integrity of the existing fence and sloped area along the shared property line between the two properties, as well as concern that the existing row of trees along the shared property line could potentially be removed. Staff acknowledges these concerns; however, they are not directly related to the requested Zone Change and General Plan Amendment requests. The owner of the subject property would be responsible for any damage occurring to the property of the neighbor as a result of site grading for any future project. Additionally, no trees are proposed for removal at this time. Any removal of ordinance-sized trees (56 inches in circumference or greater) would require a Tree Removal Permit. This is a discretionary permit for which public notice would be provided. Since the end of the public review period for the IS/ND, minor revisions were made to the IS/ND in regard to image formatting. The revisions made did not change the project description, material analysis, or environmental conclusions identified in the circulated IS/ND. Therefore, the IS/ND was not recirculated per California Environmental Quality Act Statue and Guidelines Section (c). The Negative Declaration states that the proposed General Plan Amendment and subsequent rezoning to R-l-5 will not have a significant effect on the environment. The entire Initial Study and Negative Declaration are available for review on the Planning website at: To find the document, click on the "Environment/Sustainability" link on menu bar to the left of the screen, then click "Environmental Review" and select the link to "Negative Declaration/Initial Studies." PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Criterion 1: Requires Council action on the use of public funds equal to $1 million or greater. (Required: Website Posting) Criterion 2: Adoption of a new or revised policy that may have implications for public health, safety, quality of life, or financial/economic vitality of the City. (Required: and Website Posting) Criterion 3: Consideration of proposed changes to service delivery, programs, staffing that may have impacts to community services and have been identified by staff, Council or a Community group that requires special outreach. (Required: E mail, Website Posting, Community Meetings, Notice in appropriate newspapers) Although this item does not meet any of the criteria above, staff followed Council Policy 6-30: Public Outreach Policy. Planning staff facilitated a community meeting on August 18, 2016 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the proposed General Plan Amendment and re-zoning. A notice for the community meeting was distributed to all land owners and tenants of all properties within 500 feet of the subject site.

11 File No. GP Page 7 of 7 Over 75 community members attended the community meeting and expressed concerns about the following: the preservation of (Etc Great Oaks and other trees on site, preservation of the fence on the south side of the property, the quality of construction, the uncertainty of density allowed under the Residential Neighborhood designation, and the desire to be notified of future development proposals. A notice for the September 28,2016 Planning Commission hearing was distributed to the owners and tenants of all properties located within 500 feel oflhe project site and posted on the City website, 'l'he staff report is also posted on the City's website. Staff has been available to respond to questions from the public. Project Manager: Kimherly Vacca Approved by:,j x-w. A, Planning Official far Harry Freitas, Planning Director " te: i/k/fo /awik

12 GP Attachment: Negative Declaration Can be viewed online at: Initial Study Can be viewed online at:

13 Vacca, Kimberly From: Sent: To: Subject: Bill Blodgett Friday, September 09, :07 PM Vacca, Kimberly File No. GP Almaden Rd. Hi Kimberly, I"m a resident within 500 Ft. of the property. I'm concerned that this request for residential land use on this particular parcel, would allow other properties within the same area on the General Plan 2040 map to request the same zoning. As you can see, if all properties in this Rural Residential area were allowed the opportunity to change to Residential Neighborhood designation this would put an even greater strain on the surface streets servicing the area. In particular the street that I happen to live on, reducing my property value. From my point of view, I'm against allowing this change to take place. There simply an economic side to this that would directly effect me. Would you please note that I do not want to allow this change to take place? Bill Blodgett 6920 Azalea Dr. 1

14 CITY OF ffr zs SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY PC AGENDA: ITEM: 3.b. Deferred from 9/28/16 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT File No. C Applicant David Bertelsen Location Southeast corner of Almaden Road and Burnside Drive (18590 Almaden Road) Existing Zoning R-l-2 Single-Family Residence Council District 10 Historic Resource N/A Annexation Date July 29,1966 CEQA Negative Declaration for the Bertelsen Property General Plan Amendment and Rezoning Project APPLICATION SUMMARY: Conforming Rezoning from the R-l-2 Single-Family Residence Zoning District to the R-l-5 Single-Family Residence Zoning District, on a 1.33-gross acre site. A proposed General Plan amendment for this property is also on the September 28, 2016 Planning Commission agenda for recommended action to the City Council (File No. GP16-002). This proposed General Plan amendment, should it be approved by the City Council, would change the existing General Plan land use designation for the subject property from Rural Residential to Residential Neighborhood. Please refer to the Planning Commission Staff Report for GP for analysis on the General Plan Amendment request. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council for the proposed Conforming Rezoning, subject to approval of the General Plan amendment described above. PROJECT DATA GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY General Plan Designation Residential Neighborhood (File No. GP16-002) 1X1 Consistent Q Inconsistent Consistent Policies LU-9.8, LU-9.17, IP-1.6 Inconsistent Policies None SURROUNDING USES General Plan Land Use Zoning Existing Use North Residential Neighborhood R-1-5(PD) Planned Single-family residential Development South Rural Residential R-1-2(PD) Planned Single-family residential Development East Rural Residential R-1-5(PD) Planned Development Single-family residential

15 File No. CI6-007 Page 2 of 6 West Residential Neighborhood R-1-5(PD) Planned Development Almaden Expressway Single-family residential RELATED APPROVALS Date Action 11/17/15 Conforming Rezoning from the R-l-1 Single-Family Residence Zoning District to the R-l-2 Single-Family Residence Zoning District (File No. C15-040). PROJECT DESCRIPTION Background In November 2015, City Council approved a conforming rezoning for the subject site from R-l-1 Single-Family Residence to R-l-2 Single-Family Residence, which allows up to two residential units on the subject site. This conformance rezoning was consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation for the property of Rural Residential. As stated above, the applicant is now applying for a General Plan Amendment to re-designate the property with a Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation of Residential Neighborhood. The subject rezoning application is requested concurrently with the General Plan Amendment request, as the proposed R-l-5 Zoning District is a conforming zoning of the Residential Neighborhood land use designation. Figure 1: Aerial Photograph of Subject Site On February 23, 2016, the applicant applied for a conforming rezoning of the subject 1.3-gross acre site from the R-l-2 Single-Family Residence Zoning District to the R-l-5 Single-Family Residence Zoning District. The subject site consists of one parcel that is developed with a singlefamily residence, at a density of 0.77 dwelling units per acre. The subject parcel is surrounded by single-family residences to the north, south, east and west, and is also bounded by Burnside Drive to the north and Almaden Road to the west. An aerial photograph of the subject site and surrounding parcels is shown in Figure 1.

16 File No. C Page 3 of 6 The existing residence is situated within the eastern portion of the subject parcel, with driveway access along the southern property line to Almaden Road. The parcel was annexed into the City of San Jose in its current configuration in 1966, and at that time was surrounded to the north, east and south by a larger orchard parcel that was within the jurisdiction of Santa Clara County. This separate orchard parcel was annexed into the City in 1977, and subdivided into its current configuration at an overall density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre, shown in Figure 2 as those areas designated as "R-1-5(PD) 77074" and "R-1-2(PD) 77074," surrounding the subject parcel. The largest of the subdivided parcels abutting the subject site is approximately one half the size of the subject site, with most being much smaller than the subject site, and ranging in size from 0.31 to 0.69 acres. ANALYSIS Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan Conformance As shown in Figure 3 below, the subject site has a General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation of Rural Residential. As previously stated, the applicant is requesting a General Plan amendment to re-designate the property to Residential Neighborhood. The Residential Neighborhood designation is applied broadly throughout the City to encompass most of the established, single-family residential neighborhoods, including both the suburban and traditional residential neighborhood areas which comprise the majority of its developed land. The intent of this designation is to preserve the existing character of these neighborhoods and to strictly limit new

17 File No. C Page 4 of 6 development to infill projects which closely conform to the prevailing existing neighborhood character as defined by density, lot size and shape, massing and neighborhood form and pattern. New infill development should improve and/or enhance existing neighborhood conditions by completing the existing neighborhood pattern and bringing infill properties into general conformance with the quality and character of the surrounding neighborhood. New infill development should be integrated into the existing neighborhood pattern. The average lot size, orientation, and form of new structures for any new infill development must therefore generally match the typical lot size and building form of any adjacent development. New infill development should be limited to a density of 8 DU/AC or the prevailing neighborhood density, whichever is lower. Figure 3: General Plan Map, showing the existing Rural Residential land use designation for the property. With approval of General Plan amendment request File No. GP16-002, the properly would be re-designated as Residential Neighborhood. The minimum lot size in the R-l-5 Zoning District is 8,000 square feet, however, any proposed subdivision must also conform to the General Plan land use designation for the property, resulting in a density of 2.3 DU/AC for the subject site. As stated above, the maximum allowable density would be 2.3 dwelling units per acre, matching the existing surrounding density. Given the existing lot size of 1.3 acres, a maximum of 3 dwelling units could be permitted on the property. As only one single-family residence is permitted per lot in all R-l districts, a maximum of three lots would be allowed on the property, with an average lot size of 18,876 square feet. This would be consistent with the surrounding lot sizes, which range from 8,000 square feet to approximately 30,000 square feet. Additionally, the rectangular shape of the subject lot would facilitate subdivision into lots that are also rectangular, similar to the generally rectangular shapes of the surrounding parcels. The resulting street frontages of the lots would be approximately 80 feet, which would be similar to the frontage widths of the surrounding parcels, which range from 50 feet to 100 feet.

18 Additionally, the rezoning is consistent with the following General Plan policies: File No. C Page 5 of 6 1. Implementation Policy IP-8.7: Use the City's conventional zoning districts, contained in its Zoning Ordinance, to implement the Envision General Plan Land Use / Transportation Diagram. These districts include a range of allowed land uses, development intensities, and standards within major land use categories (residential, commercial and industrial) together with zoning districts for other land uses such as mixed-use and open space. The various ranges of allowed use and development intensity correspond generally to the respective Envision General Plan land use designations, while providing greater detail as to the appropriate land uses and form of development. Analysis: The proposed R-l-5 Single-Family Residence zoning for the subject site would implement the proposed Residential Neighborhood land use designation. This zoning district allows residential uses and parcel sizes that are compatible with the goals and objectives of the Residential Neighborhood land use designation, including potential lot sizes and configurations that are consistent with the overall surrounding lot pattern. Land Use Policy LU-9.8: When changes in residential densities in established neighborhoods are proposed, the City shall consider such factors as neighborhood character and identity; historic preservation; compatibility of land uses and impacts on livability; impacts on services and facilities, including schools, to the extent permitted by law; accessibility to transit facilities; and impacts on traffic levels on both neighborhood streets and major thoroughfares. Analysis: The proposed R-l-5 Zoning District for the subject site would allow the possible subdivision of the site into a maximum of three parcels which would allow for two additional dwelling units. The resulting density would be 2.3 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the surrounding density of 2.5 DU/AC. Therefore, the request would not impact the existing neighborhood character, as defined by the existing density, nor would the addition of two dwelling units materially impact the provision of public services or traffic levels, provided currently there is no pending subdivision application for the subject site. Land Use Policy LU-11.6: For new infill development, match the typical lot size and building form of any adjacent development, with particular emphasis given to maintaining consistency with other development that fronts onto a public street to be shared by the proposed new project. As an exception, for parcels already developed with more than one dwelling unit, new development may include up to the same number of dwelling units as the existing condition. The form of such new development should be compatible with and, to the degree feasible, consistent with the form of the surrounding neighborhood pattern. Analysis: The rezoning will allow the possible subdivision of the subject site into three parcels maximum, with an average lot size of 18,876 square feet. These parcel sizes would be similar in size and form to the surrounding parcels. The ultimate configuration of the parcels would be subject to review for conformance with the lot and development pattern. The proposed rezoning will, therefore, allow development that will be consistent with the existing neighborhood form and pattern. Implementation Policy IP-1.6: Ensure that proposals to rezone and prezone properties conform to the Land Use/Transportation Diagram, and advance Envision General Plan vision, goals, and policies. Analysis: The proposed R-l-5 Zoning District is a conforming zoning district for the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation of Residential Neighborhood, as indicated Section of the Zoning Ordinance. As described above, rezoning the subject property to the R-l-5 Zoning District would allow residential development that is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood in both form and density; thus, supporting the use of the property as envisioned under the General Plan.

19 i File No. CI6-007 Page 6 of 6 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) An Initial Study (IS) and Negative Declaration (ND) were prepared by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement for the subject General Plan Amendment, The documents were circulated for public review between August 15,2016 and September 4,2016. One public comment was received on the Negative Declaration by a representative of the property owner at 1087 Seth Court, whose property backs onto the subject property to the south. The commenter expressed concern about the potential effects of future construction on the integrity of the existing fence and sloped area along the shared property line between the two properties, as well as concern that the existing row of trees along the shared property line could potentially be removed. Staff acknowledges these concerns; however, they are not directly related to the requested Zone Change and General Plan Amendment requests. City staff would evaluate any future development applications once an application is filed and address any grading or tree concerns at that time., Additionally, no trees arc proposed for removal at this time. Any removal of ordinance-sized trees (56 inches in circumference or greater) would require a Tree Removal Permit. This is a discretionary permit for which public notice would be provided, Since the end of the public review period lor the IS/ND, minor revisions were made to the IS/ND in regard to image formatting. The revisions made did not change the project description, material analysis, or environmental conclusions identified in the circulated IS/ND. Therefore, the IS/ND was not recirculated per California Environmental Quality Act Statue and Guidelines Section (e). The Negative Declaration states that the proposed General Plan Amendment and subsequent rczoning to R-l-5 will not have a significant effect on the environment. The en Lire Initial Study and Negative Declaration are available for review on the Planning website at: To find the document, click on the "Environment/Sustainability" link on menu bar lo the left of the screen, then click "Environmental Review" and select the link lo "Negative Declaration/Initial Studies." PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION In order to inform the public of the proposed project, staff followed Council Policy 6-30: Public Outreach Policy. A notice of the public hearing was distributed lo the owners and tenants of all properties located within 500 feel of the project site and posted on the City website. The staff report is also posted on the City's website. Staff has been available to respond to questions from the public. No public comment letters have been received. Project Manager:, Patrick Kelly. A1CP Approved by: Iftt Planning Official for Harry Freitas, Planning Director Date: Attachments: Draft Ordinance Owner and Applicant David Bertelsen 303 Queenhill Ave. Los Altos, CA 94024

20 RD:JVP:JMD 09/19/2016 File No. C ORDINANCE NO. DRAFT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN JOSE REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OF APPROXIMATELY 1.33 ACRES, SITUATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALMADEN ROAD AND BURNSIDE DRIVE (18590 ALMADEN ROAD) FROM THE R-1-2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT TO THE R-1-5 SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, all rezoning proceedings required under the provisions of Chapter of Title 20 of the San Jose Municipal Code have been duly had and taken with respect to the real property hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended, for the subject rezoning to R-1-5 Single-Family Residence Zoning District under File Numbers GP and C (the "Negative Declaration"); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Jose is the decision-making body for the proposed subject rezoning to the R-1-5 Single-Family Residence Zoning District; and WHEREAS, this Council of the City of San Jose has considered, approved and adopted said Negative Declaration under separate Council resolution prior to taking any approval actions on this project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JOSE: SECTION 1. The recitals above are incorporated herein. 1 T / doc Council Agenda: Item No: DRAFT - Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) or CityClerk@sanjoseca.gov for final document.

21 RD:JVP:JMD 09/19/2016 File No. C SECTION 2. All that real property hereinafter described in this section, hereinafter referred to as "subject property," is hereby rezoned as R-1-5 Singie-Family Residence Zoning District. The subject property referred to in this section is all that real property situated in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, described in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3. The district map of the City is hereby amended accordingly. SECTION 4. The land development approval that is the subject of City File No. C is subject to the operation of Part 2.75 of Chapter of Title 15 of the San Jose Municipal Code. The applicant for or recipient of such land use approval hereby acknowledges receipt of notice that the issuance of a building permit to implement such land development approval may be suspended, conditioned or denied where the City Manager has determined that such action is necessary to remain within the aggregate operational capacity of the sanitary sewer system available to the City of San Jose or to meet the discharge standards of the sanitary sewer system imposed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region. II II II II 2 T / doc Council Agenda: Item No: DRAFT - Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) or CityClerk@sanjoseca.gov for final document.

22 RD:JVP:JMD 09/19/2016 File No. C PASSED FOR PUBLICATION of title this day of, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DISQUALIFIED: ATTEST: SAM LICCARDO Mayor TONI J. TABER, CMC City Clerk 3 T / doc Council Agenda: Item No: DRAFT - Contact the Office of the City Clerk at (408) or CityClerk@sanjoseca.gov for final document.

23 P.O.B. LEGEND = REZONING LINE «PROPERTY LINE = RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE «CEWTERLINE - POINT OF BEGINNING TOTAL SITE AC. A.P.N TRACT NO. G332 / LOT / A.P.M TRACT NO LOT 30 A.P.N TRACT NO, 6382 LOT 29 SCALE: t'-so' P.Q.B, PROP, CORNER FO. 3/4" I.P. OPEN COURSE TABLE NO. BEARING DISTANCE S55'55'25"W N34'33'35"W N6lW3rE N28'55'29"W N5T04'31 "E S33'30 > 45"E S33, 30'45"E ' 159, ,40' 10,00' 51,94' 10,03" ' ^53' FO. 3/4" LP. OPEN 1 REZONE AC. j- 5,OM ft-t-z TO "^ * I '. n' \ 17. -FO. ATOM. ft NOTES! All bearings «& dlslcwcas shown ore Raaorri Dota or as noted, Dimensions shown oris in fast A: deciinols thereof CacfeDnVa Sail Josa, OA (4GB) TRACT NO, 6382 OT 1 \ EXHIBIT B PLAT TO /ACCOMPANY DESCRIPTION SCAl.r: AS SiKWII DIWMK Bfl B.8.O. DIME; AUGUST LANDS OF B5RTELSEN AWFKWSC EYi V.S. / H.l). FOR; REZONING A.P.N ALMADEN ROAD ORMVINC HUMDE!! CITY CF SAN -JOSE, CALIFORNIA R1 SH KT 2 OK 2

24 EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR: REZONING All that certain real property situate entirely In the City of San Jose, County of Santa Clara, State of California, being all of the lands described In that certain Grant Deed from Carrie Ward, et si, to David Bertelsen and Ping LI Bertelsen, recorded October 29,2014 as Document Number , Santa Clara County Records, and more particularly described as follows; BEGINNING at the most Easterly corner of that certain 1,426 acre parcel of land as shown on that ^Record of Survey of a Portion of Lot 9 of Frelfas Subdivision and Another Portion of Pueblo Tract No. 3, San Jose Cfty Lands, Santa Clara County, California", filed for Record July 14,1959, In Book 108 of Maps, at Page 45, Santa Clara County Records, said corner also being the most Southerly corner of Lot 28 as shown on that certain Tract No. 6362, filed for Record August 25,1978 in Book 425 of Maps, at Pages 26 and 27, Santa Clara County Records; thence from the POINT OF BEGINNING along the Southeasterly line of said acre parcel of land, said line also being a boundary line of said Tract No. 6382, South 55 55' 25" West feet to o point lying on the Northerly right-of-way line of'almadsn Road as shown on the aforementioned Tract; thence along said Northerly right-of-way line of Almaden Road and along a curve to the right from a tangent bearing of North 36 c 14' 18" West having a radius of 1,639,00 feet through a central angle of 01 40' 43" and arc distance of 48,02 feet to a pol.it; thence continuing along said Northerly right-of-way line of Almaden Road and along the Easterly right-of-way line of Burnslde Drive, respectively, as shown on said Tract No. 6382, the following courses and distances; North 34 33' 35" West 159,81 feet to a point; thence along a tangent curve to the right having a radius of feet through a central angle of 95 38' 06" an arc distance of 33.3S feet to a point; thence North 61 04' 31" East feet to e point; thence North 28 55' 29" West 10,00 feet to a point; thence North 61 04' 31" East feet to the most Northerly corner of said acre parcel of land; thence leaving said Easterly right-of-way line of Burnslde Drive along the Northeasterly line of said acre parcel of land, said line also being a boundary line of said Tract 6382 South 33 30' 45" East 215.S3 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, '. Containing 1,3306 acres, more or less, of land. As shown on Sheet 2, Plat to Accompany Description, attached hereto and made a part hereof, Prepared on August 1, 2015 by C. & D,C., INC. Harry Bahlcka, L Rezone Almaden Road Job No, I4048-R1 Page 1 of 2

25 Attachments: Initial Study & Negative Declaration Can be viewed online at: