CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
City of Campbell, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CAMPBELL CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, January 25, 2022 – 6:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chamber – 70 N. First Street
NOTE: This Special meeting of the Campbell City Council was conducted pursuant to the Brown Act.
This meeting was recorded and can be viewed in its entirety at:
https://campbellca.gov/agendacenter and https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofCampbell.
CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Campbell convened in session this special day of January 25, 2022.
ROLL CALL
Attendee Name Title Status
Paul Resnikoff Mayor Present
Anne Bybee Vice Mayor Absent
Elizabeth 'Liz' Gibbons Councilmember Present
Susan M. Landry Councilmember Present
Sergio Lopez Councilmember Present
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Campbell's Plan for Housing - Housing Opportunity Sites Selection (PLN - 2021-12)
Recommended Action: That the City Council review the Tier 1 Housing Opportunity Sites and provide direction to staff on which sites s hould be included in Campbell’s Plan for Housing and the City’s Envision Campbell General Plan Update and provide feedback on key p rincipals to guide which Housing Opportunity Sites should be designated for mixed-use development.
Community Development Director Rob Eastwood intr oduced the Staff Report dated January 25, 2022 not ing that tonight’s session is for Council to pro vide feedback on key principles relating to mixed- use sites, and for any final comments prior to Staff moving into the E nvironmental Impact Report (EIR) phase of the Housing Element. Director Eastwood noted the goal is to start as broad as possible with the number of sites studied as part of the EIR process and there will be sites that are not ultimately qualified to be included as part of the Housing Element, and so by starting with the broadest number possible will provide the City a buffer as sites are ultimately eliminated from the list. In order to complete the H ousing Element on time, it is not possible to add sites during t he EIR process.
Minutes of January 25, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 2
David Hogan, M -Group Representative, reviewed the feedback received from both the Planning Commission and the City Council, reviewed the public outreach completed to date, and the site selection r anking utilized by Staff. Mr.
Hogan noted th at those sites indicated as Tier 1 sites are included in the maps presented to Council and will be included in the EIR process for review. These sites tota l over 5,000 to be gin the EIR review. Mr. Hogan reviewed the draft maps, noting the Tier 2 sites and those remaining from the 5 th Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Cycle that are not being included in the 6th Cycle.
Director East wood noted that the Campbell Technology Park h as some unique challenges relating to ingress/egress and may have development limitations through 2030 as this site was originally a Redevelopment Agency project , however the property owners have shown a strong interest in developing housing on this site or doing a land swap with the City for the Corporation Yard location.
Staff is recommending including the Campbell Technology Park in the EIR . Staff is also recommending studying the current Corporation Yard as a hous ing site noting the need to move the facility should that be deemed a feasible site. This site provides a unique opportunity to provide higher density housing and a more affordable housing project given it is on City land, and it is in close proximity t o other higher density housing. Staff is also recommending keeping the First Street Parking Garage site on the list , noting the parking challenges and the e xisting parking agreements that woul d need to be investigated on this site . Director Eastwood noted t hat the City of Campbell ’s RHNA target is 3,300 including a 30% buffer, and by utilizing the ranking system identified, Staff has identified over 5,000 sites that are planned to be studied in the EIR. This will allow the City flexibility to drop some sites that are deemed infeasibl e, or through other factors during the eight-year RHNA cycle, and still meet the required number of housing units.
Director Eastwood noted that since City Council’s last mee ting in December 2021, Staff has received requests from prop erty owners to drop 283 sites from consideration and add 112 sites to the list. Staff is recommending that all Tier 1 sites requested to be dropped remain on the site list to study and that all Tier 1 sites asked to be added to the list be added for study. This again will provide the City the gre atest flexibility during the EIR process and for the best outcomes throughout the RHNA Cycle.
In response to inquiries, Director Eastwood noted that these maps do not provide for any additional open space and that Staff would need to return at a later date for Council to consider adjusting the park to unit ratio across the City. Director Eastwood clarified that the 3,300 target number already takes into account any projects currently in the pipeline and projections of potential Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) production.
Director Eastwood clarified that following the completion of the E IR, Council will formally identify the 3,300 sites to be certi fied with Hous ing & Community Development (HCD) and when each project comes forward, the site will again be required to go through an individual analysis.
Minutes of January 25, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 3 In response to inquiries, Director Eastwood noted that Staff is recommending removing Tier 2 sites from study because they have been in previous RHNA cycles without e ver being developed, the parcel is too small, the re is ver y little common ownership, or they didn’ t meet the other criteria developed to identify the most potentially fruitful sites. Director Eastwood clarified that this evening is about site selection, and that additional conversations will be had with Council throughout 2022 in relation to the tools and strategies the City can use to meet affordability targets.
Senior Planner Stephen Rose presented the four key pri nciples for Council to consider for mixed-use development and noted that mixed -use can pose challenges for development . Staff is recommending they be used in higher density parcels, on larger sites, for pedes trian oriented projects, and in places where it could help offset other services. Staff feels a mixed-use project could be most helpful in the Pruneyard area, the Fry ’s Electronic site, and the walkable area between Campbell Avenue and the Pruneyard. The Planning Commission has requested this to include the major arterial corridors and the Milk Farm Dairy site in the s outhwest area of the City. Staff is seeking feedback from Council on whether mixed-use should be deemed ma ndatory in some areas or if having an option for mixed-use is preferable.
Senior Planner Rose pr esented a chart depicting the potent ial height of a building/development among other factors and spoke of the methods and tools available t o help keep the height of a building to the 75 ft. limit for the City of Campbell but noted that there may be instances where the building is tall er than 75 ft. as allowed by State law. Staff has tool s to assist w ith this concern t hrough development standards and the like but cannot guarantee it. Director Eastwood noted that Staff would return to Council throu ghout 2022 with additional methods and tools for addressing affordability and building height considerations.
Mayor Resnikoff opened the floor for public comment.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mike Krisman, Campbell Village H OA Representative, urged the City to pass impact fees to help pay for the neede d services that additional residents will bring.
Allen Ishibashi, Campbell Resident, urged the City to allow the Uplift Famil y Services site to move forward with their development at 20 units/acre and for identifying sites for townhome development that will include t he “missing middle” and families.
Jim Sullivan, Campbell Resident, urged the City to allow the Uplift Famil y Services site to move forward with their development at 20 units/acre.
Sarah Chaffin, Campbell Resident , requested her propert ies be included in t he EIR at 75 units/acre.
David Snyder, Campbell Resident, spoke of his concerns relating to water us age for the new residents and for this to be a consideration in the EIR.
Minutes of January 25, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 4
Raja Pallela, Campbell Resident, requested Council keep mixed- use optional so as n ot to restrict development, but also urged the s chools needs to be considered if so many new residents will be coming into the City.
Bill Baron, Campbell Resident, requested Council keep mixed -use optional so as not to restrict development, and requested to include the Housing Element in the next General Plan process for a wholistic review by the Committee.
Susan O ’Brien, Campbell Resident, s poke of the delicate balance in providing more housing but keeping the Campbell feel.
Bruce Bowen, Campbell Resident, spoke of the need to build larger units that attract families and noted that mixed- use developments can be seen as added amenities as well.
Peter Beritzhoff, San Tomas Plaza Owner, noted his interest in having the entire property included in the EIR process.
Marla Lemarchand, Campbell Resident, urged the Council to consi der ways to improve pedestrian safety when consi dering additional housing coming into Campbell.
Nancy Tepperman, Campbell Resident, spoke of her concerns relating to traffic, open space c rowding, and walkability with adding high density near the Budd/Winchester area.
Kevin Krewell, Campbell Resident, spoke of his concerns relating to the heig ht of buildings along Winchester and adjacent to neighborhoods and stressed the need to keep the Campbell feel.
Christa Reichmuth, Campbell Resident, supports smart growth and a balanced approach with keeping family spaces and clean and open site line views.
Austin G., Campbell Resident, spoke of the need to plan for smart growth and for the need to mandate mixed-use in some of th e areas around the City, and noted that building height isn’t of so much concern around light rail stations.
Mayor Resnikoff closed the public comment.
Council recessed at 8:28 p.m. and reconvened at 8:41 p.m. with one member absent.
Director Eastwood clarified that some sites included in the EIR are most suited to townhome production at 20 units/acre and th at the EIR process will include projections of future utility us age noting that most of the projects developed in today’s cl imate include plans to mitigate water us age for landscaping .
Community Development is advising Uplift Family Services to wait for th is EIR process to be completed to move forward with their sell and development, to limit any duplicative efforts on the environmental impact analyses.
Minutes of January 25, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 5
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - CONTINUED
Councilmember Gibbons noted that mixe d-use can include office/retail/commercial uses and can be included on the first and second floor of a development project. Councilmember Gibbons expressed a desire for transitional building heights and for open spaces along the Winchester corridor, and for including the First Street Parking Garage and Corporation Y ard for EIR analysis but noted the extensive challenges with both locations. Councilmember Gibbons could support the Technology Par k if it included a nearby pedestrian bridge. Councilmemb er Gibbons requested Tier 2 sites around the Downtown Campbell light rail station to be included in the EIR analysis as it is a n ideal location which just needs some creative development projects. Councilmember Gibbons requested large single-family parcels on Rincon Avenue to be included, supports higher densities on the corner of Bascom and Hamilton but lowe r densities on the east side of Bascom to be respect ful of t he historic nearby neighborhoods, supports higher density at the culinary school site, and su pports inclusion of the entire San Tomas Plaza site. Councilmember Gibbons expressed concern that the Southwest are a of Campbell is a food desert and is supportive of mixed-use at the Milk Dairy Farm site and for encouraging open space in this area of the City.
Councilmember Lopez noted that he is not supportive of removing sites f rom the EIR process at this stage , noting the increased penalties of not meet ing the RHNA numbers, the most significant being loss of local control. Councilmember Lopez is suppor tive of adding the sites identified by Councilmember Gib bons.
Councilmember Lopez noted that he would like to see a point system developed for identifying the best sites for mixed -use projects and is supportive of adding the Planning Commissions recommendation to provide mixed-use opportunities along the commercial corridors, adding incentives or even mandating for some higher density projects.
Councilwoman Landry di splayed a chart depicting the various ways a development project could exceed the City’s 75 ft. bui lding height limit and expressed co ncerns that this may happen more than C ouncil intends it to with higher density projects. Counc ilwoman Landry stated that she di d not want to include more than 4,000 units in the EIR process for analysis. Councilwo man Landry is not supportive of including the Corporation Y ard or the Firs t Street Parking Garage in the E IR process as these sites could prov e very costly to move and could be legally challenging to do so. Councilwoman Landry is supportive of including the Technology Park but notes the access road challenges with the site. Councilwoman Landry noted her suppor t for inclu ding the sites noted by Council member Gibbons. Councilwoman Landry noted her support for investigating establishment of impact fees to support the needed City services with the increase in population.
Mayor Resnikoff stated that he is not supporti ve of all the sites identified thus far but would like t hem all included in the EIR process to continue to identify those sites mo st feasible for inc lusion in the final Housing Element. Mayor Resnikoff stressed hi s con cern about losing services that are going to be needed by residents, such as auto r epair shops, and would like to keep these sites as they
Minutes of January 25, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 6 are if possible. Mayor Resnikoff noted his conce rns relating to mandating mixed- use for some developments, stating that some sites it could be best suited for it, however mandating it in the Pruneyard where other retail is already located could be problematic . He would like to see more infor mation r elating to bui lding heights, tools to limit the height, and specific a reas where going tall er may be more acceptable.
Councilmember Gibbons supported Mayor Resnikoff ’s request for more information r elating to bui lding heights and tools to limit the building heights.
Councilmember Gibbons requested the Finance Director issue a one -page informational memorandum on the property tax implications of this Housi ng Element process.
Director Eastwood summarized Council consensus as including all Tier 1 sites , adding in the late property owner request ed sites, evaluating higher density on Bascom and Hamilton, adding in the Tier 2 sites near the Downtown Campbell light rail station, adding in larger parc els on Rincon Avenue, including the entire San Tomas Plaza site, including the C orporation Yard, First Street Parking Garage, and the Technology Park, and removing the auto repair shop sites along Winchester from the EIR process.
ADJOURN
Mayor Resnikoff adjourned the meeting at 10:02 p.m.
APPROVED:
________________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk