December 15, 2016

It was already past midnight on Tuesday, and the Sunnyvale City Council members were hoping to fast-track a development proposal on 1250 Lakeside Drive by Sunnyvale Partners, LTD., a joint venture between Boulder, Colo. -based Millennium Hotels and Resorts and Fairfield, Conn. -based Wittek Development, that is planning to add a mixed-use complex that includ es a six-story, 263-room hotel along with 250 apartment units along US 101 and in close proximity to the Lawrence Expressway. However, when it comes to any type of real estate development in the Bay Area, things are rarely ready for a fast process.

The lot today is a rare infill opportunity in Silicon Valley along one of its busiest corridors. It is vacant; a site where previously a 378-room Four Points Sheraton, demolished in 2006, once stood. The surrounding neighborhoods in all four directions have similar occupancy—offices and restaurant to the south, a Residence Inn to the east and high density residential (709-unit Avalon Silicon Valley apartments) to the west.

“The Planning Commission reviewed [the project] on November 14th. They recommended approval in a 7-0 vote,” said George Schroeder, project planner with the city of Sunnyvale who presented the project to the City Council. His overview provided details of the NBBJ-designed project and in summary added that the City Staff recommended to the Council to approve it and adopt a series of resolutions that would certify the environmental findings and allow the project to proceed.

Yet, the Council had some issues with the development. The first was raised by Council member Jim Griffith who questioned the nature of a privately-owned public park on the premises, which the developer is proposing next to the man-made lake on the property. “In terms of agreements with the property owner for maintenance and access and all that kind of stuff, this seems like something that is new to us,” inquired Griffith as he spoke to the city staff.

He also addressed the park dedication fee set up, which requires the developer to either pay the city a fee or hand over land. “The way [the] park dedication fee is set up, the housing developer is required to give us land, give us money or some combination of the two. In this proposal the owner is doing neither” Griffith added. The city’s staff explained the reasoning behind such an arrangement and concluded that there are legal ways around the language that requires the land or money contribution, as in this case.

And while the park will be listed in the city’s directory of parks for public use, Griffith and Council member Jim Davis did not think it will be practical for Sunnyvale citizens to use it, given where the park is located (behind the buildings), lack of public parking and general access to the property.

Kurt Wittek, of Wittek Development spoke on behalf of the development team. He stated that the hotel has over 22,000 square feet of function space, which was a mandate of the specific plan for this development area. In comparison with other hotels in the vicinity, this hotel will have a multitude of options for banquets and meeting-space needs. The developer anticipates the project will contribute approximately $3 million per year in taxes to the city coffers at stabilization.

In describing the housing development, Wittek explained that 220 of the 250 apartments will be below market-size for typical apartments of their type (studios, one-bedroom and two-bedroom). “We’re not claiming that they are below market [rate] units, or that they are meeting the definition of affordable [housing], but 88 percent of all the units in the building are smaller, and therefore on a relative basis more affordable than what is elsewhere available on the market,” said Wittek.

Council member Davis did concede that the location was appropriate for the intended use, and he did not object to the style of the apartment development. He expressed his concern about the aesthetic of the hotel structure, but mostly disliked the practicality of the privately-owned public park. “I really don’t like the park project. I think the city is not going to get as much out of that as if we had asked for the park dedication fees in full, and I don’t think it’s going to be utilized by a wide variety of the community,” he stated.

The Council approved the project 5-1, with Council member Davis dissenting. The meeting concluded at 2 in the morning.