After a lengthy debate at its Dec. 2 meeting, the Sunnyvale City Council rejected an appeal from homeowners in the Sunset Oaks community and allow proposed townhouse construction on Crescent Avenue to break ground. However, the concerns raised by homeowners in attendance spurred the council to send the plans back to the drawing board for a few tweaks.

The homeowners were appealing an Oct. 13 planning commission approval of plans by Classic Communities of Palo Alto to build 17 townhouses on a 1.17-acre lot. Members of the Sunset Oaks Homeowners Association touted the development's higher density and architectural elements as proof that the proposed development would not fit in with the neighborhood.

"Our key issue is the density of the units," said Joe Rainwater, the homeowner named in the appeal, which said that the townhouse plan incorporates a density of 14.5 units per acre versus 10 units per acre in Sunset Oaks.

The appeal also outlined insufficient distances (less than 20 feet) between Sunset Oaks residences and the property line. "In many cases, this distance is as close as I am to you," added Rainwater, gesturing to the city council members, asking them to imagine bulldozers and other construction nuisances at such close proximity.

Numerous homeowners spoke out, pointing out other flaws in the proposed townhouses they say alienates the plan from the style of Sunset Oaks. Harriet Rowe held up a picture of the Southwestern-style architecture in another Classic Communities development in Sunnyvale, saying it meshes better with the design of Sunset Oaks than the proposed California Craftsman style.

Others lamented that the unadorned rear views of the houses would not make for good scenery, construction would be disruptive and the one-car garages of the townhouses would create parking problems.

In response, Scott Ward of Classic Communities said that all plans were consistent with specifications set forward in the R2 zoning designation. He said that building coverage on the proposed development is 30 percent versus 40 percent in the code, that setbacks are 21 feet versus 20 feet and that 2.9 parking spaces are available per unit, compared to the recommended 2.1. He added that Classic met with residents eight times to negotiate the plan for the lot.

In addition, he warned the council against heeding the advice of the Sunset Oaks residents, saying they could set a dangerous precedent. "When does an ad hoc neighborhood group become a de facto planning commission?" he said.

Members of the city council were initially divided over the proposal. Julia Miller indicated that she had recently toured the area and shared the residents' concerns, and Fred Fowler asked about "dressing up the backs of the buildings" and placement of guest parking. When assured that homeowners would have a contact for complaints and receive notice for Saturday work, Ron Swegles indicated he'd "rather finish more quickly" than send the plan back to the planning commission and cause further delays.

This mindset pervaded the voting as Melinda Hamilton's motion to grant the appeal was defeated 5-2, with Hamilton and Otto Lee voting yes. A subsequent motion to deny the appeal passed unanimously, with the amendments that Classic Communities reduce the number of units to 16 and work with the homeowners association on a number of issues, including adjusting the architectural details and making the backs of the townhouses more aesthetically pleasing.

"This is a real tough one," Fowler said, "but this is something we can do here tonight."

Sunset Oaks homeowners said they felt the debate was very thorough, but were disappointed with the results. "Almost everyone on the council seemed sympathetic to our main issue. It was big of Otto Lee and Melinda Hamilton to step forward and stand up to the staff, but we just got bulldozed," Rainwater said.

Rich Robertson agreed and echoed the group's main complaint: They received notification of the Oct. 13 meeting less than a week ahead of time. This didn't give the homeowners association enough time to review the plans, which changed from 13 single-family homes to the approved proposal. A petition with 240 signatures did not procure the wanted delay. "We're looking at the city council as an oversight committee," Robertson said. "Yes, the plan follows the rules, but it doesn't make sense."