Loading...
PC 03-09-92 � _ i. .t' .' CITY OF CIIPERTINO, BTATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino., CA. 95014 (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON MARCIi 9, 1992 SALUTI; TO THE F'I;AG: ROLL CALL: • Commissioners Present: Chairman Fazekas Vice Chairperson Mann Commissioner Mackenzie Commissioner Mahoney Commissioner Austin Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Colin Jung, Associate Planner Michele Bjurman, Planner II Colin Jung, Associate Planner Bert Viskovich, Director of Public Works _ Cheryl Kershner, Deputy City Attorney " APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: Com. Austin moved to approve the minutes of February 19, 1992, as presented. SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 5-0 Com. Austin corrected the minutes of February 24, 1992 as follows: Page 3, Vote should be 4-1 with Com. Austin voting No. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve the minutes of February � 24, 1992, as amended. SECOND: Com. Mann � VOTE: P�ssed 5-0 WRITTEN COMMIINICATIONB: Cheryl Kershner, Deputy City Attorney Rhoda Fry Westf ield Inc . Nelson Blackman Harold Silva Joan Auckman George & Floren Lee Mark Acker PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 2 POSTPONEMENTS OR NE'Tq AGENDA ITEMB: Item 4: Application 1-U-92 - Jack In The Box: Continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of March 23, 1992. ORAL COMMONICATIONB: � Com. Mann noted that she serves on two Committees and would like to resign from the Environmental Review Committee. Mr. Cowan noted this will be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Apt�lication 3-TM-89 - Tunq Pina Chanq: Applicant is requesting an extension of a tentative map for one year. 2. Application 4-U-86 (Amended) - Prometheus Development Co., Inc.: Applicant is requesting a one year extension of the Use Permit for the hotel at Cupertino City Center. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve the Consent Calendar.� SECOND: Com. Austin VOTE: Passed 5-0 PUBLIC HEARINGB: 3. APPLICATION 3-GPA-90 - CITY OF CUPERTINO: ADJOURNED PUBLIC HEARING to continue discussion of the General Plan recommendations. Subject: Land Use, including Monta Vista, Hillsides, Housing, Transportation, Public Services and Utilities. Suggested time period: 6:45 p.m. - 9:30 p.m. Staff Presentation: Planning Director Cowan noted the Affordable Housing Committee was asked by the major employers to delay action on recommendations at this time. The Affordable Housing Committee will continue their deliberations until March 20, 1992. Mr. Cowan discussed the main points of the General Hillside Protection Policy. He discussed the Council's alternative. Mr. Cowan presented charts and maps explaining this. He discussed the boundary of the City. He stated, regarding the growth line, the City adopted an urban service line in 1972/73 which outlines how the City will grow. He outlined this on a map and pointed out that this line has remained stagnant. In addition to the 5 year growth line, there is the sphere of influence which is a 25 year growth line. The area between the two lines is the Transition area. Mr. Cowan stated the City did adopt the County Plan by reference. Staff suggest the City implement this and any changes may be addressed at that time. Mr. Cowan went over the Council's alternatives PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 3 regarding slope density. He noted both the Council and the Planning Commission want to establish stricter guidelines for the hillsides. Mr. Cowan outlined the Commissioners goals regarding the seminary property. In response �o Com. Mahoney's question regarding limitinq the urban service area, Mr. Cowan stated if the City has a desire to limit growth, then they should limit growth to the five year line. Mr. Cowan reiterated the tentative goals made by the Planning Commission. He presented and explained a"Reallocation Scheme of the Planning Commission". He noted the chart is based on LOS D. He noted the main idea of the Chart is to look at commercial/retail growth and additional housing units needed. Mr. Cowan explained the allocation and noted that Westfield is requesting an additional 260,000 s.f. He noted the Commissioners have not received a report on the fiscal analysis as staff is working on this. He stated to maintain LOS D on the street system, the City should work within the chart to maintain a balance. Mr. Cowan went on to explain the tier approach for transportation. He noted the Commission may need to have a workshop on this issue to understand the implications of allowing growth beyond the existing General Plan levels if on-site housing is provided. Staff suggest that the standard TDM program, that is mentioned in the County's Congestion Management Program, be locked in. Mr. Cowan outlined the focal points as outlined in the staff report: - Maximum height of buildings in Town Center. - Encourage integration of Vallco Park with surrounding community by planning for pedestrian activity. - Heart of the City alternatives - Monta Vista. Mr. Cowan discussed housing, noting the Affordable Housing Committee have not made a recommendation at this time. He presented a chart outlining: jobs/housing ratio; Density/mixed-use; development standards; providing affordable housing through rental units; housing mitigation of new non-residential and residential development; investigate financing strategies; develop a community education and advocacy program. Mr. Cowan reiterated the goals with regards to the following: Central Fire Protection District Cupertino Sanitary District Solid Waste Santa Clara Valley Water District Cupertino Union School District Fremont Union School District Library Services PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 4 Chr. Fazekas opened the public hearing. Ms. Sue Mirch-Kerchman, 20568 Blossom Ln., OAKS, expressed concern regarding the housing needs for Cupertino. She noted the market rate and above rate homes developed will have an impact on the affordable �ousing to be provided. She noted in order to meet ABAG's requirement, 1.62 affordable units need to be built for every market rate unit built. She suggested alternatives to hillside development to meet the affordable housing needs, such as rezoning certain areas of the City which could accommodate low income housing. She urged the Planning Commission to consider the impact of developing market rate and above un.its on affordable housing needs. Ms. Nadine Grant, 10463 Heney Creek P1, OAKS, addressed the impact on Cupertino Schools. She stated the safety and traffic impact on the children should be considered. She noted the impact of development on the schools needs to be addressed.. Ms. Kindel B1au, 23005 StandingUp Ct., OAKS, stated the City needs a clear policy statement regarding hillside development which would allow the staff and public to work through the issue. She noted_ OAKS do endorse the Council's position regarding development of hillsides. Ms. Diane Moreno Ikeda, FAIR, noted FAIR continues to strongly support fair treatment of the seminary property. She spoke in support of the Planning Commission's original proposal. She stated the proposal will provide both open space and the needed housing. Mr. Jack Birkholz, 21381 Milford Dr. , stated he is pleased with the development in the City. He noted there are two conflicting goals. One is the need for more housing and the other is for open space. He spoke in support of the Planning Commission's proposal noting this addresses both objectives. He stated the Council's plan will serve the wealthy of the community, but does not meet the housing needs. He urged the Planning Commission to stand by their original proposal. Mr. Cowan stated the Council's plan allows a minimum lot size of one half acre lots and clustered homes. They want 90 percent of the land left undeveloped. Ms. Margaret King, 10521 San Felipe Rd., stated that the City should remain with the 25 year sphere of influence plan that fits in with the County plan. Mr. David Bauer, 21597 Flintshire St., noted that preserving open space improves the quality of life; developing open space degrades the quality of life. He noted open space is not patches here and there. He stated more development will have an impact on the water PLANNING COMMISSION MINIITEB Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 5 table. Mr. Bauer suggested the City form a task force to work with the Diocese, County, OAKS etc. to get the necessary funding for the . acquisition of the property. Ms. Rhoda Fry, 10351 San Fernando Ave., stated the prohibition of� flag lots in Monta Vista should not be discussed as residents were not notified. Also this prohibition would result in unattractive and unusable homes. She stated homes would be closer together destroying the character of Monta Vista. She feels the prohibition of flag lots will leave the city wlnerable to expensive and needless litigation. She urged the Commission to remove this item from the agenda and any other future agendas. Mr. Melvin Caldwell, 10300 E. Estates Dr., read an excerpt regarding constitutional studies on property rights. He expressed concern regarding affordable housing. He stated tT�e School District is tearing down schools when there is a need for more housing and schools. Mr. Richard Schumacher, 11331 Bubb Rd., stated the Planning Commission has taken a position and he encouraged the Commission to stay with this. - Ms. Jan Miller, 871 Partridge, Menlo Park, stated the kinds of homes that will be developed in the hillsides will be very expensive. She urged the Commission to allow time for the acquisition of the property. Mr. Robert Schick, 1046 Cuesta Drive, Mountain View, spoke in support of the possibility of acquisition of the seminary property and urged the Commission to allow time for this. Ms. Pat Cala, 742 Ashby Dr., Palo Alto, stated the Church should receive fair treatment and expressed concern about property rights. , Ms. Ann Anger, 10185 Empire Ave., spoke in support of developing 290 homes on the seminary property, noting 100 acres of open. space will. be provided. She expressed concern regarding the � discussion on Monta Vista and urged the Planning Commission to leave it as is. Mr. John Endicott, Westfield Inc., presented a site plan of Vallco Fashion Park and the areas for future development. He stated the site has more buildable potential than allowed. He requested an additional 300,000 s.f. of development rights. He noted the Fashion Park is in a good location and additional development rights should be considered. He stated they are moving ahead with the Cinema. . In response to Com. Mahoney's concerns, Mr. Cowan explained the development rights of Vallco Fashion Park. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 6 Mr. Paul Ilgenfritz, 10268 Danube Dr. stated the City should allow the absolute minimum industrial growth to help the jobs/housing , imbalance. He stated the City needs housing that the workers in Cupertino can afford. He spoke in favor of retail in the Town Center and a pedestrian walkway. Mr. Dick Rosemeier, 10192 Parish P1. stated the Commission needs to look at the economic impacts. He stated there is an additional need for development in certain parts of the City. He stated if there are no Development Agreements the City will not get the housing and traffic mitigation they want. Mr. Bob Shelby, 23300 Via Esplendor, expressed concern about development in hillsides. He stated open space can not be in pieces there must be continuity. He expressed concern regarding traffic congestion if development occurs. Ms. Kathy Nellis, 22322 Regnart Rd., stated that commercial development should be given a priority as they provide services to city residents. She noted she has heard no discussion on light rail, but feels the corridor at Kaiser should be preserved. Regarding housing, she feels the bedroom communities surrounding_ Cupertino should be included in the Study and also development in the sphere of influence. She spoke against eight story buildings along De Anza and Stevens Creek Blvds, she feels high rise should be concentrated at the Vallco area only. She stated the residents want a pedestrian oriented area. Regarding hillsides, Ms. Nellis noted that two basic approaches are being discussed, those being: 1) traditional large lot development and 2) focus the development in certain areas and cluster . She feels both of these are possible within the community. She spoke in favor of the 25 year time line. She noted public open space is more beneficial to the citizens. Regarding landscape screening, Ms. Nellis stated colors and height should be restricted. She stated lighting is not needed in rural areas. She stated open fencing should be used as opposed to solid board fencing. _ Com. Mann thanked Ms. Nellis for her expertise and input. Mr. John Hailey, Tandem Computers, stated each City has a responsibility to look at logical development patterns that attempt to address problems of the past. He feels to avoid urban sprawl, development� needs to occur along the transportation lines. Regarding height limitations, Mr. Hailey stated this will effect density and mixed-use. He requested that the Commission approach this issue, specifically in the Vallco area, with caution. Mr. Peter Prinzivalli, 1840 Schooldale Dr., San Jose, stated when the people have the choice they will live in the hillsides away from the pollution and congestion. He stated the foothills should PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE3 Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 7 be preserved for those who are forced to live in the City. Cheryl Kershner, Deputy City Attorney, stated that any person who provides models or plans they are conceptual only. If the Commission makes a decision on the information the plans�or models provide this is not binding on the City as it is only conceptual. Com. Mann left the room. Mr. John Sobrato, Sobrato Development, addressed the County definition of hillside property. He stated the Diocese Land is inappropriately included in the consideration for a five acre minimum designation. He noted this property has been in the City since 1985 and has existing city services. Mr. Sobrato stated that 83 percent of the property is less than the 30 percent slope. Mr. Sobrato presented a model outlining the slope densities. He stated the five acre minimum is unreasonable and is out of context with the neighboring development. The plan presented to the City Council had approximately 300 detached lots and 180 townhomes/apts. Mr. Sobrato presented two alternative site plans. � Mr. Sobrato stated he did discuss the possible acquisition of the_ property with Supervisor McKenna, and she indicated she would not support the acquisition of this property, therefore the Diocese would like to continue the plans through the zoning process on the 32 acre parcel. He stated after measuring tree covers, etc. over the riparian corridor they suggest a 100 ft. setback from a lot line. Regarding the house size, Mr. Sobrato suggested the 45 percent FAR be applied. He noted they are concerned about security with regards to making the open space accessible to the public and this needs to be addressed. He requested that a marketing consultant meet with the City Consultant before making any recommendations. Com. Mann returned to the hearing. Regarding the Apple/Sobrato development, Mr. Sobrato stated the 300,000 s.f.. of additional growth is not the critical mass needed for the companies to provide housing and to implement TDM programs . Mr. Dick Carey, 10031 Barbara Ln. CURB, noted that CURB broke into individual groups and each will focus on a certain issue. He stated the Planning Commission should consider catching up on the housing with regards to the jobs created over the iast 10 to 20 years. Mr. Joe Hauser, CURB, addressed traffic problems, noting it is a regional problem. He stated the volume of people equal the volume of traffic. He stated traffic mitigation and public transportation need to be addressed. He outlined what Cupertino can do to mitigate traffic. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 8 Mr. Don Burnett, CURB, presented drawings outlining the Grand Blvd. concept. He noted the essential factor is the planting strips and to create pedestrian walkways. Mr. Burnett showed an alternative Grand Blvd. concept called the Urban Parkway. He stated that CURB is in favor of this. In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Mr. Burnett stated whether people walk or not depends on if there is something to walk to. In the parkway concept there are places to walk. Ms. Nancy Burnett, CURB, stated they represent people's needs and have come to expect a certain quality of life and don't want to lose it. She stated more development results in the need for more housing. She expressed concern about two areas of development within the City noting that any growth will cause more traffic congestion. She stated height limitations need to be considered and eight story buildings by the freeway and Vallco is a good idea. She noted Vallco Park has been divided into Vallco and Tandem and this needs to be considered. She stated the Commissioners need to address the protection of neighborhoods. . Mr. Phil Zeitman, CURB, stated the recommendations are in line with CURB's positions. He addressed the tier system and noted a strong policy is needed to implement these technigues. A cap on total development must be put in place. He stated a strongly worded hillside policy must be enacted and should include all the areas on the West side of town. He stated the proposals should be sent to the Council for their consideration. The meeting readjourned after a brief recess. Com. Mackenzie requested that staff look at how many potential housing units there are with regards to the acreage available. Com. Mahoney requested staff explain where the square footage allocation for office/industrial is. Com. Austin expressed concern regarding the financial impact with regards to the number of housing proposed. She requested a report on this. Mr. Cowan stated the tier approach will be discussed in a workshop. This meeting was continued to March 11, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 9 4. Application No(s): 1-Z-92, 1-TM-92 and 2-EA-92 Applicant: Lois Gaviglio Property Owner: Same Project Location: Cupertino Rd/Stevens Creek Blvd. REZONING of 1.67 acres from R1-10 to R1-7.5 � TENTATIVE MAP for 4 lots on .97 ac. ranging from 7550 sq. ft. to 13,200 sq. ft. Staff Presentation: Associate Planner Jung presented the staff report. He noted the proposal is to subdivide one parcel into four lots ranging from 7500 s.f. to 13,300 s.f. He noted the surrounding zoning uses, as outlined in the staff report. He stated the rezoning and subdivision is consistent with the General Plan residential density. He noted staff find the project inconsistent with the General Plan based on General Plan policy No 26-B: Compatibility of Lot Sizes. Staff recommend denial of zoning on the established plan. Staff also suggest a continuance on the Tentative Map to allow the applicant to work with staff to work out concerns. In response to Com. Mann's question, Mr. Jung stated the 7500 s.f._ will be net. Com. Mann noted the EIR was not signed by the Chairperson. She asked about the specimen trees identified in the report. Mr. Jung stated most of the trees are along the perimeter. The applicant could not determine exactly how many trees will be lost with the development of homes. In response to Com. Mann's concerns, Deputy City Attorney Kershner stated that what has not been signed is the evaluation which has to be completed by the City staff and has been signed by•staff. In response to Commissioner's questions, Mr. Jung stated there are i eight lots at this time. He noted under the present zoning six can be considered buildable lots. He noted lots under 5,000 s.f. can be combined with the larger lots. He stated the subdivision ' boundaries follow the property lines. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Marv Kirkeby, Project Engineer, stated there are actually 9 lots. He noted the proposal is within the density of the General Plan and not out of character for the neighborhood. He stated the rezoning will enable the property owner to split the four lots on Cupertino Rd. He stated they are not increasing density. � The Commissioners discussed the zoning in the area. Com. Mann stated when walking around the area most of the lots are larger lots. PLANNING COMMI38ION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 10 Com. Mackenzie asked, if built as proposed, can the City require lots 1 and 2 to take access to the driveway garages of the f lag lots as opposed to Stevens Creek Blvd? Mr. Jung stated there could be a deed restriction prohibiting curb cuts along the property frontage. He noted lot #1 is irregularly shaped and there is an existing public easement putting a restriction on the buildable area of the lot. Chr. Fazekas expressed concern regarding the drop off on Stevens Creek and the common driveway. Mr. Kirkeby stated there will be some fill in the front yard and the houses will step down in the rear. He stated the street is now wider than the official plan. Chr. Fazekas opened the public hearing. Com. Mahoney noted it should be six lots with access from Cupe�tino Rd. Chr. Fazekas concurred. , _ Com. Austin spoke in support of staff recommendation. Com. Mackenzie expressed concern regarding lot 1 and would not support the application. Com. Mann stated zoning it 7500 s. f. is not in keeping with the area and would not support it at this time. Com. Mackenzie suggested giving the applicant time to work with staff and come back before the Commission. • Mr. Kirkeby stated if they can not zone it 7500 s.f., they do not need a subdivision act, and can develop four lots with access off Cupertino Rd. or Stevens Creek Blvd. Mr. Cowan stated the City does not have to approve the easement access for two lots to go out to Stevens Creek Blvd., this is a map act. � MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend a Negative Declaration. SECOND: Com. Mahoney • VOTE: Passed 5-0 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend denial 1-Z-92 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing with the following additional finding: it is incompatible with R1-10 in the surrounding neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 . Page 11 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to continue 1-TM-92 to the meeting of April 13, 1992. SECOND: Com. Mann VOTE: Passed 5-0 5. Application No(s): 2-U-92 Applicant: CoitCom. Inc. � Property Owner: Cupertino City Center Associates Project Location: 20400 Stevens Creek Blvd. USE PERMIT for installation of a 4 ft. roof antenna. Staff Presentation: Planner Bjurman presented the.staff report. She noted the proposal is to place a 4 ft. diameter wall mourited microwave antenna on the east facing wall plain of the penthouse on Apple building 3. She stated staff was concerned regarding visibility, but this has been resolved. There is a cooling tower enclosure which will obscure the view of the antenna. She stated staff is recommending approval with the condition that it is painted the same color as the building. Chr. Fazekas opened the public hearing. _ Applicant Presentation: Mr. Kert Mortenson stated he agrees with staff report. MOTION: Com. Austin moved to approve application 2-U-92 subject to the findings and subconclusions with the additional condition: The antenna will be painted the same color as the building. SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 5-0 6. Application No(s): 3-U-93 Applicant: Ron Lackey Property Owner: Same Project Location: 10021 South Blaney Ave. USE PERMIT for a 2, 370 s. f. flower and produce store in an existing shopping center. Staff Presentation: Planner Bjurman presented the staff report. She noted the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan designation. Ms. Bjurman reiterated the background information on this parcel as outlined in the staff report. She explained the specialty use and that staff is considering removing produce markets from this category. Staff is recommending approval. Com. Mackenzie expressed concern about the 1988 Use Permit and no time frame. He stated part of it was upgraded as planned, but phase II and III never occurred. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 12 Mr. Cowan stated the decision was not to have a phasing plan. He stated the Commission can add a time period for the phasing in order to implement the Use Permit. Com. Mackenzie stated there should be a time period for the phasing. � Applicant Presentation: Mr. Gary Schmidt stated at the time of the original Use Permit the biggest concern was upgrading Stevens Creek Blvd. He stated the improvements to Hamasushi could have been done without a Use Permit. He noted the landlords did the landscaping on Stevens Creek as a trade off to obtain a Use Permit for the building in the rear. He stated the existi�g Use Permit application is a change of tenant. He stated they are reconsidering the plans for the center. Com. Austin asked about signage. Mr. Schmidt stated they have exposed signage off Stevens Creek. He also noted that delivers would be through the front door, but as it is not a big operation deliveries will be few. MOTION: Com. Mahoney moved to recommend granting a Negative Declaration SECOND: Com. Austin VOTE: Passed 5-0 MOTION: Com. Mahoney moved to recommend approval of application 3-U-92 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing. SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 5-0 OLD BOSINESS: 7. Application No(s): 14-U-91 and 14-EA-91 Applicant: Nelson Chao Property Owner: Same Project Location: 10022 Peninsula Blvd. USE PERMIT to operate a financial services office and storage in an existing 2,864 s.f. building. Staff Presentation: City Planner Wordell presented the staff report. She noted the request is for office space and storage. She reiterated the recommendations as outlined in the staff report from the Planning Commission and the direction from the City Council. She stated the architecture is acceptable and the colors should be beige and tan, both will go back to ASAC for final review. Regarding the removal of the rear of the building, staff suggest that if there is the possibility of reciprocal access in PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 13 the future then this area can be required to be removed. She stated the walls are not load bearing and staff recommend wire mesh partitions. Com. Mackenzie stated there was a conditional of approval to remove all windows�and doors on the sides of the building. Ap�licant Presentation: Mr. Jim Jackson noted the removal of windows and doors is covered in Condition 11. He noted they are in agreement with most of the staff report, but feels that in Condition 10 (2) the applicant should pay for his own improvements as opposed to the entire former Peninsula Avenue.right-of-way. He noted the applicant's architect will address the removal of the load bearing walls. Mr. Cowan stated that Peninsula Ave. has to be improved by the applicant as outlined in Condition 10 (2). Regarding the removal � of the stairs, Mr. Jackson stated they will have no loft storage and will put a door to the loft which will be locked at all times, but would like to keep the stairs. He stated they would like to have the masonry wall condition deferred until such time when access becomes available. - Mr. Frank Olden, Architect, presented a drawing of the proposed plan for the building. He noted the partitions proposed make the storage areas to small to use as offices and the carpet has been removed. There will only be one light and one switch. He stated after talking to the Fire Marshall, sheetrock is preferred for the interior walls. He noted the walls are bearing walls and if removed will require beams to be put it. He requested 3 ft. of plywood to be place around any equipment in the loft area. Regarding the handicap space, it must be bigger, but does not have to be marked. Mr. Olden stated the Fire Marshall requested that the stairs remain for safety reasons. � In response to Com. Austin's question, Mr. Olden stated garbage will be kept inside. Mr. Olden noted a 600 s.f. office is not big enough for one person. ' Chr. Fazekas questioned the parking. Mr. Cowan stated there are four parking spaces, 2 for employees, 1 guest and 1 for storage. Regarding the improvements on Peninsula Ave., Mr. Olden stated the land was given back to property owners when the street was abandoned and each property owner should do their own improvements. He stated this originally came about when Mr. Chao stated he would do the improvements if he could obtain access in the rear, which he has not obtained. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 14 Dr. Joe Brown, Animal Hospital, stated the City has maintained the street and the street never belonged to the property owners. As far as the improvements, the City has done minor improvements and Dr. Brown requested that Mr. Chao repair the hole in the street and the street would be back to what it was when the City maintained it. • Com. Mahoney questioned the ingress/egress. Mr. Cowan stated the City wants to ensure the street will be maintained. He stated Mr. Chao has granted ingress/egress to the other parties, but they have not done the same to him, which they are required to do as a condition of their Use Permit. Mr. Cowan stated the street has to be improved to a private parking standard. Com. Austin stated the partitions should be removed, the windows and doors on the sides should be removed. Remove the rear of the building and the sound wall should be put in place. She stated the applicant should not do the improvements until the ingress/egress issue is resolved. Com. Mann spoke in favor of the of f ices requested by the appl icant . Chr. Fazekas concurred. Com. Mackenzie expressed concern regarding the parking ratio if bigger offices are allowed. MOTION: Com. Mahoney moved to approve application 14-U-91 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing with the following modifieations: original offices, per staff's drawings; rear storage area partitioned with wire mesh or similar material or no more than 6 ft. wide sheet rock storage areas; rear addition maintained until the access is granted; windows removed from the north building elevation. � SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 3-2 , NOES: Com. Austin, Com. Mann Com. Mann feels that some of the conditions passed are unreasonable. Com. Austin stated she prefers the original plan. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: - None REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: - None PLANNING COMMISSION MINIITES Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992 Page 15 DIBCIISSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: - None ADJOURNMENTs Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 12:00 a.m. to the next meeting of March 11, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, �,�SL, I.A • � o�,�� t�-.� c� Catherine M. Robillard, Recording Secretary Approved by the Planning Commission at the Regular Meeting of March 23, 1992 /s/ Daryl Fazekas Daryl Fazekas, Chairman Attest: /s/ Dorothy Cornelius Dorothy Cornelius, City Clerk 1 1 r