Loading...
PC 07-12-1993 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA. 95014 (408) 252 -4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JULY 12, 1993 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Chairwoman Austin Vice Chairperson Mahoney Commissioner Bautista Commissioner Roberts Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Doyle Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Thomas Robillard, Planner II Michele Ejurman, Planner II APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: Com. Bautista moved to approve the minutes of June 28, 1993, as presented. SECOND: Chr. Austin VOTE: Passed 2 -2-1 ABSTAIN: Mahoney, Roberts ABSENT: Doyle POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: - None CONSENT CALENDAR: - None Planning Director Cowan requested that item #2 on the agenda be heard first. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Application No. 81,004.8 and 4 -EA -93 (RHS) Residential Hillside Ordinance Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Citywide PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 12, 1992 Page _2 An Ordinance of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 19.09, Residential Hillside Zones (RHS), and Title 18 (Subdivisions) of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Staff Presentation: Planner Robillard presented the staff report. He noted this discussion was not advertised for a public hearing at this time and staff's request is for the Planning Commission to study the issues and make changes or additions if necessary. He stated the main goal of the Ordinance is to have prescriptive rules so applications can be approved by staff. He noted, after public input, exceptions can be approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission. Planner Robillard outlined the proposed criteria to be used to make findings for approval of an exception. In response to Commissioners concerns regarding the 30 percent rule, Planner Robillard stated the intent of this rule is to prohibit the building of a structure on a slope 30% or greater, and encourage developers to build on the flat areas. Regarding Clustering, Planner Robillard outlined the three scenarios which may be used for hillside subdivisions. Mr. Robillard stated staff considers the existing standards for geological hazards to be sufficient. He stated the Planning Commission may wish to adopt stricter rules. Planner Robillard presented a map outlining the existing prominent ridgelines and also areas which should be added to the map. He also presented photos showing the ridgelines within the City limits. Planner Robillard stated one problem is the visibility of houses on ridgelines. He noted it is almost impossible to build houses on lots close to the ridgelines without causing disruption to the ridgeline. He suggested one solution is to create a site line not to exceed a 15 percent slope from the ridge. Location, Mass and Height of structures was briefly discussed. Planner Robillard showed examples demonstrating potential design guidelines for reducing mass. He also reviewed building height as outlined in the staff report. Chr. Austin requested information on the maximum house sizes for hillsides in surrounding cities. Mr. Robillard stated development standards will be provided which limit the height and visual impact. He added, regarding grading, staff will develop a maximum grading amount. Com. Roberts addressed the vantage points as seen from the County parks. Planner Robillard stated consideration was given to these vantage points, but the main intent of policy 2 -47 is to identify prominent ridges viewed from the valley floor. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 12, 1992 Page 3 Planning Director Cowan stated the Planning Commission will establish critical vantage points. In response to Com. Mahoney's concerns regarding architectural review, Mr. Cowan stated the main goal of the ordinance is to be as prescriptive as possible. He noted the Council is not interested in the public review process except for lots with a grade of 30% or more, or substandard lots. Com. Mahoney expressed concern about loop holes in the Ordinance if it is made too prescriptive. Planner Robillard pointed out that if a particular application is denied by staff the applicant can apply for a variance. Chr. Austin questioned the rural improvement standards? Planner Robillard stated this refers to grading and street standards in the hillsides. Com. Bautista asked staff to provide some disadvantages and advantages of the clustering options, regarding open space in private hands vs. open space in public hands. He suggested looking at the guidelines from other cities and adopting some of these into this ordinance. He requested clarification on high intensity lighting. In response to Com. Mahoney's questions regarding clustering, Ms. Wordell stated as discussed previously, open space should be as contiguous as much as possible. She noted they will be looking for direction from the Planning Commission from the example clustering options. Com. Mahoney requested clarification on policy 2 -55. He stated the strategy does not follow the policy. Ms. Wordell stated this will be clarified. Chr. Austin open the meeting for public input. Ms. Kendel Blau, 23005 Standing Oak. Ct., addressed the landscaping near sensitive areas and asked for clarification regarding setbacks. Ms. Wordell stated setbacks have not been developed at this time. Ms. Blau spoke in favor of policy 5-15 emphasizing drought tolerant native plans and ground covers. Com. Mahoney addressed the consolidation of lots. Ms. Wordell stated as of June 2, 1993, if a property owner has an PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 12, 1992 Page 4 adjoining vacant lot in common ownership which is sub - standard, this would be rendered unbuildable. She noted all property owners involved will be notified about the new General Plan policies. This discussion was continued to July 26, 1993, to a public hearing. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application No(s) 2 -TM -93 Applicant: Harry Lozano Property Owner: Same Location: Tula Lane between Sola Street and Tula Court TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide into two parcels of 8,915 and 9,082 sq. ft. respectively. Staff Presentation: Planner Bjurman presented the staff report and outlined the property on a site plan map. She stated the request is to subdivide an approximate 1/2 gross acre parcel into two lots of approximately 9,000 sq. ft. net each. She stated the parcel is currently single family residential with a minimum lot size of 7,500 sq. ft. She noted the project is consistent with the zoning and the General Plan density. Ms Bjurman outlined the proposed subdivision lay out. She reviewed the housing mitigation fee adopted with the General Plan and noted this property would need to participate in the BMR program. She noted the 2% in -lieu fee has not been established at this time. Planning Director Cowan stated the 2% translates into approximately $1 per sq. ft. for new construction or remodeling that involves more than 500 sq. ft. addition. Ms. Bjurman added there is a condition requiring participation in the BMR program. Regarding the flag stem location, Ms. Bjurman stated the adjoining properties to the north and south are also flag lots and either side for the flag stem is appropriate. She noted a condition requires the flag lot to be expanded to 12 ft. to create a 30 ft. access drive. Planner Bjurman outlined the trees on the property and noted the oak tree is given special protection by the City Tree Ordinance. In response to Com. Mahoney's question regarding flag lots, Ms. Bjurman noted there were no policies created to discourage flag lots during the General Plan review. In response to Com. Bautista's question, Planner Bjurman stated condition 11 addresses a joint ingress /egress easement. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 12, 1992 Page 5 Com. Bautista stated the objective would be for the two properties to share the driveway and this permit should ensure this. Planning Director stated if the contiguous property owner is not conditioned to require reciprocal access for future development this could cause problems. He added condition 11 is a standard condition applies to all flag lots. Com. Bautista stated staff should know what side the flag stem will be on before making a decision. Planner Bjurman stated the flag lot to the north of the proposed flag lot does not have a condition of approval requiring joint access nor does the parcel subdividing to the south. Chr. Austin opened the public hearing. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Mory Nelson, Civil Engineer, representing Mr. Lozano, noted Mr. Lozano has discussed this matter with the adjoining property owner to the north and decided it would be in everyone's best interest to grant reciprocal ingress /egress. He noted, should this not happen, the driveway can be widened from 12 ft. to 15 ft. He noted he did review the other conditions and they are acceptable. He urged approval at this time. Planning Director Cowan stated they will modify condition 11 to include that the easement will be recorded prior to recordation of the map for this development and if the easement could not be obtained, the flag corridor will be increased from 12 ft. to 15 ft. Mr. Henry Lozano, 85340 Hollenbeck, Sunnyvale, stated he has owned the property for many years. He noted he did discuss the reciprocal access with the owner of the adjacent property who indicated they would be willing to have the joint ingress /egress agreement. Chr. Austin closed the public hearing. In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Mr. Cowan stated condition 16 is adequate at this time. MOTION: Com. Mahoney moved to approve 2 -TM -93 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing with the following modifications: Cond. 11, if no reciprocal access can be achieved, the driveway should be widened to 15 ft.; Cond. 13, should read "tree" singular. SECOND: Com. Roberts VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 ABSENT: Com. Doyle 3. Discussion of meeting schedule for the month of August. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 12, 1992 Page 6 City Planner Wordell stated staff need to know who will be attending the meetings in August and if any meetings should be canceled. The Commissioners agreed to continue the Hillside Ordinance Hearing from July 26, 1993 to August 23, 1993. No meetings will be canceled in August. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: - None REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: - None DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: Com. Bautista questioned the lawsuit regarding the Highway 85 extension. Mr. Cowan stated the issue is regarding the majority vote, but he does not know the outcome of the Appellate Court decision. ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 8:20 P.M. to the next Regular Meeting of July 26, 1993 at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Catherine M. Robillard, Recording Secretary Approved by the Planning Commission at the Regular Meeting of July 26, 1993 Donna Austin, Chairwoman Attest: • City Clerk