Loading...
PC 06-26-00CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 DRAFT SUBMITTED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JUNE 26, 2000 SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Staff present: Doyle, Kwok, and Stevens Corr and Harris Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development; Ciddy Wordell, City Planner; Vera Gil, Planner II; Carmen Lynangh, Public Works; Eileen Murray, Assistant City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the May 22, 24, June 12, 2000 Planning Commission meetings MOTION: ~ Com. Doyle moved to approve the minutes of the May 22 and May 24, 2000 Planning Commission meetings as presented SECOND: Com. Kwok ABSENT: Corns. Corr and Harris VOTE: Passed 3-0-0 Approval of the June 12, 2000 Planning Commission minutes was postponed to the July 10, 2000 meeting. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None POSTPONEMENTS FROM CALENDAR: 'None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARING 2. Application No.: · Applicant: Location: 9-U-00 Wayne Gong 19442-19990 Homestead Road Use Permit to add 1,120 sq. ft. to existing shopping center and modify exterior of the buildings. Continued from June 12, 2000 Planning Commission meeting Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application for a Use Permit to add 1,120 square feet to an existing shopping center and modify the exterior of the building, as outlined in Planning Commission Minutes 2 June 26, 2000 the attached staff report. The applicant also plans to significantly upgrade the existing retail site including improved and increased landscaping, a building fafade redesign, new roofing and tenant signage. Staff is requesting that the garbage enclosure be upgraded from chain link fencing with wooden slats to stucco wails and a wood, metal or other material entry door. Planning Commission's decision on the item is considered final, unless appealed to the City Council. Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, referred to the site plan and reviewed the proposed changes and staff's recommended conditions of approval, including final landscaping, site lighting, color scheme, design of roof screen to be replaced, and design of gates between building next to the office building. She said staffwas also recommending different fencing in the garbage enclosure area, that the area of the property line next to the daycare have a solid wall vs. a change link fence, and that the slats in the chain link fence be repaired if broken. Staff recommends approval with the conditions of approval listed.. Mr. Wayne Gong, applicant, addressed the staff's conditions of approval. Relative to the garbage enclosure area, he said he was not opposed to a solid barrier and would prefer a masonry wall consistent with the adjacent building. For the front of the enclosure area, he recommended vinyl slats in the chain link fence, and agreed that they should be maintained. Relative to the 'trash bins, he noted that it would be the tenant's responsibility to roll the units to the curb, which would be stipulated in the lease agreement, so that the front loader trucks would not come in and damage the fencing material. He said that he added a landscape area to conceal the gate at the 131aney entrance; and proposed to close off the fence area by the Peacock Lounge as a safety factor. Relative to Condition 5, signage, he said he felt the proposed monument sign was consistent with the neighboring center, and as part of his goal to renovate the center for the benefit of the community; something different would not be appropriate for that location. He said he felt the signage criteria for internally lit signswas critical to the success of the project. Mr. Gong said he would work with the architectural staff and review committee to define the appropriate colors for the center. He pointed out that the center at the corner of Blaney and Homestead was painted last year to restore the same color, but toned down, and he would like the consistency maintained for the two centers to try to unify the same color scheme. Mr. Gong answered questions on the proposed color scheme and roof materials. He said he felt the proposed metal roofing would make more of an impact, and the building in the other center would be updated at a later time. Chair Stevens opened the meeting for public input. Ms. May Chen, Director of the Child Care Center, 730 E. Homestead Road, said that she was not opposed to the application; however, she asked thaCh~r three recommended conditions be considered. She suggested a concrete wall instead of wood slat fence; no construction from 12:30 to 3 p.m. because of day care nap time; and assurance that non-toxic materials only are used for the project. Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. Com. Doyle expressed concern about the proposed metal roof, and stated that he felt other materials such as shake, composite, or architectural roof with more richness, would give the buildings more character; whereas he felt the metal roof was not appropriate. Relative to design, he said the back of the building should be the same material, either masonry or stucco; and the details of the fencing should be referred back to staffand the architect. Planning Commission Minutes 3 June 26,2000 Com. Kwok agreed, and said the details relative to color and signs should be presented after design review. He expressed concern about statements made by Ms. Chert regarding her request to impose conditions as part of the project approval. He said he felt limiting the construction hours was not realistic; and he agreed that the concrete wall between the buildings would be more suitable. Chair Stevens said that the parking deficit of 5 spaces was not addressed, and although the staff report indicated that because the Peacock Bar had odd hours and the two would be non-conflicting and therefore should be a moot issue, he reiterated that there was still a deficit of 5 spaces. He said he felt the stucco wall would be suitable; however, he felt it should not be the owner's responsibility, and should be worked out with Ms. Chen, and not a requirement of the Planning Commission. He noted that the requirements for safe, non-toxic materials was already included in the code. The issues were summarized: fencing/walls; gates; sign; color; and roof materials. Com. Doyle said that the roof should be architecturally interesting, not just standing seam metal; color to be a more modem color, minimizing the pink color, but referred to the Design Review Committee; sign per consultant's recommendation; gates should be referred to staff to work with applicant on a final solution amenable to both; fences and walls - go with staff recommendation for hard enclosure on the back of the garbage enclosure, with front face of it to come up with a solution. Com. Kwok said he felt the project was appropriate, and to have staff work out the details and come back With a final approval through the Design Review Committee. Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development'Director, said that neither the architectural advisor nor staffwas opposed to the standing seam metal roofi He said that the applicant was proposing the metal roof as he planned On redoing the adjacent center in the future also, and he noted that the roof elements were relatively small on the development, and commented that the metal roof would produce a good result as well as the shingle. Chair Stevens said that the fencing, walls, gate, and sign would be reviewed by the Design Review Committee, as well as the colors. He agreed with Mr. Piasecki's comments about the metal roof, and noted that the new fire station has a metal roof also. - Ms. Wordell reported that the condition states that the w~aen slats shall be repaired, which would call for replacement with wood slats. If the condition is to return as part of the design review process, it should be stated, unless the requirement be stated as vinyl slats, as requested by the applicant. Mr. Piasecki suggested that the wording be changed from "replaced" to "reviewed" by the review committee, which would allow the issue of impact to be addressed. Ms. Wordell added that the construction program in terms of noise and hours would be reviewed prior to commencement, and perhaps something could be worked out that would be sensitive to the day care. Planning Commission Minutes 4 June 26, 2000 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Doyle moved to approve Application 9-U-00 with modifications to Item 9 to change wording to "review" the design with the Design Review Committee; and to change the roof material from metal to a more three dimensional product, either composite or other materials, and to work with staff'on details; remainder as recommended by staff Com. Kwok Corns. Corr and Harris Passed 3-0-0 3. Application Nos.: Applicant: Location: 16-U-99, 31-EA-99 Stanley Wang 10600 So. Stelling Road, 10051 Bianchi Way Report to City Council: Use Permit to demolish three single family dwellings an construct eight townhouses totaling 17,112 square feet on a 23,170 square foot lot. Tentative City Council hearing date: July 17, 2000 .Staffpresentation: The video presentation reviewed the application for a Use Permit to construct 8 townhouses in the vicinity of Stelling Road and Bianchi Way, following demolition of three single family dwellings. The application includes an exception to the Heart of the City Specific Plan on side setbacks. Ms. Vera Gil, Planner II, noted that there was additional square footage for the garages which was not noted oh the plans, resulting in a use permit for a total of 13,686 square feet of buildlng area total, changing the FAR to 59%. She reviewed the application as set forth in the attached staff report, noting that the proposed buildings were now facing Stelling Road, not Stevens Creek. Ms. Gil reviewed the Planning C ' ' ' · omm~ss~on s suggemons for changes from the two previous meetings, including changing the fronting locations to Stelling Road; decrease in density; and lower mass; however, the applicant did not provide the suggested pedestrian access by the City Council because he felt it would impose a liability. She said staff reviewed the site plan and felt that if the pedestrian access requirement was imposed, placing a sidewalk in the area would decrease the size of the units and might require the elimination of two units, which would compromise the site plan. She said the new site plan was more pedestrian friendly, with front stoops, front yards, garages located in the back and not visible from Stelling Road, inclusion of green space, and the addition of a large tree as a landscape focal point. She said that access could be achieved later as tile properties redevelop. Ms. Gil added that staff and the~'chitectural consultant agreed that the variety of materials used created interest and that the plan was an improvement, and recommended approval of the project. Ms. Gil pointed out that the Heart of the City Plan allowed for exceptions for small, difficult to develop parcels, and they felt it met the requirements. Chair Stevens said to ensure that it states on Page 3-1 that the applicant intends to provide a tentative map at a later date, with one lot held in common. He expressed concern that if it is not specified early in the proposal and they are not stated as owned units, (if they are rental or townhouse configurations). Changing them to owned units at a later date is hinged on tile occupancy rate of rental units being less than 5%. He said it may prove to be difficult if not alerted at this time. ~ Planning Commission Minutes 5 June 26, 2000 Ms. Gil noted that the intention was that they would be ownership units; with the applicant applying for a tentative map at a later date. Mr. Piasecki suggested that it could be handled partially by adding a condition that the applicant shall process a final map prior to the issuance of building permits. Mr. Jim Yee, Dahlin Group, architects, referred to the site plan and reviewed the location and design of the proposed project. Responding to the concern about the tentative map, he indicated that the applicant was intending to sell the project as for-sale condominiums. The reference to the held-in-common was the driveway and common open space held by the townhouse homeowners. Mr. Yee and Ms. Gil answered questions relative to the design elements of the project. Chair Stevens opened the meeting for public input; there was no one present who wished to speak. Com. Doyle said that the proposal was a vast improvement from the previous submittals. He expressed concern that when following the process, that the exceptions created or precedence setting are well understood to prevent a reoccurrence the next time. He said that he assumed because of the commercial site on one side, the setbacks and visual intrusion were not major issues. He said they had discussed the transition parcels coming into the FARs of .45 to .55, and the project is .59, but the merits of the architecture and detailing offset the excess. He expressed concern for future ones with .60 FAR. Mr. Piasecki commented that the project sets a pattern along Stelling Road of duet units, which can be replicated on the properties to the south. Driveway access will need to be coordinated because they are independent owners with individual parcels. Ms. Gil pointed out that the Wherehouse building was constructed before the Heart of the City Plan was implemented, and the future units next to the proposed project would have to apply for an exception. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Doyle moved to approve Application 31-EA-99 Com. Kwok Corns. Corr and Harris Passed 3-0-0 Com. Doyle moved to approve Application 16-U-99, including the condition that the applicant shall process a final map approval prior to issuance of building permits, and that the pedestrian access n~f~e required Com. Kwok Corns. Corr and Harris Passed 3-0-0 Application No.: Applicant: Location: l-U-00, 2-EA-00 Pinn Brothers (The Adobe Inn Hotel) 28128 Stevens Creek Boulevard Use Permit to demolish a restaurant and construct a 47,000 square foot, 77 room hotel. Continued from June 12, 2000 Planning Commission meeting Planning Commission Minutes 6 June 26, 2000 Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application for a Use Permit to demolish the existing restaurant and construct a 47,000 square foot, 77 room hotel, with a subsurface parking garage. Mr. Piasecki reviewed the application as outlined in the attached staff report. The city's architectural advisor, Larry Cannon, has recommended that the front portion of the building needs additional work to reduce the mass and break up the building with more interesting building materials. Staff recommends opening the public hearing, hear the applicant's presentation, receive input from the public, and provide the applicant with direction regarding the design issues, and continue the application to the July 10th Planning Commission meeting, which will allow the Heart of the City exceptions to have been advertised and be considered along with the use perm it. Mr. Jim Starkevitch, architect, referred to the architectural renderings and reported that additional stonework was added to the bottom base of the building at the suggestion of the architectural consultant. He said there were 80 parking spaces in the underground parking garage, with two stories of hotel rooms, and a penthouse area with 7 additional suites on the Stevens Creek side. He added that the courtyard included 6 fountain areas, various sculptured pieces, and seating area. Chair Stevens opened the meeting for public input. Mr. George Monk, 19985 Price Avenue, said he supported the two hotel developments, but expressed concerns about the traffic impacts in the residential areas, as a result of the increase in traffic from taxis, delivery vehicles, and rental cars. Ms. Carmeh Lynaugh, Public Works, said that she had discussed the traffic issues with Mr. Viskovich, Director of Public Works, and he felt the development, because of the location, would not affect neighboring streets. Mr. Monk reiterated his concern about traffic, and said that benchmark studies on Rodriguez, Blaney, Pacifica, and Torre were needed relative to present volume and speeds to say definitively whether it will change in the future. Mr. Piasecki said that the traffic engineer could address the traffic impacts further. Com. Doyle asked that a chart be included in the next presentation, showing what the setback requirements should be vs. the actuals; a traffic study of the adjoining neighborhood; and the effect of the trellis on the massing. He said he felt the project was appealing. Com. Kwok asked that the landscape plan be included in the next presentation, and that the applicant work with the consultant Larry Cannon on furth~[refinement of the architecture. Chair Stevens said he concurred, especially that the adjoining properties and proposed developments, if they are known, be brought to their attention, but specifically the adjacent properties should be notified so that they can contribute to the overall plan of that area. He said he concurred with Com. Doyle's comment on the architecture, in that the trellis has a heavy look. He recalled that he originally stated that the area was set up with steps, with the apartment and hotel going away from that; and this project was yet another one going away, and he questioned what past plans if any, were going to be dismissed. Com. Doyle said he would like to have the real color chips available for the next presentation. June 26,2000 Planning Commission Minutes Chair Stevens said that as a result of comments, it appeared the Planning Commission looked at the project favorably, in that the proposal was well done, was acceptable to many staff and the architect for the most part; but they were seeking an overall plan Com. Kwok said the two foot height exception was acceptable and suggested that direction be given regarding the setbacks. Chair Stevens said that the setbacks are set up with the idea of knowing what the neighbors' are going to be also. The setbacks will need to be considered and reviewed. Mr. Piasecki addressed the setbacks, pointing out that the reason why they included the relationship to existing buildings below the setback issue, was to point out that to the west of the property where the podium apartments are, there is a 20 foot emergency access easement, with an additional 20 feet of separation which helps on the west side. On the south side, they are next to the Lake Biltmore Apartments, with their driveway and carports in that placement, which accounts for the 110 feet between buildings. He said on the south side the setback relationship to residential is set up when adjoining single family, and there are homes next door; in this case there are driveways and carports immediately next, and quite a distance before the next apartment unit. He said the applicant has expressed a willingness to provide for public access to this site. Mr. Piasecki noted that the consultant felt the arched glass areas facing onto Stevens Creek were overdone and needed to be studied further. Chair Stevens said that he was not opposed to the height exception; however, the public voiced their opinion height exception approvals, and he expressed caution that a plan existed and it should be met. Mr. P iasecki said that they met the 1-1/2:1 setback ratio. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Doyle moved to continue Applications I-U-00 and 2-EA-00 to the July 10, 2000 Planning Commission meeting Com. Kwok Coms. Corr and Harris Passed 3-0-0 OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COM1VIISSION: Environmental Review Committee: No report Housing Committee: No meeting held Mayor's Breakfast: NA It was noted that the telecommunications item was postponed until the next Planning Commission meeting when all commissioners would be present. Com. Doyle discussed the Hansen cement facility, noting that there has been public input on the impacts, and they appear to be escalating relative to that site. In response to his suggestion that the Planning Commission address the impacts and potential mitigation, Ms. Wordell reported that the issue was listed on the work program, and tentatively scheduled for the August 14th Planning Commission meeting.