Loading...
PC 06-12-00CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JUNE 12, 2000 SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Staff present: Corr, Kwok, Chairperson Harris Doyle and Stevens Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director; Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, Colin Jung, Associate Planner; Carmen Lynaugh, Public Works; Raymond Chong, Traffic Engineer; Eileen Murray, Assistant City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of May 22, 2000 Regular Meeting: Postponed until June 26, 2000 meeting POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: 5. Application No.: 9-U-00 Applicant: Wayne Gong Location: 19442-19990 Homestead Road Use Permit to add 1,120 sq. fL to existing shopping center and modify exterior of the buildings. Request continuance to meeting of June 26, 2000 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. Request continuance to meeting of June 26, 2000 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Kwok moved to continue Applications 9-U-00, I-U-00, 2-EA-00 to the June 26, 2000 Planning Commission meeting Com. Corr Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 Planning Commission Minutes 2 June 12, 2000 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Chair Harris noted receipt of a petition in favor of keeping the Oaks Theater, letters from Glenbrook Apartment residents, some in favor of the Andronico's market and some in favor of keeping the Oaks Theater; and a letter suggesting keeping the theater and also adding the market. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARING Application Nos.: Applicant: Location: 2-U-00, 4-EA-00 Johnson Lyman Architects 21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard Use permit for the demolition of a cinema and retail space and the construction of a new 32,160 Square foot market and cooking school (Andronico's) at an existing shopping center. Tentative City Council hearing date of June 19, 2000 Staff presentation: Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, outlined the history of the application. He clarified that the city was not requiring the removal of the theaters, but that it was the property owner's decision to change the use of the parcel in response to market trends. He explained that the city operates under a strict framework of policies and zoning laws to ensure that all property owners are treated objectively and fairly. The framework allows property owners to make m~irket decisions within existing shopping centers, provided they are consistent with the list of uses permitted in the commercial zone, which essentially permits retail, entertaining, supermarkets, etc. There is no city policy or ordinance framework to support discriminating between a market or theaters simply because they may be a preference of one over the other. Consequently, without any policy or ordinance framework, the city must focus on potential external impacts of the proposed use - traffic, parking, and building design. He said the Commission had indicated their understanding of the concepts and is considering a minute action to communicate the overall concern about inexpensive family movies to the City Council. Relative to the conduct of the meeting, he said that the Commission has the responsibility to consider all public testimony related to an application and to conduct the public review of applications in an expeditious manner. The Planning Commission and staff appreciate the time taken to provide input on all the issues; however, to ensure closure on the matter in terms of Planning Commission deliberations, staff recommends testimony be limited to new information only and if in agreement with previous speakers, not to repeat testimony, but note agreement or disagreement with the statement. Staff also recommends that the hearing be limited to one hour. Mr. Colin Jung, Associate Planner, referred to the new site plan and illustrated the modifications to the access points on Stevens Creek, in response to neighboring residents' concerns. Mr. Raymong Chong, Traffic Engineer, reported that staff had met with the community members recently and would address their concerns and recommendations as part of their normal practice of making a safer community. He summarized the traffic/parking analysis made by consultant George Nickelson. A summary of the analysis begins on Page 2-72 of the staff report. Mr. Chong reviewed the existing traffic operational concerns, Andronico traffic effects and solutions, and the Matrix of Existing Traffic,' Parking, Access Issues for the Oaks Shopping Center and Surrounding Planning Commission Minutes 3 June 12, 2000 Area, and the Proposed Andronico's Market, as outlined in the attached staff report. He noted that the addition of Andronico's would generate an additional 77 new peak hour trips during the p.m. peak hours. Relative to trip generation, he said that staff's estimate of 11.6 trips per 1,000 square feet was conservative for the 32,000 square foot market and was about one-half of the national average based on the different characteristics of the supermarket. He reviewed the LOS of various intersections and the intersection delays. Mr. Chong reviewed the additional issues: Eastbound left turn queue on Stevens Creek and Mary Avenue (staff recommends extending the green time to accommodate present and future left turn and U-turn movements); Gateway crossing for the Gienbrook Apartments, Memorial Park and Senior Center (staff proposes to add it to the CIP for the coming year and is requesting the developer contribute $20,000 to provide safe crossing on Mary Avenue); Site parking (proposal for 129 parking spaces based on ITE's parking generation manual); Flint Center (staff has contacted Flint Center relative to developing special timing plans during performances); Neighborhood traffic volumes collected for Meteor, Lubec and Anton Streets which will be the key measures of impacts of any by Andronico's, and if significant, will be addressed in a public hearing, and necessary traffic calming measures would be built. Mr. Chong summarized that traffic impacts of Andronico's would be minimal; however, there is a concern about traffic operations and staff will address it proactively. He said that "no parking" provisions would be enforced to alleviate large trucks parking in the driveway. He answered questions related to trip generation and traffic impacts. Staff recommends approval of a mitigated negative declaration on the Use Permit project; approval of the Use Permit in accordance with the model resolution with deferral of sign approval to a separate application; and approval ora minute order requesting that the City Council forward a letter to the management of DeAnza College Flint Center expressing the community interest in expensive, family oriented film entertainment. Chair Harris read into the record the contents of the minute order which was included in the staff report. Mr. Piasecki indicated that he had spoken with the general manager of the Flint Center who indicated receptivity to the possibility of Flint Center or DeAnza College incorporating the showing of low cost films into their entertainment programs. Chair Harris opened the meeting for public input. She summarized that the three issues were: keeping the theaters and/or market; traffic issue; som,e_,residents did not want the additional grocery store as there were other similar ones in the area. Mr. Bill Andronico, Andronico's Market said that he was present at the recent neighborhood meeting and said that the traffic concern was being addressed. He said the residents expressed the desire to have a gathering place at the center, and he said he felt the plans for the center captured some of the concerns and desires of the neighbors, and he expressed willingness to work to make 'the store successful and fit into the neighborhood. Mr. Andronico said that he felt there were still some questions and concerns from the residents he was unable to address. Relative to the westbound driveway, he said he would prefer a solution to make the access from Stevens Creek easier and become less in conflict with thru traffic and traffic onto Highway 85; however, it was not a vital part of the flow and he was open to suggested modifications. Planning Commission Minutes 4 June 12, 2000 Mr. George Nickelson, traffic consultant, said that relative to the westerly driveway and possible options, his concern about a new driveway was that it would result in a short driveway throw coming into the center, with cross traffic mingling with traffic coming indirectly off Stevens Creek, and because there was not enough room, it would create potential backups onto Stevens Creek. He said they attempted to move the first stop well into the center, and extended the driveway into the first major internal intersection, creating a more right angle intersection of the parking aisle into the driveway. He said it was not feasible to providea right turn lane; there was a fair amount of landscaping with a grade change between the street level and parking lot level. A taper could be provided to allow the vehicles to exit more quickly as they enter the center. Chair Harris noted receipt of a letter from Hobee's employees which was in favor of the Andronico's application, since they felt it would be a good tenant and would revitalize the center. Ms. Delores Carson, 10062 Senate Way, said she felt the only item not covered was the crosswalk across Mary Avenue from the park. She said the only part about it being a grocery store, is that since there are no concessions in the park, it would generate more traffic crossing Mary Avenue from the park; also considering traffic going the other way if people park at the Oaks Center and walk over to the park. Presently, people only walk over from the Commons to the movies, which is not a high traffic time. If aayone is going east from the shopping center, they must go on Mary Avenue since there is no exit along Stevens Creek heading east. Anyone from the park who is either walking or leaving is going to need a triggered light or something similar because of a big backup at the park or a potential for people running across without having the traffic stop. She said that the entrance to the tapered driveway is in the lane which is the on-ramp for the freeway. Ms. Kay RCes, resident, said that she resided in the Oakdale Ranch neighborhood and questioned the possibility of closing the entire area leaving no access from Stevens Creek, requiring people to go around Mary Avenue, as there is always a backup onto Highway 85. She said she felt the numbers representing the number of people coming were not accurate and that the center has not been a viable center. Ms. Rees said that it would have been more accurate to select the Los Altos Andronico's market rather than the Danville site for the traffic count. She reiterated her concern about the numbers used as they were not viable numbers and might have been selected because they were more favorable to the Commission's position. She also expressed concern about the large semi trucks using Foothill Boulevard, turning onto Stevens Creek, and said that if the problem was not addressed there would be many residents expressing their opposition at a future meeting. Mr. Chong addressed the concern about the truck traffic, stating that there were prescribed truck routes in town; between Foothill Blvd. and Highway 85 on Stevens Creek, there are no trucks permitted, and no trucks permitted on Highway 85, south of Highway 280, and have to use either Stevens Creek Blvd. or DeAnza Blvd. He noted that the traffic numbers were accurate and common practice. Mr. Tony Vandersteen, 10401 Paar Lap Drive, asked if there was any extra publicity for the current meeting. Chair Harris noted that attendees at the previous meeting who left notification cards were personally notified of the community meeting held at the Commons. He said that petitions were gathered containing hundreds of signatures from non-residents supporting the theater, and he expressed concern that if the meeting had been noticed in a newspaper there would have been several thousand signatures in opposition. He questioned if the Planning Commission intended on reacting to the obvious community protest. Planning Commission Minutes 5 June 12, 2000 Chair Harris clarified that it was not the Planning Commission's responsibility to make the determination about whether or not the theater remained, or if the city would make a requirement that it remain. She said it was their responsibility to look at the center and deal with the issues related to community interest, such as traffic flows and whether or not it fit on the lot, are the setbacks met, and are there any exceptions required to the rules of the city. The philosophical issue would go to the City Council as their role. Chair Harris pointed out that the issue appeared in the newspapers a number of times, resulting in community awareness. Mr. Vandersteen said he wanted to know when it could be established that they could express their point of view for reaction as he did not feel it was happening. He said when he first appeared at the meetings, it seemed the commissioners had already made up their mind about Andronico's. He said it was difficult for the community members to express their objections to the market when it appeared the commission was in favor of it. Ms. Eileen Murray, Assistant City Attorney, said that if the petition was. in support of the theater, it was not the appropriate venue to protect the theater, and that it should go to the owner of the shopping center, because the Planning Commission has no control over whether the theater goes or stays. She said that the Planning Commission can only work from the application before them, which is an application from Andronico's, and they cannot prevent the theater from leaving the center; that is a decision of the center itself. She suggested that the 1,000 signatures be presented to the owner of the center to express their support for the theater. She said that the only application before the Planning Commission is the application from Andronico's. She pointed out that everyo~ne I saddened about the loss of the theater. Chair Harris said that the petitions received would be forwarded to the City Council. She noted that the Planning Commissioners read their packets before the meeting and are familiar with the staff recommendation, so that when they attend the meeting, they receive public input and try to mitigate the damages of any changes. She said that if it was going to be approved as a slam dunk with no forethought, it would have been approved the first night, but this is the fourth meeting as well as a public community meeting, that is trying to meet and be responsive to all the community input, which is a benefit of the public process. Mr. Les Burnell, said he had a strange feeling that states that nowhere in the city is there anyone that can say they don't want Andronico's. He said he felt there is a bad impression that when someone goes to the city and states they are putting a m~ar_k~et in, there is not much the city can do to stop them. Somewhere in this city is somebody that originally gave Andronico's the permission to start this and it is leaving the wrong impression. He said he felt one of the driving forces is that Andronico's is within the city of Cupertino and becomes a tax base and a revenue; none of the other large markets are located in the city of Cupertino and Cupertino is not drawing any revenue from them. He questioned the percentage of people going into the center, that are coming off Highway 85, what percentage is anticipated coming down DeAnza Blvd. Mr. Burnell said that the logical thing to do is be present at the 6 exits, and stand and count by the hour to know exactly how many people are in and out of Andronico's. Chair Harris responded that there were 422 people who get offHighway 85 at that intersection and turn right, and go by DeAnza College in the peak hour. Relative to the issue of nobody can say this, the Planning Commission writes rules and has a General Plan that governs land use, with a zoning ordinance that governs how to develop the commercial center; setback rules, parking rules Planning Commission Minutes 6 June 12, 2000 and height restrictions and density issues, but they don't say you can have a shoe store or you can have a jewellry store or a supermarket; they cannot discriminate against a particular use if it meets the requirements. Restaurants and bars require more parking because they bring in more people and stay longer. Otherwise it is governed by the parking and setbacks and there are no exceptions required here; it is just a personal opinion of whether you would rather have a theater or an Andronico's and either of those is a legal use and either is allowed here. It is market driven; if the theaters wanted to stay they would work it out with the center to do so. Mr. Chong responded to Ms. Carlson's comment about the Mary Avenue crosswalk from the park. He said it was part of the gameplan to have two crossings, one across from the Glenbrook Apartments and one across from Memorial Park. Ms. Karen Jacobson, 10861 No. Point, said that she felt the arrangement of the roadways that meet at the site of the Oaks Center is unusual, and even with good modifications, it boils down to a big impact on Highway 85, Stevens Creek, etc. She said that an attendee at the Commons meeting expressed well that the theaters that represents a public place in Cupertino and the surrounding communities that has a real connection with the community. It includes people of all ages; it is not a historical building, it is not a special older theater, and yet it is a feeling from the people that manage the theater and how they relate to each other and how they relate to us and it is very relaxed and comfortable setting. It' is special and important to the movie goers and don't underestimate it because it is one of the last least expensive places, that happens to be important too. She said the town is a mass of expressway like roads and there is no downtown anymore; she stated that the passion to keep the Oaks Theater that is coming across at the other meetings open has something to do with a lack of identity in our community and having a real connection at this theater. It ts a special and a good place; it just works harmoniously and smoothly, and without it, the people will be losing something that we don't have anywhere else; there is something important about this theater and especially with all the advantages we have living in the Bay area with the massive growth compared to all the other places in the country. She said they should look at Boulder Colorado where they set limits, and definitely limits should be made not just based on the market place, or because the landlord has a business they want to open with business zoning. What the community and surrounding communities want and need is what it has now and to demolish it is a problem. Ms. Christine Pierce, 21869 Garden View Lane, said that the Planning Commission has asked staff to meet with residents as it was felt there was not enough information disseminated. She echoed a comment that the meeting was to let people know about the meeting; there have been some letters and in the Cupertino Scene; but it was on the agenda for several meetings ago, and has been continued and some people may not have been aware that it was on this evening's agenda. She said she felt the work on addressing the traffic has been in response to the concerns heard here, and those were the changed use, the traffic and the overall environmental impact including tree removal and those things and the effect on the community which is the changed use. She said she questioned whether the suggested minute order relative to Parks & Recreation or DeAnza College movies would meet the same needs that the theater is currently meeting. She said it appeared there was a viable business, making a profit and wanting to continue to exist. Ms. Pierce said she was pleased with Mr. Andronico's willingness to work with with the community and his willingness to answer any questions. She questioned if he was willing to work with the community, the owners of the center, and owners of the theater, to perhaps come up with a solution that is a shared use, and not demolish the theaters, or perhaps there is other movement of vacancies within the center that would allow both uses to co-exist. Planning Commission Minutes 7 June 12, 2000 Mr. Chris Hittig, attorney representing the owner of the center, said that after Careful consideration, the owner made the business decision to change the use of the Oaks Theater to another use which is a grocery store. The contract documents between the Oaks Theater and the shopping center allows the owner to terminate that lease and the owner has notified in writing the Oaks Theater of the owner's intent to terminate that lease, and there may be some misconception about the different roles of the parties involved and who has control over that. This has been a decision carefully weighed by the owner and in their best estimation, this is what they want to do; they want to put a grocery store at that site, and to try to say, can you keep that theater there and also put Andronico's there, is a planning issue that has been thoroughly briefed by the parties and is just not feasible. Mr. Shawn Wyllie, 7640 Erin Way, said that between 1994 and 1997 there was a detailed citywide study of intersections, and the Mary Avenue and Stevens Creek intersection came up as Nos. 7 or 8 in the city in terms of number of incidents which is not particularly high. However, in terms of number of pedestrian and bicycle incidents per million cars going through the intersection, it came as No. 2 and 3 in the city which is high. He recalled the intersection higher than that, the mitigation that was taken between 1997 and this year was the construction of a traffic light at. that intersection. The question is what if any mitigation was made in the last three years at that intersection to address the high level of high accident rate. The next issue to address was the back access off Mary Avenue where the truck entrance is. From what we have looked at here, it is difficult to get in from the front, so we are going to offioad that traffic to the back, and of course all the trucks are supposed to come through the back. As you go west on Mary Avenue and in that middle part of the street, preparing to make a left turn, there is a grade towards the northwest, you can't clearly, see if you are a car in the oncoming traffic; you can see it but it is not clear; a truck probably wouldn't have that issue as much. The next point is the 77 additional trips just to back up what someone else said, based on a bogus number; you would have to measure that current usage at the theater at that peak p.m. hour and then subtract that from the 260 for a more realistic increase from the current situation is. He pointe dout that Flint Center is managed by a company, not DeAnza College, and any deal would be run as a for-profit enterprise. He said he was hopeful of a compromise, that he met Bill Andronico who seemed sincere in his goals. Mr. John Ennals, said that he was disappointed at the loss of the theater, and he doubted the plan to encourage DeAnza to do something about that would result in the first run movies being shown at reasonable prices. He said he felt it was not covered at the present meeting, but was a he Wednesday meeting, that the majority of traffic is hope~d_to enter in the back of this project. He suggested closing the front entrance. He expressed concern that it was the fourth time it has been on the agenda. He asked whose responsibility it was for the approval of the large increase in square footage which makes it possible to put a grocery store, which removes the whole sense of space on the inside of the center and turns it into an outwardly focused center. Chair Harris responded that it was the Planning Commission's responsibility, and there were certain requirements for FAR and density in a center that this meets; there was a restaurant that was closed in an adjacent area that is being folded into this as well. He reiterated his disappointment that the focus was not directed toward the parking lot, not inwardly. Ms. Chris Kennedy Pierce submitted a petition containing 800 signatures in support of the center having a community theater. Planning Commission Minutes 8 June 12, 2000 Ms. Linda Asbury, Executive Director of the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce, clarified that a decision has been made that the theater will go; and said that once that decision was made, she felt Andronico's was a wonderful replacement, and it needed to move forward and let the market bear out. Chair Harris closed the public hearing. Chair Harris said the only new item was the traffic consultant's comment of more of a taper on that second driveway. There were other comments about closing both Stevens Creek accessess. Chair Harris summarized the issues: (1) Whether or not to approve the Andronico's market; (2) Crosswalks on Mary Avenue; (3) Minute order relative to the theaters at Flint Center and Parks and Recreation; (4) Comment about tapering the entrance to the westerly driveway; (5) Comment about closing the Stevens Creek accesses; (6) Final landscape plan at the west driveway. Mr. Jung said that a revised landscape plan was not yet available and illustrated the current plan with a proposal for a new driveway and the landscape bulb. He said that staff would be satisfied with a condition from the Planning Commission that would address that little part at a building permit level should the application be approved. He said it was only the area related to the westerly driveway entrance. Com. Kwok said that the issue of Mr. Andronico working with the community and the property owner should be discussed. The attorney said that he understood that the owner did not plan to make drastic changes to the center, and would work closely with Andronico's if approval is given, to keep the ?enter as a place that people want to come to. Com. Corr said that he would prefer a solution that would give everyone what they want and be able to have it all; the theater and the market, but it is not the Planning Commission's decision; they must look at what is before them, which is the center applying for a use permit for a grocery store. Relative to the crosswalks, it needs to be ensured that it is already in theworkplan for the traffic division to make sure that those are designed. He said that although he applauds the concept, he felt the Flint Center minute order is not the same as having the movies in a theater. In terms of the taper on the driveway, he said anything to keep the traffic flowing is worthwhile, and he was not concerned if it doesn't work to close those driveways on Stevens Creek. He said it could be made a requirement at this point for the application, but if it was not successful, he was not opposed to closing it. Relative to the revised landscape plan, they have seen the General Plan and liked it, and the area that has to be adjusted relates..tp_the taper into that driveway, and there could be a condition to see the landscape plan. Crosswalks on Mary Avenue are appropriate. He said it was time to move forward with the application. Mr. Piasecki said that a minute order for both crosswalks would be appropriate. Com. Kwok said that staff approving the landscape at driveway was appropriate as they know about the landscape plan. Tapering the driveway and closing the Stevens Creek side involves the traffic and he said he was not in favor of closing the Stevens Creek offramp into the parking because it is merely Passing the problem to the Mary Avenue entrance and exit, which is not a suitable mitigation. He said tapering would slow down the traffic; crosswalks were suitable. He said he was concerned that the theaters were traditionally the focal point and gathering place of the community and without a downtown, it is the meeting place for people and he was sad to see it go, but it is a business decision made between the property owner and Andronico's and not the role of the Planning Commission. He said their job is to ensure that the project presented to the Planning Planning Commission Minutes 9 June 12, 2000 Commission meets the intent of the General Plan, and ensure that it is consistent with the neighborhood. He said he supported the project, but was hopeful that the property owner and Andronico's management would work closely with the community. He said the cooking school is a good way for people to gather at a common place, and he hoped that there would be more amenities of that type open up in the future, but they cannot dictate what it is. Relative to the minute order regarding the possibility of Flint Center or Parks and Recreation having movies, he said they could explore the possibility, but he wished they could be more proactive rather than reactive. He said the project should move on as he felt it would provide economic vitality for the Oaks Center. Chair Harris said she was willing to approve the market although she was a theater patron and would miss them. She said some of the traffic considerations have been worked out; however, she was not plaesed with the westerly entrance and was in favor of requiring that it be tapered so it has an easier entry. She said she was in favor of sending a minute order to the City Council requesting a crosswalk to the apartments and the park, and was also supportive of a minute order to the City Council to take a proactive stance and raise their consciousness about the loss of this resource, and to have them work with Flint Center and Parks and Recreation to possibly create theaters. She said she was willing to have staff review the final landscape plan as it relates to the westerly driveway. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to approve Application 4-EA-00 Com. Kwok Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 Com. Kwok moved approval of Application 2-U-00, with the following changes: Condition 27, add wording "that the applicant shall prepare a design illustrating tapering of the entrance to the westerly driveway to better accommodate ingress with the final design subject to the approval of the staff; Added Condition 28 entitled "Landscaping". "The applicant shall submit a landscape plan relating to the new landscape area adjacent to the westerly driveway for approval by the staff prior to release of building permits." Com. Corr Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 Com. Corr moved the minute order of the Planning Commission requesting that City Council consider alternative venues for inexpensive family oriented film entertainment Com. Kwok Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 Com. Corr moved the minute order encouraging the City Council to expeditiously install the two crosswalks on Mary Avenue from the Oaks Center to the Glenbrook Apartments and Memorial Park Com. Kwok Corns. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 Planning Commission Minutes 10 June 12, 2000 Application Nos.: Applicant: Location: 5-U-00, 4-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99, 8-EA-00 Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group Cupertino City Center Use permit to construct a new 224 room, 130,580 square foot hotel on a vacant parcel. General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet. Heart of the City Specific Plan exception to exceed the 40 foot height limit and to allow hotel use. Continued from meeting of May 22, 2000 Tentative City Council hearing date of June 19, 2000 There was a brief recess to enable the next applicants to set up displays. Staff presentation: Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, reviewed the modifications to the application which were outlined on Page 3-5 of the staff report. She summarized the requested actions by the Planning Commission: approve the negative declaration, approve the General Plan amendment, approve the Heart of the City amendment and exceptions, and approve the Use Permit. She said that both the hotel and apartment applications were scheduled to be presented to the City Council on June 19th as they took a straw vote in support of the apartments, but not a final vote, since they would prefer to keep the General Plan amendment which is for both projects in tact. The City Council is requesting that the Planning Commission's vote on the hotel application be forwarded for the June 19th City Council meeting. Mr. Tom F!tz, Ginsler, illustrated the modifications which included the arrival area, outdoor area, trellis treatments, and fountain area. He said the interior of the hotel was similar to the original proposal; and illustrated the second floor and parking area, backhouse area. He pointed out that the room configuration was 32 rooms per floor, for a total of 224 rooms. He illustrated the different categories of windows and window articulations throughout the building, addition of awnings and balconies, and reviewed the changes to the south elevation and the entry courtyard. Chair Harris opened the meeting for public input; there was no one present who wished to speak. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to approve the negative declaration on Application 8-EA-00 Com. Kwok Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to approve Application 2-GPA-99 Com. Kwok Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 Chair Harris said that her specific issues included: should the hotel be at this specific site; said she opposed the flat roof on the restaurant, which lacks a quality look. She said she liked the mitigation on the outside of the area; did not like the flat top although she was aware it was an equipment shelter. She said she was opposed to the parking structure that runs along the DeAnza frontage at 18-1/2 feet tall covered with vines. She said she felt the parking should be underground and she would be willing to approve it at the height it is. Chair Harris said she supported the hotel, and commented that the restaurant and Planning Commission Minutes 11 June 12, 2000 conference center were extraordinary and would be great community assets. She said that she did not have any parking issues, although she felt it was wrong to put the garage in such a prominent way. She commented that the model was deceptive as it shows a building along the whole front parcel and the building won't be along the front parcel, it is small with parking. MOTION: SECOND: NOES: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Kwok moved to approve Application 4-EXC-00 Com. Corr Chair Harris Corns. Doyle and Stevens Passed 2-1-0 Chair Harris noted that her issue to the exception was related to the zero lot line on the DeAnza side. She said she was not opposed to the exception to build the hotel at the site. MOTION: SECOND: NOES: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Kwok moved to approve Application 5-U-00 according to the amended resolution Com. Corr Chair Harris Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 2-1-0 Chair Harris noted that her objection was solely with the parking garage being above ground and 18-1/2 feet tall for the length of the building along DeAnza Boulevard. Ms. Wordeil noted that the applicant wanted to have the separate bar mentioned which would be included in the resolution as "hotel, restaurant and separate bar." Com. Kwok complimented staff on their work with the architect, and said he felt it was a good project and would be an asset to the city. Application Nos.: Applicant: Location: 4-Z-97, 7-TM-99, 14-EA-97, 32-EA-99 Hossain Khaziri 22020 Homestead Road Zoning to P(Res) Tentative Map to create 7 lots. Use Permit to demolish a vacant service station and construct 7 single family residences. Tentative City Council hearing date of July 17, 2000 Staff presentation: Mr. Jung presented a brief overview of the application to demolish a vacant service station and construct 7 single family residences. He referred to the zoning map and illustrated neighboring high density developments for comparison purposes. In response to direction received at the previous meetings, the applicant returned with a status on the site cleanup, including a case closure letter from the Santa Clara Valley Water District. They were also asked not to create a walled'off development and in response provided a fencing plan, which was reviewed by Mr. Jung. The applicant also created a smaller proportion of second story, and six of the seven lots meet the R1 standard of having not more than 35% of the second floor being part of the entire floor area, with the exception of one smaller lot. He pointed out that the FAR calculations were corrected in the staff report (Page 4-3) to reflect the true FAR as they were Planning Commission Minutes 12 June 12, 2000 incorrectly reported atthe previous meeting. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning subdivision and. Use Permit. Com. Corr expressed concern that the back of the house on Lot 7 faced the street, and the back yard was open space to the wall. Chair Harris recalled that the previous discussions suggested Lot 7 have two houses instead of one, and said that she preferred that one house face Homestead and one house face the center court. Mr. Jung reported that it was not approved by the majority of the Planning Commissioners. She agreed that Lots 1 and 7 should face Homestead Road, and recalled that a consultant's study addressed the issue of building houses to face the street to create a better community feel. Com. Corr said that he was not opposed to having the driveway where it is so that the garage enters from the side of the house, if the house front faced the street. Chair Harris also noted that Lot I did not have a lot of private area. Mr. Jung explained that the ambient noise does not exceed the General Plan standard, and therefore a sound wall was not needed, and the traditional wood fencing would be acceptable and compatible with the neighborhood. Chair Harris noted that the significant change in the application was the floor area ratio. She pointed out the majority of the Planning Commission had previously recommended more housing, smaller sized houses, and were in favor of higher FAR. She said she felt Lot 7 should be two houses, not one. Discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of splitting Lot 7 into 2 houses. Mr. James Chao, architect, addressed Lot 7, and stated that he would have preferred to have two houses on the lot; however, the setback requirements prevented it. He said that if the setback requirements were relaxed, th6 number of lots could be increased, and he was willing to work with staff to create 8 lots. He pointed out the uniqueness of corner houses in that they were different from regular houses with all front yard, and no back yard~ Mr. Chao noted that as a safety factor, he chose not to put the front door out onto the street, but said if directed to change the location of the front door, he would do so but against his practice and it would be reflected in the record. Responding to Com. Corr's question about higher density on the parcel, Mr. Jung explained that originally ten units were proposed for the project, and the Community Development Director at the time concluded that the neighbors would strenuously object to the higher density as it was out of character with the surrounding area. Staff concluded then that it would be more in keeping with the character of the immediate neighborhood to have housing that met a single family standard but was not overly dense. Com. Kwok recalled that the direction given to the applicant was to put 7 houses on the parcel. Mr. M. Khaziri, applicant, said that the environmental issue was emphasized at the previous meeting, and he worked diligently with the Santa Clara Valley Water District to get the closure letter so that the project could move forward. He said it was his understanding that the majority of the commissioners were satisfied with the elevations presented, which included Lot 7. Discussion followed regarding the lot sizes, house frontage, elevation variations, street width, and parking conditions. Mr. Marvin Kirkeby, project civil engineer, clarified that the street width was increased to accommodate parking on one side of the street. Planning Commission Minutes 13 June 12, 2000 Com. Kwok said he supported the project as proposed. Chair Harris said she would give up on the second house, but recommended that Lot 7 be moved closer to Homestead and fronted on Homestead, and also for Lot 1. She said she felt that at least 2/3 of the house visible from the corner should not be fenced. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to approve Application 14-EA-97 Com. Kwok Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Kwok moved to approve Application 32-EA-99 Com. Corr Corns. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 MOTION: SECOND: NOES: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to approve Application 17-TM-99 Com. Kwok Chair Harris Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 2-1-0 Chair Harris said that her objection was that the project should be 8 lots, with Lot 7 being divided with one more house. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: NOES: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to approve Application 5-U-97 with the provision that the dwellingon Lot 7 move farther north, and the north and east elevations of the house should present more like the front, and the same for north elevation of Lot I to give the appearance of a front, with fence ending at the back of house, subject to review and approval of the Development Review Committee Com. Kwok Coms. Doyle and Stevens Chair Harris Passed 2-1-0 Chair Harris said that she felt there should be 8 houses. OLD BUSINESS Application No.: 8-SP-00 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Citywide Wireless communication master plan meeting to discuss the scope of work. Staff presentation: There was a brief discussion regarding the purpose of the joint meeting to discuss the wireless master plan. The meeting will be held at 6:45 p.m. at the beginning of the June 26th Planning Commission meeting. - Chair Harris opened the meeting for public input. Planning Commission Minutes .14 June 12, 2000 Mr. Ashraf Rageh, Nextel, thanked staff for the report telecommunications and briefly reviewed antenna locations and the need to discuss updated telecommunications. NEW BUSINESS Application No.: 10-SP-00 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Citywide Request to set a hearing for an amendment to Chapter 19.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code regarding the definition of "basement" Chair Harris reviewed that the purpose of the public hearing was to discuss and amend the definition, single family residential and accessory buildings/structures ordinances regarding basements. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Kwok moved to approve Application 10-SP-00 to set a public hearing to amend Chapter 19.08 Definitions and Chapter 19.28 Single Family Residential Zones and Chapter 19.80 Accessory Buildings/Structures ordinances related to basement regulations. Com. Corr Coms. Doyle and Stevens Passed 3-0-0 Ms. Murra3' stated that Chapter 19.08 had the definitions and zoning, and noted that some definitions were in question lately and requested that there be a hearing to review the definitions' as well as the basement issue. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION: Com. Corr reported that the Environmental Review Committee had not met recently. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Mr. Piasecki reported that the City Council reached a consensus vote on the apartments to approve at the height requested by the applicant. Relative to the library location, Mr. Deke Hunter from Hunter Properties announced that his company was purchasing the Town Center and he would entertain the idea of a third possible location for the library. City Council said they4_w~ould have a study session on the issue. Gerry Braeger, a city building inspector, received an award from the IAMPO recognizing him as government man of the year. Mr. Piasecki reported that City Council approved the agreement with the County for the Redevelopment Agency. The City Council also received the annual General Plan update and work program and concurred with the Planning Commission's review of it. Roger Berry has been selected as the artist for the Four Seasons Plaza art project as recommended by the Fine Arts Commission. Mr. Piasecki reported that an appeal has been filed on the 4 unit Peninsula project and staff is scheduled to meet with them, which may result in a withdrawal of their appeal. He reported that David Knapp, currently the Town Manager of Los Gatos, was selected as the new City Manager for Cupertino. Don Brown's retirement function is scheduled for Saturday, June 17th. DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: There was a brief discussion of the article on Eichler homes, and the conduct of the Los Gatos Planning Commission meetings.