Loading...
PC 03-27-00CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 AMENDED MINUTES OF TIlE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON MARCH 27, 2000 SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Corr, Doyle, Kwok, Stevens, Chairperson Harris Staff present: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development; Ciddy Wordell, City Planner; Colin Jung, Associate Planner; Vera Gil, Associate Planner; Carmen Lynaugh, Public Works; Raymond Chong, Traffic Engineer; Eileen Murray, Assistant City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the March 13, 2000 regular Planning Commission meeting MOTION: Com. Doyle moved to approve the minutes of March 13, 2000, Planning Commission meeting as presented SECONDi Com. Stevens VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 WRITTEN COMNIUNICATIONS: Chair Harris noted receipt of the Spring 2000 General Assembly Smart Growth Conference notice in San Francisco; and a letter from Lisa Rittenhauer on the Oaks Theater issue; 2 newspaper articles and tour agenda for April 1. POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR 6. Application No.(s): 2-GPA-99, 33-EA-99, 19-U-99 Applicant: Santa Barbara Grill (Hagman Group) Location: 10745 North DeAnza B~ly_d. General Plan amendment to allow the conversion of retail commercial development potential to office/industrial development potential and applying it to the subject site to allow its redevelopment from restaurant to office. Use Permit to allow the demolition of an existing restaurant and the Construction of a three-story (50 feet) tall, 40,000 square foot office building with surface and underground parking on about 1.37 acres Request continuance to Planning Commission meeting of April 1 O, 2000 Tentative City Council hearing date of April 17, 2000 Planning Commission Minutes 2 March 27, 2000 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com.Doyle moved to postpone Item 6 to the April 10, 2000 Planning Commission meeting Com. Kwok Passed 5-0-0 ORAL COMMUNICATION: None CONSENT CALENDAR Chair Harris removed Application 14-EXC-99, 21-ASA-99 from the Consent Calendar; Com. Kwok excused himself from discussion of Application 7-U-99(M) because of a potential conflict of interest as he is a member of the Board of Directors of ttie YMCA; and Com. Stevens removed Application 16-U-78(M) from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Application Nos.: Applicant: Location: 14-EXC-99, 21-ASA-99 Hossain Khaziri (Beacon Service Station) 10002 DeAnza Blvd. (northeast corner of DeAnza and Stevens Creek Blvds.) Sign exception for two ground signs and architectural review of all proposed signage. Discussion: Chair Harris requested that the minutes reflect the reason for the opposition to the second sign. It was felt that the sign would obscure the building sign for the ultra food mart, and that it was;not so much that the sign was superfluous and extra advertising, but rather it could hurt the business and keep the public from knowing there was a store located there. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Core moved approval of Application 14-EXC-99, 21-ASA-99 Com. Doyle Passed 5-0-0 Chair Harris moved the agenda to Item 4. Application No.: Applicant: Location: 16-U-7S(M) Compac Computer 19333/19191 Vallco Parkway Referral to Planning Commission of a Director's minor modification to a use permit to remove a foot bridge over Calabazas Creek. Planning Commission decision final unless appealed Discussion: Com. Stevens said that he felt Compac Computer's desire to make a bridge across the creek for the employees was a thoughtful gesture, and he supported the application. He expressed his disappointment that the Santa Clara Valley Water would not grant the permit for thebridge which he felt would have been an asset to the community, and particularly the employees. Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, said that he was hopeful that the city could work with the water district as part of their master plan. Com. Kwok clarified that the bridge concrete columns and footings would also be removed if the bridge was removed within 2 years. Planning Commission Minutes 3 March 27, 2000 MOTION: Com. Kwok moved approval of Application 16-U-78(M) SECOND: Com. Corr VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 Chair Harris moved the agenda back to Item 3. Com. Kwok left the dais during discussion of the item. Application No.: Applicant: Location: 7-U-99(M) YMCA of Santa Clara Valley 20803 Alves Drive Referral to Planning Commission of Director's minor modi'fication to an approved use permit for modifications to grading and tree removal and replacement. Planning Commission decision final unless appealed MOTION: SECOND: ' ABSTAIN: VOTE: Com, Corr moved to approve Application 7-U~99(M) Com. DoYle Com. Kwok Passed 4-0-1 PUBLIC HEARING 5. Application Nos.: 2-U-00, 4-EA-00 Applicant: Johnson Lyman Architects Location: 21275 Stevens Creek Blvd. Use permit for the demolition of a cinema and retail space and the construction of a new 32, i60 sq. ft. market and cooking scho91 (Andronicos) at an existing shopping center. Tentative City Council hearing date of April 3, 2000 Continued from Planning Commission meeting of March 13, 2000 Staff presentation: Mr. Colin Jung, Associate Planner, reviewed the application to demolish existing cinema space and retail space to construct a new 32,160 sq. ft. grocery store and ancillary cooking school at the Oaks Shopping Center. He referred to the site plan and reviewed the revised traffic circulation into the shopping center and truck movement and delivery. He reviewed the proposal to trim back the island to allow cars entering.[rom Stevens Creek Blvd. the option of using two driveways to make the traffic flow better. Mr. Jung reviewed other proposed changes to address concerns about the truck deliveries, parking, and design changes. Staff answered questions regarding the delivery truck schedule, landscaping, parking, and likelihood of a crosswalk. Mr. Jung reported that he had met with the Averys to discuss the possible crosswalk and said that he met with Public Works on the possibility of proposing a traffic calming measure in that corridor as part of the grand scheme with the Memorial Park gateway issue. He clarified that a calming measure included islands or textured pavement, to slow down traffic speeds. Relative to the crosswalks, Mr. Jung said that both gateways would be included as part of a system approach and could be included as a minute order. He noted that the cooking classes would be held at non-peak times for the supermarket; therefore parking spaces would be available. Planning Commission Minutes 6 March 27, 2000 but other communities as well, with exceptional value, and is a community draw in an area that brings the community together. Hundreds of people were disappointed to see the bookstore leave the center because of high rent. He asked if any poll was taken in the community to see if there was a need for another supermarket. He expressed disappointment that the community was not involved in the choices, particularly as many Cupertino residents have been in the area for 30 years or more. He said the theater was obviously not a money maker, but there were other ways to generate income for the community. He questioned why concerts were not held as they were in the past. Ms. Elizabeth Geddes, 10072 Senate Way, addressed the issues of pull out lanes, the heavy traffic along Stevens Creek, entrances to the freeway, and parking in Oaks Center. She also said that she was saddened by the loss of the movie theater and the dance studio. She said she did not feel that another market was needed in the area. She also illustrated where the delivery trucks park during the day on Stevens Creek to make their deliveries, and carry their deliveries to the different stores. Mr. Piasecki noted that it was not a safe condition and would ask the sheriffs department about the delivery trucks parking on Stevens Creek. Chair Harris questioned if the change to the driveway entrance was a permanent one and approved by the city. She also asked staff about the Economic Development Committee (EDC). Mr. Piasecki said that he would address the parking and delivery issue with the owner of the center and also the EDC. Relative to the EDC role, Mr. Piasecki said that typically the Commission is aware of the range of uses allowed within commercial districts and the private marketplace determines what uses go in and what uses go out. He said there are some rare uses that may be desirable and the city should be looking at regulating those. He said there may be occasions where you would be forcing the use to stay that was no longer economically viable; however in the theater's case, it was a mutual agreement that the theaters move out and something else would replace them. He said the city typically would not enter into that type of discussion, the marketplace dictates that. Chair Harris asked staff to explain how the traffic analysis was done for the proposed use. Mr. Chong explained that he used old traffic counts in 1988 and used the model to forecast the trip that would be generated by the market and then imposed the traffic counts over that existing condition model; then determined the LOS which was B- and C+ for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. He said he did not address problems related to freeway access at the time, and would also have to do more research about the entrance. He said most of the traffic going to the market was from the north side, and going from east to west into the intersection. Mr. Chong said that based on the market trip generation, during the a.m. peak hour, it was projected that 13 vehicles would be making the left or u-turn going eastbound on Stevens Creek; during the p.m. peak hour it would be 38 trips traveling eastbound, based on the Andronico market survey that they divided into different zones. Relative to the current rating of the left hand turn in the evening peak p.m., Mr. Chong said that it was operating very good at 200 foot long pocket and operating at C+ in the p.m. peak hour, and he felt there was more than enough capacity to handle the left turn. Com. Doyle pointed out that sometimes caution has to be exercised to cross the exit out of DeAnza so as not to get caught in the left hand turn lane. He said that adding another 38 would add to the existing problem. Chair Harris questioned if they took the 38 by taking their count for the evening and dividing it over the hours they are open evenly, or was there an assumption that more people would stop on their way home from work and fewer would come in the evening. She Planning Commission Minutes 7 March 27, 2000 also asked if the survey had each hour defined or did it have a certain block of time and certain number of cars for that block of time. Mr. Chong said that he used the survey provided by the market and he assumed that would be the draw; he divided up the whole market to determine which direction which mostly they would enter from. Relative to defined blocks of time, Mr. Chong said that it was not that level of detail, but was based to divide the whole Cupertino into market areas, like so many people living in different areas of town; and based on that he determined what was the most likely path. Chair Harris said that at the last hearing, Andronicos said how many cars would come in the evening, and asked if those numbers were used. Mr. Chong responded no, stating his numbers and theirs were actually close. Chair Harris closed the public hearing. Mr. Dave Johnson, Johnson Lyman Architects, said that the issues were narrowed down to ten from the previous meeting, and noted that traffic had not been included as a major issue. Com. Doyle said that one of the documents previously discussed contained the distribution of customers by locatiom Mr. Jung said that he had a market survey letter, but it was a very complex document and was not included in th~ staff report at this time. 'Chair Harris recalled that the numbers were quoted during the meeting by Mr. Andronico when he stated how many people he thought per day and per weekend day that would come into the store; however, they were not contained in the last meeting minutes. She asked that the discussion of the numbers be included in the meeting minutes. Mr. Johnson apologized that he did not have the numbers with him at the meeting that were provided previously by Mr. Andronico. Com. Doyle said that from the numbers after the first year, it appeared the areas with the highest estimated sales were from the areas that cut across Highway 280 to go into the center, and were the ones with the highest market shares and highest dollar volume. The Planning Commissioners discussed the issues which still needed to be addressed or need to be addressed as part of a recommendation: Com. Corr summarized issues to discuss: traffic issues; new truck only exit; landscaping; exit off Stevens Creek; and southwest entrance. Com. Doyle summarized issues for discussion: concept of the theater; what options for preservation; could DeAnza help with other possible alternatives for this type of venue. Com. Kwok summarized issues: traffic patterns; theater alternatives for neighborhood entertainment - upstairs in a center7 He said he felt they should not rush with approval of the project, but would look at options to bring entertainment back to the community. Com. Kwok said he was not too concerned about the landscape as it was adequate; trucking: the loading dock is appropriate under the revised proposal, but again the noise made when the trucks back out of the area could be a concern especially if deliveries start at 7 a.m. He also was concerned if trucks blocked the cars in the parking stalls while unloading. Com. Kwok said relative to the traffic circulation, he was concerned because it does compound the parking and also the traffic problems around in the neighborhood, especially because it is so close to DeAnza College} every time there is an event, the traffic problems are compounded. Traffic is definitely a problem and needs to be addressed before making a decision on the project. Relative to the theater, he expressed concern about the entertainment in the neighborhood, but possibly could work out something with Flint Center; but agreed with Com. Corr that whether Andronicos is there or not, they are going to close the theater because it is an economic issue. He said he was not overly concerned with the backup truck noise, as they could regulate the hours. He said he Planning Commission Minutes g March 27, 2000 supported having an Andronieos market in the area because the other markets are different enough. Chair Harris said that an issue to add to the list was the new plans for the trucks backing up. She said that many people would be entering on Mary Avenue because it was easier, closer to the store. She noted that a speaker suggested unloading the delivery trucks through an open door where the unloading is hidden. Although it is more costly for an interior unloading area, it is functional and more efficient, and doesn't have the constant truck backup noise. Chair Harris said that it is important with traffic that when using a document provided by the applicant, to take the devil's advocate approach, and verify and validate the information provided and do site inspections of the present situation. Chair Harris said she liked the project and would like to see Andronico's there; however, the traffic problems need to be confronted and mitigated. It does not mean that the project won't go forward, but that a realistic view up front must be taken. As suggested by a previous speaker, a study needs to be done. Until this meeting, the problem with the other delivery trucks stacking up on Stevens Creek Blvd. was not known, 'and it needs to be addressed. The project could revive that whole center and be areal asset to the community but the traffic issues need to be mitigated. She said the revamping of the truck program was positive, the wall has been redesigned and a planting strip put in. There needs to be a truck access and people access. The demise of the theater is unfortunate but you can't mandate something that is failing. Possibly contact Parks & Recreation with this particular community concern; the Quinlan Center is available, perhaps family movie nights could be sponsored or partnered with DeAnza or another organization, such as the cur;rent foreign film series. Relative to backup noise, it is a nightmare and it should be mitigated as much as possible. Too many grocery stores: she said she agreed with Com. Doyle, that the market drives that and Andronicos wouldn't be Willing to go to the expenditure of putting this into play if they didn't feel it was worthwhile. It is different than what we have, different stores offer different products, and specialty stores are good for the community. She said the landscaping was appropriate. The daily counts for the cars expected and trucks per day were discussed at a previous meeting and should be included in the meeting minutes. She said she did no feel that a count of 38 cars is reasonable, as it could very well be 300 cars. Com. Stevens said that he agreed with previous comments, and said he frequented the Coffee Society and experienced problems in the parking lot with speed bumps. He said he was interested in the comment that trucks are parking on Stevens Creek to unload theirdeliveries which presents traffic problems. He said he liked Mr. Burnell's commg_nt about the need for a system approach. He said that traffic circulation is multi faeeted, and an important issue and along with truck parking needs to be looked at, and until addressed he could not approve the project. He said truck access was also an important issue, and he expressed concern about the trucks backing up. The proposal is a superior proposal; with the trucks folding into a departflre area, unloading and folding out. Many people are Concerned about the theaters, but it is an economic issue driven by the market. Alternatives are being sought. He said he was concerned about the lack of information and the lack of publicizing the meetings. He said the backup noise was addressed earlier with truck access; looking forward to having the Andronicos market; and landscape improvements are appropriate. Com. Stevens said he was satisfied with the proposal overall, with the exception of the traffic circulation and the theater issue. Com. Corr said he agreed in terms of the traffic issues; but need to address it today as to what the numbers really are and not use old 1998 numbers. He said the traffic department's figures are Planning Commission Minutes 9 March 27, 2000 usually accurate, but they have not instilled confidence that things have been addressed the way they should. He said he was concerned about the stacking lane on eastbound Stevens Creek; and the city is in the process of changing the flow of the lights. In terms of the driveway off Stevens Creek by the freeway, it is a difficult mm to make, but need to look at the whole traffic circulation and make sure we look at all the pieces including senior center, where the bus stops, in terms of the truck stacking and the access in the back, he said he felt the plan works well, and unless someone comes up with a design that shows how the pull through one can work or something where you don't have to back up, he did not know how it would be solved. The trucks can back in, be almost lined up with that driveway and back in and there will be the beeping noise. The stores have indicated that their deliveries will be early in the morning. He expressed concern with the truck only exit because it will be difficult to monitor for trucks only. The theater issue is not in the Planning Commission's purview to deal with; the reality is that economically, it is failing and a mutual agreement was made with the center. Relative to too many grocery stores, Com. Stevens said that Andronicos is different and they are looking at their market share; landscaping is suitable with ample screening. The overall project is a good project for the site; however, he said he would not give the go ahead until some of the other issues are adequately addressed, particularly the traffic circulation Com. Doyle said he thought the duckout on the Stevens Creek entry close to close to 280 or 85 was a good concept. He questioned if it was possible to modify the two entries off Stevens Creek to improve the flow without doing away with the 500 year old oak trees. Mr. Jung said the traffic department would have to look at it, although there was not much to work with as it was very narrow. Mr. Piasecki said that the landscape area was not very wide, and to have a deceleration lane you w~ould lose your landscaping. Com. Doyle said that relative to traffic and circulation, the key things to consider am the turns onto Mary Avenue; the Stevens Creek turnoffs, how to improve that; the traffic cut through, he said looking through the data it appears that most of the customers come from the western part of town; that is the traffic direction that will have the most impact. Truck access and stacking: make sure we don't turn that backside which will be where most of the people come into this center or into this shopping center and into this grocery stores seeing all truck access and doors; landscape: make sure it is as mature as can be and of good quality. The renderings should reflect whatwill be reality. With the loss of the theater, address creative ways to involve the community in providing opportunities that would foster family gatherings/opportunities, such as YMCA, Parks and Recreation or Flint Center. Back up noise: not overly concerned with if is controlled by the hours, make sure the distance to the closest units are some~h_e_re around 250 feet so that it creates a significant buffer so as not to'create a significant impact. Too many grocery stores: he said the experts feel that it will be successful. Relative to the overall project, something is needed to liven up the Oaks Center; them are a lot of other possibilities that would be a lot more onerous and problematic, but it is much better than a Home Depot or some night club. Andronico's has a good image, and we should try to see if we can try to work that in, but make sure the tradeoffs are understood. To be successful, the community has to support it and we need to make sure that compromise and equation is correct. On the amhitecture side of it, we need to do something to break up the northwest corner or enliven it; it is covered by trees in all our documents, but it is really a 25 or 28 foot high wall plain on two sides. Community involvement: is there someway we can better inform the community which is the message from the last two meetings. He said it has been in the Courier but them should be some way in the future for the larger developments, to find a communications mechanism that would let them be informed of that in advance. Planning Commission Minutes 10 March 27, 2000 Chair Harris summarized that all were in favor of the project, with the loss of the theater. The design and landscaping were agreed upon, and the main issue is the concern about the traffic and the truck routing. Mr. Chong suggested taking another traffic count in a week or so to see if there were any changes. Chair Harris encouraged community members to call Colin Jung with comments. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 2-U-00, 4-EA-00 to the April 10th Planning Commission meeting Com. Kwok Passed 5-0-0 Chair Harris suggested that when there is a big commuriity issue, perhaps there should be a community meeting which has been well publicized. She said it may be too late now, but for the future, they need to catch the wave' because the community does not like to find out things by accident. Mr. Jung said he felt some of the concerns had to do, not with Andronicos itself, but the concerns with the center management. He said relative to this particular application, the center management has not been very active, it has really been Andronicos that has been in the driver's seat pushing forward. Chair Harris noted that a written communication from Lisa Rittenhauer was received. Mr. Jung said that another wildcard issue is what goes on at DeAnza College (DAC), because staff has very little or no control what goes on at DAC, and as long as they charge for their parking, people will naturally look for free parking over at the Oaks Center. Chair Harris said that at times extra security guards are hired at the Oaks Center to monitor non- customers parking in their stalls. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: 7. Vallco Redevelopment Area: Recommendation to City Council on adoption of proposed Redevelopment Plan. Staff presentation: Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, reported that in July 1999 the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council and the City Council adopted the boundaries for the redevelopment area. Activities since then have been for the most part the legal steps required to actually reach final adoption of the redevelopment project in the redevelopment area. She said that the Planning Commission will be considering the recommendation to the City Council on the redevelopment plan and its conformance with the General Plan. The item will go to the City Council on May 15 and they will adopt it at that time, and will also receive the final E1R but will not take action on it. The final action on the entire redevelopment project is scheduled for June 19, 2000, which would include the adoption of the final EIR; the Planning Commission will not take any action on the EIR, the only time it will take action on it will be at the time the use permit is submitted for the project and at that time the draft EIR of the final EIR will be evaluated to see if it anticipated what the actual project is and if any impacts change or anymitigations change to a significant degree, there would be an analysis and possibly amendment to the EIR. Ms. Wordell said that in the staff report it is acknowledged that the project itself is in a state of flux, it has been since the first time that Jacob's group talked about what they had in mind, but the Planning Commission Minutes il March 27, 2000 draft EIR is basically a snapshot of a set of project proposals that they had at the time that it was done. They will be making changes and when there is a real project, those changes will be analyzed. She pointed out that in the draft EIR, there were two areas considered significant impacts that were not mitigatable; the rest were considered to be reduced to less than significant. One of them was the cumulative traffic and the other was air quality and staff will recommend in the final EIR that the cumulative impacts of traffic also have the potential of being reduced because they include traffic from future projects that have not been approved, and of course those will have traffic review when they come in. And if the city were to want to; if it still showed at that time that there was an E+ at an intersection which is not tolerated by our General Plan, then mitigations could be imposed at that time to reduce it to an acceptable level. Airquality has some mitigations proposed but the EIR says it still would not be reduced to less than a significant level and if that stays, if in fact no additional mitigations are proposed then there would have to be some sort of overriding consideration in order to approve the project. Staff would not expect to get into a lot of detail on the EIR itself; the focus is the conformance with the General Plan for the redevelopment plan. She said questions will be answered on the EIR and there will be traffic experts to help with that since that may be a primary concern. Ms. Nicole Murphy, legal counsel to the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency, said that the Redevelopment Plan was a general document, is a long term plan with a need to maintain flexibility by the agency in carrying out its redevelopment activities over a 30 year period. The redevelopment plan functions primary as a charter of powers for the Redevelopment Agency, setting forth the agency's ability to control land use and development in a project area and provides authorities for the agency to undertake activities in the project area including public improvem~ents such as street work and parking, and assistance to particular redevelopment projects. It also provides a mechanism for financing redevelopment activities. This plan provides for land use and development in the project area in conformity with the General Plan; the same land use that is provided for in the General Plan is authorized in the Redevelopment Plan, including the acknowledgement that there is a existing 91 development agreement which gives vested rights to the developer under that development agreement. The Redevelopment Plan acknowledges that and will permit development in accordance with that development agreement. No specific development project is adopted at the time the Redevelopment Plan is adopted; those specific development projects come forward later in connection with either an owner participation agreement with the agency or some other form of agreement. It also could include the use perm it application. She said there were two parts to the action tonight, they are the determination by the Planning'Commission that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan, and whether or not to recommend to the agency and the City Co~uncil approval and adoption of this Redevelopment Plan. She said that as Ms. Wordell mentioned, there is no environmental review or finding or determination required in connection with the action tonight; the EIR is provided as an informational document because one of the prime purposes of an EIR is to evaluate potential conflicts in land use policies so that information to the extent it is set forth in the E1R is provided for nformation in making the consistency findings. It is also useful in evaluating and providing information pertinent to the decision of whether to recommend for or against approval of the Redevelopment Plan by the agency and City Council. Chair Harris said the reason she wanted more information on the draft EIR was because one of the statements in the approval document reads "whereas the Planning Commission has considered the proposed redevelopment plan ... including the draft EIR .... "which implies that they have reviewed the document and are aware of its contents. She questioned what the result would be if Planning Commission Minutes 12 March 27, 2000 there was an unmitigatable problem in the report, such as air quality, which would be cause to not recommend the Redevelopment Plan. Ms. Murphy said that if it was the opinion in connection with considering whether or not to recommend the Redevelopment Plan, they could consider issues raised in the EIR, but reiterated that fhe EIR in this case more specifically evaluates a project. It is attempting to evaluate a specific Redevelopment project in connection with an overall Redevelopment Plan. As mentioned before, no specific development project is being approved in connection with adopting the plan; those issues will come back to the agency to the city for review at the time they are proposed. She said that relative to the final EIR project, it will be based on the same set of facts considered in the draft EIR and she said that the EIR is over inclusive and no specific development project is yet being proposed for approval. Com. Kwok asked for clarification on the statement in the report about conformity to the General Plan; it is indicated the vested elements are also consistent with the 1993 general plan except for the one to one setback to height ratio along Wolfe Road. Ms. Wordell said that even though there is not a specific project, it does show building footprints and given the number of stories proposed for those buildings, it appears that there will not be the one to one ratio, which is an aside at this point. It is anticipated that it will not be consistent with the 93 plan and based on the vested elements, it does not have to be. Ms. Murphy explained that the draft EIR is out for public review, ending April 12th, with a required joint public hearing in June. It will be noticed and the final EIR and the redevelopment plan and a!l related documents related to this action will be made available well in advance of that hearing. Com. Doyle questioned if the Wolfe/Pruneridge intersection where the traffic impact drops from D- to E; is consistent with the General plan. He said the General Plan states that no intersection in the community shall be below D except for a designated 3 or 4. Mr. Chong responded that the only two intersections that have the E+ exemption are DeAnza and Stevens Creek and DeAnza and Bollinger. Chair Harris asked if the impact on the freeway exits at peak hour times was addressed when the environmental review of the traffic was conducted. Ms. Murphy said they looked at it in terms of LOS at the freeway'ramp intersection, which was the direction received and what was required to be consistent with the General Plan. The finding was .l[bgt the intersections were operating at an acceptable level, C or better. Although the ramp meters cause problems, the level of service methodology does not take that into account. Chair Harris said that she felt it was preposterous to have take such an ostrich approach to say that it is known that there is a problem, but it would state in the report that there is no problem because they don't control the ramp meters. She said th6 ramp meters do exist and the LOS can be measured at the peak hour at that traffic light based on the reality of the ramp meter. Chair Harris questioned if they could discuss the deterioration of the air quality and why staff is recommending the proposal knowing that the air quality, if it is approved, will not bemitigatable and that it would set up a situation where people are going to have to drive, walk through and stand in, unsatisfactory air quality. Planning Commission Minutes t3 March 27, 2000 Ms. Wordell explained that it would be project controlled and if findings state that the redevelopment project is in conformance with the General Plan, it could be included as was suggested in the findings, that it would be based on the air quality meeting the General Plan, and not meeting the General Plan standards for the air quality is not acceptable. She said with Ms. Murphy's concurrence, on the finding on Page 7-5, section I, findings A, where it is stated, that it conforms to the General Plan in the City of Cupertino, it could be stipulated only as long as the air quality and traffic policies of the General Plan are met. Ms. Murphy explained that the Redevelopment Plan requires that land use and development in the project area conform or be as appropriate under the General Plan with the exception of the 91 development agreement. Chair Harris said that it was difficult to discuss a general document that creates a redevelopment area and have an EIR related to a specific project and say that this document being approved is broad and that the EIR is the worst case when we already know that we have a setback problem that doesn't conform with the General Plan, as well as an air quality problem and a traffic, problem subject to future development. Mr. Piasecki clarified that the one area on setbacks, is part of the earlier development agreement, which does conform to the General Plan and is an umbrella of the General Plan. Relative to the other two issues, Ms. Wordell suggested making the finding that the Plan does with the proviso that it must meet the air quality and traffic constraints of the plan. He said it was incumbent to monitor all t he projects, not justVallco, but Compac and everything in that area. He said it puts everyone ;on notice with the additional wording. Ms. Murphy asked if it was the Commission's desire not to allow any future project to ever exceed the policies in the General Plan related to air quality and traffic. She said she was concerned that they were trying to establish a too-permanent line in connection with a document that is intended to be very general and flexible to cover a 30 year span of time. She reiterated that it was confusing but it is the redevelopment plan itself that is being considered for adoption, not a specific development project and the EIR does evaluate and most EIRs on redevelopment plans do evaluate. She said she may have misspoken earlier, of what would be allowed as full buildout under the General Plan; this one goes a bit further to try and analyze what was then a specific development proposal by this developer which we now know has changed somewhat. Chair Harris summarized that they were being asked..tg~make the two findings on 7.5 that the proposed Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General plan and the activities undertaken in the project area conform to the General Plan and are recommending approval and adoption, and transmitting this to the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council. Chair Harris opened the meeting for public comment; there was no one present who wished to speak. Com. Doyle said he felt the plan should be approved, and expressed concern that there are some control elements included that are not being exercised and won't have the chance to do again. Chair Harris clarified that when they did the diocese property, it was done in conjunction with an application before them and they are not being given the application before them, but an envelope of development to work with. Planning Commission Minutes 14 March 27, 2000 Com. Kwok said that he was satisfied with it as long as the findings in Section la are modified that the air quality and accumulative traffic and all the current constraints of the General Plan are met.. Com. Corr said he was content with the plan, but was concerned with adding such changes. Chair Harris said she was not comfortable approving something that says it conforms to the General Plan when in fact it does not. Com. Stevens said that T8 and AQ2 are stated as being not fixable based on worst case scenario. The project that will evolve will be less than worst case s~:enario, and they are stating that they cannot do anything about it now or in the future, and it concerned him. He said it still behooves them to pass on their concerns even though this is tentative. Ms. Wordell said that she and Ms. Murphy feel that by the time this gets to the City Council, since they have to make a finding that it conforms to the General Plan, they will need to have the final EIR reflect that as well; they wouldn't be approving redevelopment area, they had a project that didn't conform to the General Plan and if there are statements in the EIR that indicate that's the case, then we would have to mitigate them to conform with the General Plan. She said she felt they were going in the direction stating that as long as the final EIR and the project do conform, they were not approving something that does not conform; the Redevelopment Plan says that it has to conform. Ms. Murphy reiterated that the Redevelopment Plan does conform to the General Plan and th~at is the document being established. MOTION: SECOND: NOES: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to approve Application 02-SP-00, a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, making its report and recommendation on adoption of the proposed redevelopment plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. Com. Stevens Chair Harris Passed 4-1-0 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Corr moved to submit a minute order to alert the City Council and Redevelopment Agency to evaluate the traffic and air quality to ensure that they do conform with the General Plan, and ~9.~include height and setbacks. Com. Stevens Passed 5-0-0 REPORT OF TttE PLANNING COMMISSION: Environmental Review Committee: Com. Corr reported that the group had not met and will meet this Thursday. Residential Design Review Committee: Com. Doyle reported that 2 applications were presented at the recent meeting. It was helpful that the applicants had done their homework prior to the meeting, so there was little issue with the designs. Chair Harris noted that there was an error in the report document. Planning Commission Minutes ts March 27, 2000 Mayor's Breakfast: Com. Kwok reported on his attendance at the recent Mayor's breakfast. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Mr. Piasecki reported on the recent tour of the higher density housing projects with Pegasus Development, and noted that there was a tour scheduled for Saturday. He reported that the Planning Commission was scheduled to present a summary of issues and review of projects at the next City Council meeting. Mr. Piasecki summarized the City Council decision on the Planning Commission recommendation relative to the combination of the Design Review Subcommittee and the Residential Design Review Committee DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjoumed at 10:50 p.m. to the April 1, 2000 meeting at 9:30 a.m. in Conference Room A. Approved qs amended: April 24, 2000 Respectfully Submitted, Elizabetlf.~tis Recording Secretary