Loading...
PC 09-08-97CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 AMENDED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON SEPTEMBER 8, 1997 SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Staff present: Doyle, Mahoney, Vice Chair Austin Chair Harris and Com. Roberts arrived later in the meeting. Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development; Ciddy Wordell, City Planner; Colin Jung, Associate Planner; Raymond Chong, Traffic Engineer; Eileen Murray, Deputy City Attorney WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Vice Chair Austin noted correspondence relative to the Walgreens' application. POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: 11-EXC-97 and 29-EA-97 Ron Dick 11835 Upland Way/Lot 2 Hillside Exception to construct a residence on slopes greater than 30% in accordance with Chapter 19.40.050 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED REQUEST CONTINUANCE TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPT. 22, 1997 Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: 10-U-97 AND 27-EA-97 Chevron Service Station 10023 DeAnza Boulevard Use Permit to demolish an existing service station and build a new one, including modifications to the site plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED REQUEST CONTINUANCE TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPT. 22, 1997. Planning Commission Minutes 2 September 8, 1997 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to continue Items 4 and 5 to the September 22, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. Com. Doyle Com. Roberts and Chair Harris Passed 3-0-0 Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: 1-DA-97, 3-Z-97 and 5-EA-97 Tandem Computers, Incorporated Bounded by Stevens Creek Blvd., Tantau Ave., 1-280 and Wolfe Road APN#: 316-20-074, 316-20-075, 316-20-076, 316-20-077, 316-20-078, 316-20-079 Development Agreement to commit the City and applicant to a loag-term agreement to permit the applicant to construct buildings and develop a master site plan based upon current General Plan Policy. Zoning to rezone 3 parcels from Planned Industrial to Planning Office, Industrial and Residential. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: October 6, 1997 REMOVE FROM CALENDAR MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to remove Item 6 from the calendar Com. Doyle Com. Roberts and Chair Harris Passed 3-0-0 ORAL COMMUNICATION: None CONSENT CALENDAR Application No.: Applicant: Location: 25-U-83 (Mod.) West Valley Presbyterian Church 6191 Bollinger Road Use Permit Modification to remove 3 olive trees at an existing church property and replace with new trees. Director's referral of minor modification in accordance with Chapter 19.132 oftbe Cupertino Municipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED Application No.: Applicant: Location: 9-ASA-97 Target Homestead Development 20956 - A1 Homestead Road Architectural review for a 310 sq. ft. waiting room addition to an existing restaurant and the removal of 3 parking stalls. Planning Commission Minutes 3 September 8, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to approve the Consont Calendar Com. Doyle Com. Roberts and Chair Harris Passed 3-0-0 Application No.: Applicant: Location: 8-ASA-97 SNK Development (Paioso) 10741 No. Wolfe Road & 19590 Pnmeridge Avenue Architectural review of landscaping and recreational plans for an approved aparmaent complex. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 26, 1997 Stuff presentation: Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, explained that the recreational amenities and landscaping would be discussed; and the automatic gates would be reviewed at later time. She reviewed the other conditions to be considered which include access between the game court area and the park area; the preservation of the trees along Linett Lane and the planting of 36 inch box trees along the Mine property; and a 20 foot setback between the recreation center and the Mine property. She referred to the overhead of the site plan and illustrated the approved recreational areas, play equipment areas and picnic areas. She discussed the conditions of approval for the various areas as outlined in the attached staff report. Ms. Wordell said that additional furniture was added to the central gathering area of the recreational center to make it more conducive for gatherings. She said that the landscape plan was very detailed and specific questions could be addressed. She pointed out that the city's preference was for sidewalks with a landscaping strip with a sidewalk; however, a monolithic sidewalk is proposed because there is not enough room to accommodate both the sidewalk and the landscape strip. Staff supports the monolithic sidewalk. Staffalso recommends that there be access from the game court area to the community park, with no lighting. Mr. Don Peterson, SNK Development, used a slide presentation to illustrate the location of the children's play areas, picnic areas, swim pool, recreation room, placement of trees, and landscape plan. He then presented a colored artist's rendering of the courtyard area which illustrated each area of the courtyard, and discussed the placement of benches, trees, plants and shrubs throughout the courtyard area. He also discussed the placement of the arbors, fountain and sundial. Referring to Exhibits C and D, Mr. Petemon explained the changes to the sitting area of the recreation building. In response to a question from Com. Austin, he said that staff recommended there be access between the game court area and the neighborhood park, with no lighting. He pointed out that a golf driving range had been added to the game court area and that there was a basketball court and shuffleboard court. Mr. Peterson said that in compliance with staff recommendation, the height of the golf range net would not exceed the height of the existing sound wall. Mr. Peterson thanked staff for their cooperation on the project. In response to Com. Doyle's question regarding fencing, Mr. Peterson explained that there was an existing 8 foot masonry wall, and it was planned to extend the wall out and erect a wooden fence on the other side out to the shopping center where the wall currently does not exist. He said that the only Planning Commission Minutes 4 September 8, 1997 fencing in other areas within the project, would be fencing around the children's play areas. Ms. Wordell pointed out that there was a masonry wall around the Mine property. Vice Chair Austin opened the meeting for public comment. Mr. Warren Mine, 10630 Linnet Lane, questioned what type of masonry wall would be built around his property. He said that he had sent a letter to SNK Development recommending the type of wall, a lighthouse design, but said he did not get positive feedback from them. He requested that his recommendation for the lighthouse design be a condition imposed for the masonry wall construction. Relative to the landscape plan, he pointed out that there was supposed to be a barrier on the game court side to prevent any balls going into the residential area, and he had not seen a description on it. Referring to the site plan, he illustrated the area near the basketball court where there was supposed to be a higher nettingtsereening to go above the walls so that the balls would not go into the residential area. He requested a description on the landscaping and more information if it was available. Ms. Wordell responded that there was no formal condition requiring the netting, but said that it could be added as a condition if the applicant was agreeable. She said that the landscaping plan was included in the packet and he could also see an updated landscape plan. Vice Chair Austin closed the public hearing. In response to Com. Doyle's questions, Mr. Peterson said that SNK maintained the redwood trees along 1-280. He also discussed traffic impacts on, and placement of, the park and picnic areas. Vice Chair Austin noted that the landscaping and recreational plans for the apartment complex were included; and that the single family homes landscaping plan and hotel and automatic gates would be presented at a later date. Ms. Wordell noted that the staff recommendation relative to the seating in the recreational building was complied with by thc applicant, and said that the netting between thc Mine property and thc basketball court may not have been a previous condition; and if it was not included, it could be specified to be included. She said that the wall will be reviewed as part of the building permit, and she would notify Mr. Mine when she had the details and if he has any concerns they could address them. Vice Chair Austin noted that the sidewalks would not have the planting strip because of lack of room. Com. Doyle said that he felt there should be more active area for residents of Buildings 7, 8 and 9. Ms. Wordell noted that thc areas had been approved, but that the Planning Commission could suggest that the applicant add more BBQ or picnic areas. Mr. Stuart Grundle, SNK Development, explained that there were two significant other areas on the north podium, and noted the southwest corner oftbe podium had a large planter area with a seat wall, and several trees, with a quiet area at the southwest corner of that podium. He said there were also at the entrance to the north podium the same seatwall condition with arbors coming into the podium area. In addition to the planter area that was already pointed out at the north boundary; there were two other significant areas that are highly planted, green and a quiet area. He said that in the large open space that was driven initially by the 40 foot setback, they had set back the building further, and created a large seat wall area around a planter. He said they shared the same concern about having a quiet seating area, whether it is considered passive or active. Com. Mahoney said that the staffrecommendation was appropriate. Com. Doyle said he didn't have any stoppers relative to the recreation. Viec Chair Austin concurred. Planning Commission Minutes $ September 8, 1997 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to approve Application 8-ASA-97 in accordance with the model resolution, to include a condition relative to the height of the netting, and staffto review the wall materials Com. Doyle Com. Roberts and Chair Harris Passed 3 -0-0 Application No.: Applicant: Location: 21-U-96 Karate Masters (Huntington Learning Center) 7335A Bollinger Road Request to modify an approved use permit for a specialized school. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application to modify an approved Use Permit for a specialized school, as outlined in the attached staff report. The school which will occupy the space form~ally occupied by the Karate Masters requests modification of the hours of business and number of students permitted at one time. Staffreeommends approval of the application. Ms. Wordell summarized that the school was similar to the previous occupant, and parking was the only issue for review. She said that parking for the new school was not a problem because the students were non-drivers, and there would not be parking impacts from the application. Mr. Richard Goosman, owner, Huntington Learning Center, requested that an increase from 3 to 7 employees be approved to take into account growth potential. He said that most of the students would be dropped offat the school and would not impact the parking. Vice Chaff Austin opened the meeting for public comment. There was no one present who wished to speak. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Doyle moved to approve Application 21-U-96 with the modification to allow up to 7 employees Com. Mahoney Com. Roberts and Chair Harris Passed 3-0-0 Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: 11-U-97 and 28-EA-97 Thomas Boyd (All American Shopping Center) NW Comer of Bollinger Road and Blaney Avenue Use Permit to construct a new 13,833 sq. t~. retail store (Walgreens) and other improvements related to parking and landscaping at an existing shopping center; and to allow 24 hour operation at Walgreens and a drive-thru pharmacy window. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: September 15, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes 6 September 8, 1997 Staffpresentation: The video presentation reviewed the application for a Use Permit to construct a new 13,833 sq. R. Walgreans retail store and other improvements related to onsite parking and landscaping in the existing center, and to allow 24 hour operation and drive-through pharmacy window. The proposed projeot is a two phase project for the All American Shopping Center; the first phase including the construction of the Walgreeas store and resuffacing and restfiping of the existing parking lot with associated landscaping improvements. The second phase will include a facelifl; of the existing retail buildings. Mr. Robert Cowun, Director of Community Development, referred to an overhead map of the area and ilhistmted the location of the shopping center and the proposed Walgreens store. Referring to the site plan, he pointed out the existing retail shops in the center, and explained that the city is providing incentives to seek redevelopment of some of the older shopping centers that are not doing well because of competition from surrounding communities. He said that the controversial issue related to the hours of operation, and the drive up pharmacy window. Referring to the architectural diagrams, he illustrated the rendering of the building as seen from various perspectives. He noted that eoneem was expressed about the clock on the building tower, relative to its illuminated appearance. Mr. Cowan explained that the City's General Plan was revised to permit drive up windows. In 1989 the City revised its policy to allow drive up windows to accommodate handicapped patrons and in response to concerns from families with children who did not want to leave their vehicles to pick up prescriptions. He said staff supports the drive up facility; it is allowed in the General Plan; but there was concern about the need for two bays. He pointed out the proposed landscaping strips for Blaney Avenue and Bollinger. He said that the entire parking lot will be restriped and trees added. Mr. Cowan reported that staff was working with the store owners relative to concerns from the nearby residents about noisy compressors in the back of the store. Mr. Cowan summarized that architecturally, the building was attractive; and the signs would be reviewed by staff. He said it did not change the level of service at the intersection of Bollinger and Blancy. He reported that Chair Harris expressed concern about the design of the clock on the tower, particularly the illumination of the clock. In response to Com. Doyle's question, Mr. Cowan referred to the site plan and explained that in office and industrial, the density is controlled by FAR; in retail, there is a pool of space to be drawn down from, with no FAR requirement per se. He said the FAR of the entire center would be approximately .3, and that in typical commercial developments, it is .25 or .26. Mr. Cowan said that the space was coming from the pool for redeveloping older centers. Mr. Tom Boyd, Quality Design Concepts, 20085 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, addressed the issue of the eoneom relative to the clock design on the tower. He said that the clock is internally illuminated, but was not neon. He said that he was willing to work with staff on a color change if appropriate. He said that they envisioned the clock as being a focal point in Cupertino. He pointed out the Walgrcens neon logo of a mortar and pestal which was proposed to be located in two focus elements of the building. Mr. Boyd discussed the colors and materials used. He said that the roof was clay tiles, fiat, depictiing a more residential scale in character for the building, and were deep brown color. He said a base went all round the building; selection was for slump lock; which has a residential scale to it; which is called parch coat with a thin layer of plaster over that to soften the Planning Commission Minutes 7 September 8, 1997 edges even further; ahnost looking like an adobe building; khaki color; above that a mediura stucco finish; something definitely coarser than smooth stucco but not heavy stucco; canvas awnings over the windows in a teal color; exposed wood elements along the roof and clay file roof material. He said the overall color of the building was a dark tan color. Mr. Boyd said that Walgreens was proposing two drive up windows in an effort to accommodate customers who use the drive thru window to minimize waiting in line to pick up prescriptions. He said the drive up windows are exclusively for the pick up of prescriptions. Discussion regarding the tower clock continued. Mr. Boyd said the proposal was to have a clock that is easily read at night, which requires an internally illuminated clock. He said the colors could be softened and materials changed to eliminate the concern about the colors. Chair Harris amved at $: 10 p.m. Vice Chair Austin opened the meeting for public comment. Ms. Billie Cramb, 20090 La Roda Ct., Cupertino, said she felt the decision was already made and asked what the rush was. She said she only learned of the proposal recently and canvassed the neighborhood and got negative responses from people she contacted about the proposed Walgreens at the specified intersection. She said she was surprised a drive thru was even being considered in Cupertino and that a 24 hour store in an essentially residential neighborhood was a mistake. She said she remembered the problems caused by Taco Bell when the 24 hour operation was attempted, and that there were stories about children jumping the wall onto other people's property. She said the store would assumedly be selling alcohol which would cause more problems, and that there were already 4 drugstores within 1.5 miles of the corner and there was no need to have another one. In making inquiries about the phrase "negative declaration recommended in the agenda, she was told that it meant the environmental review committee had passed it as having no negative impact on the environment. For general information committee members are Don Brown, City Manager; Bob Cowan, Director of Community development; Bert Viskovich, Head of Public Works; Wally Dean, City Council; and Orrin Mahoney, Planning Commission. She said that it appeared to her to be a conflict of interest. Mr. Brown, Mr. Cowan and Mr. Viskovich are City staff, Mr. Dean and Mr. Mahoney who get to vote twice on whether or not there will be a Walgreens in the neighborhood. She said that it appeared to her that Com. Mahoney would get to decide tonight if he agreed with himself on something that was already passed. When it comes up before Council, Mr. Dean can decide that he agrees with himself. She said she felt it was not right that he was wearing two hats. Ms. Cramb said she would like to see facts and figures on the environmental impact study, traffic flow studies, and the number of accidents on that comer over the last few years, and the projected traffic increase; 750 was brought in tonight; at the same time the developer is talking about two drive thru windows and worrying about lines. She said she felt it was going to result in a big mount of traffc. She said that Walgreens wasn't putting a building in just to be nice; they are obviously expecting some business as it was a busy comer. She asked that the Planning Commission to vote no on this project. Vice Chair Austin clarified that Com. Mahoney did not vote twice; the negative declaration only deals with one portion that relates to the environmental impact, and Mr. Cowan does not vote. There is no conflict of interest. Com. Mahoney clarified the distinction that, the first thing that happens in any of the projects is that there is a vote to determine whether or not a full blown environmental impact report per CEQA, (such as what was done for the Diocese property) is required. In the case of the Diocese property the cost upwards of $100,000 was involved, and the report was a voluminous document and took months to review. He said the committee which has a rep from the City Council Planning Commission Minutes II September 8, 1997 and the Planning Commission, goes through a che~k list to see whether or not a full blown environmental impact report is required, and that is reviewed and either approved here by the full Planning Commission, and determined whether or not a full blown environmental impact report needs to be done. The first step of the entire process is what is oceuring at this evening's meeting. Mr. Ken Pugh, 6848 Bollinger Road, San Jose, expressed concerns about security. He said he was concerned with the many vehicles that come in contact at that intersection, people hurt, and he said he hoped those issues would be discussed. Relative to 24 hour traffic, he said the facility would attract local residents as well as those passing through and create more traffic. Mr. Eric Chang, said he objected to having the building at the intersection. He said it was poor planning, and a very congested area from the original side. He said the traffic was also very heavy at the corner, especially on the weekend, when the parking lot is almost full. If another store is added, there will not be enough parking; and if having to add more landscaping, it will reduce the parking space. He said more investigation was needed for landscaping protection for this area; the planning is not enough to cover all the design. He said the 24 hour store will increase the noise, including the parking noise and the alarm forced alarm systems. He has lived there 10 years, and Tin Tin always forces their alarm which interferes with his sleep at night. Based on these reasons, he said he was strongly opposed to the store, and it needed more investigating on traffic and noise control. Mr. Paul Van Loan, 10729 So. Blaney Ave., said he felt it was an ill-advised recommendation. He pointed out also that the current parking lot is over half full and the proposed building would take up most of the spaces. He said there would be traffic congestion; and said he was surprised the people from the Tin Tin market are not opposed because it will affect their business. He said as a resident, he was concerned about the noise which will take place 24 hours per day. He expressed concern about the traffic at the intersection, noting that there have been serious accidents at the intersection. He questioned why Walgreeas would not locate at another location, such as the one vacated by K Matt on DeAnza Blvd. Mr. Scott Cowling, 10786 So. Blaney Ave., said that the issue of 24 hour operation was unacceptable and questioned why it would be considered when Taco Bell was not permitted. He said in locking at the other options available, there was a Payless Drugs 6/10 of a mile away, Longs Drugs on DeAnza and on Stevens Creek Blvd., therefore proximity to drugstores was not an issue. He said that the character of the neighborhood has grown to a lot of traffic in the center, and that 700 visits in and out of the center was a low estimate. He said the environment begins to quiet down at 9 p.m. and a 24 hour per day operation or 11 p.m. closing is not in keeping with what the neighborhood or the City of Cupertino needs. If you look at traffic again, the question is where is another access road for emergency services; there is no other straight through thoroughfare like Blaney. He pointed out that it was already difficult for the neighbors to get out of their driveways with the flow of traffic; and this would make it worse. He said the residents have heard about what the City Council and Planning Commission want to do for no growth; although there is clearly a piece of prnperty that could possibly be better utilized; this is just not it for the neighborhood. Ms. Mary Ann Overton, 10743 So. Blaney Ave., said that she has seen many accidents at the intersection and many drivers turn into the shopping center at all angles of the parking lot and putting a drive thru window will not allow traffic to go down Bollinger; there will be more accidents and the people coming to use the 24 hour pharmacy will be non-residents. She said that Mary Avenue and Fremont Avenue is a much busier intersection to be used for a 24 hour pharmacy. She said she was opposed to the use of any 24 operation in the center. Planning Commission Minutes 9 September 8, 1997 Mr. G-corgc Monk, 19985 Price Ave., said that there would bc a significant traffic increasc on Bollingcr and Blaney with thc 24 hour operation retail store. Hc said that the only othcr 24 hour facility was near El Camino Hospital, and the proposed Cupertino store would be a magnet for anyone halfway between here and there, and would increase traffic 24 hours a day. He said the Planning Commission should be prepared for many planning requests for huge walls on Blaney and Bollinger to keep the residents away from the traffic. He said that Stevens Creek Blvd. and DeAnza Blvd. are intended for this kind of bnsiness and should be kept there. Mr. Doug McCormick, 19983 Lindenbrook Lane, said that he concurred with the previous speakers; the area is busy enough as it is. He has small children and is concerned about more traffic on the street. He said he was opposed to the proposal. Vice Chair Austin closed the public input portion of the mee{ing. Chair Hams questioned the hours of sales for liquor sales. She asked if tbere were any safety issues from the Safeway store that was opened 24 hours. She said that she was curious to know if there were issues about safety from the Safeway 24 hour operation and its close proximity to Cupertino would bear on this decision. She questioned the hours that the drive thru would be opened. Mr. Cowan stated that it was the preference of the owner and a convenience they were offering for customers. Staffand Mr. Boyd answered questions about the parking spaces and thc restriping of thc parking lot. A discussion ensued regarding thc traffic impacts. Mr. Cowan explained that the City's General Plan addressed traffic caring capacity of roadways and it is a LOS B in terms of traffic. He mentioned that there was increased traffic and it is a question of severity. He said most of the people in the residential neighborhoods are not concerned about capacity oftbeir streets, but a worried about more ears. There will be more cars but the city standards will not be exceeded; the level of service will not go down. Chair Harris said that many businesses are moving out of town and the idea of someone moving into Cupertino was gratifying. She said that although there is another Walgreens and a Payless Drugs in close proximity, in reality they are not in the City of Cupertino and do not benefit the city in dollars. She added that the Walgreens on DeAnza Blvd. is scheduled to close. She said she liked the idea of the retail store at the location. Relative to the 24 hour operation, she was originally in favor of the 24 operation as a community service; but the fact that it is a residential neighborhood and at, er listening to the residents' input, she no longer was in favor of the 24 hour operation but suggested that the store open earlier in the morning and remain open later in the evening. She said that liquor should not be sold all night; and felt someone should know the laws about sale of liquor during the late hours. She said she would like more information on the coverage; if it was previously .43. how couM it be down to .31. She said she felt the drive thru window was advantageous for evening hours for safety reasons and could be opened from 9 p.m. until closing. Chair Harris said if the center and community feel there is a parking issue, then we need to have it open so people don't park in the street and in front of people's houses. She said she felt the architecture was a little too striking to attract attention and didn't want neon; said it needs to be toned down; it doesn't need to scream out. She said she would like to see the color boards and would like to see the landscaping and see that there is color and attention to that, and she wanted to know how many parking spaces are there now compared to what is proposed. Planning Commission Minutes 10 September 8, 1997 Com. Mahoncy said that he concurred with Chair Harris on the project itself and that he favored retail. He said although a 24 hour operation is convenient, the proposed location is not appropriate for 24 hour operation. Drive thru should be a single bay only and he had no feelings about hours. He said he was not worried about coverage, but fine if you want to get numbers for that. He said he wanted to see architectural details, real color boards. He said more traffic data could be gathered, but felt the actual flow will be better with less curb cuts; parking to be addressed further; liquor sales will take care of themselves with hours of more information needed on the color palette; more detailed information needed on the architectural and site on the building; issue on the 24 hour operation, and the drive through pharmacy. He said that one advantage of putting this in is the curb cuts would be reduced. Com. Doyle said he was concerned that there needs to be some good setbacks to the intersection since it is an odd shaped intersection; and to make sure there is lot of clearance and visibility there. Need more color information; more architectural details. He said he was trying to recall another site where there is another 36/37 foot height commercial building that is not a landmark one coming into the area, that close to the corner. He said that a lot of work went into some of the ones in other parts of town to make sure that it blended in with the neighborhood and the heights weren't too high, and generally a lower slung building that would be reflective of the center and the surrounding neighborhood would be more appropriate if there is going to be one there at all. Coverage as general information; he would like to have what site in town has this type of coverage for a retail outlet for comparison purposes. Relative to the project, he said he felt redevelopment of the center is a positive upgrade but it shouldn't be detrimental to the environment and the people around it. Com. Doyle said he was opposed to drive thru windows and did not feel it was the right think for the community. He said he was not supportive of the 24 hour operation in these corridors. He said generally when one 24 hour operation is permitted, more become 24 hour operation, and he felt it was not appropriate. Relative to parking, he said he was opposed to the new ratios but it appears that it meets the ratio; he said the Safeway comparison would be informational. Vice Chair Austin said she would like the item to be continued to see the architectural design and color materials as she could not approve the project until she saw it all. She said she would also like to see a comparison of the Safeway; and other 24 hour Walgrecns. She said she was in favor of the drive thru window for one bay for people picking up prescriptions when they are ill or parents with children. She said she has always been against 24 hour operation, but don't think this is the kind of place people would gather. Relative to coverage, FAR, she said it seems like it would be overdeveloped. She said that regarding liquor sales, she did not think they could be restricted. Chair Harris said that the access on Bollinger didn't look wide enough; people are going to go into the store and go around to the right and go thru that drive thru and come out; either whether they come in on Blaney or on Bollinger and drive thru and come back out onto Bollinger. People will be entering from the other parking lot and will come out there to and will be converging there, and yet that looks like only 66% of the opening that is on Blaney. She said she would like to see how many fee~ that really is and what the traffic engineer thinks about circulation. The other thing is the store doesn't have any potted plants or landscaping; it has all the areas that are lined; so there needs to be something to soi~en the fact the store is sitting in the middle of the parking lot. She said she would like to see some green or color either in pots or in some of the triangles planted. She requested a landscape plan and a color board and the answers to all questions so that a responsible decision could be made and the community will have more than 3 days to consider it. Planning Commission Minutes 11 September 8, 1997 Chair Harris said that she would like information on the safety issue at the Safeway 24 hour store two blocks away. Mr. Cowan clarified that thc Usc Permit, if granted, would be to the owacr of the center, not to Walgreens, to build a store; and could possibly be used for another use in the future. Mr. Boyd indicated he would prefer a continuance to address the issues of concern. He pointed out that without a drive thru window, the project of a Wnlgreeas store and the renovation of the center would go away as Walgreeas would only build a freestanding building with a drive thru window for prescriptions. He said that the 24 hour operation and one drive thru window only would be negotiable issues. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to continue Application 11-U-97 to the September 22, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. Com. Doyle Com. Roberts Passed 4-0-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 26, 1997 Regular Meeting MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VOTE: Chair. Harris moved to approve the August 26, 1997 Planning Commission minutes as presented Com. Mahoney Com. Roberts Com. Doyle Passed 3-0-1 Vice Chair Austin declared a recess from 9:10 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Chair Hams reconvened the meeting. Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: 8-Z-97 and 30-EA-97 City of Cupertino John Way Request from residents to m-zone John Way to limit construction to single story. The following parcels will be affected: 359-19-001; 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 007, 008, 009, 010; 359-18-001, 002, 003, 004, 005,006 and 007; 359-18-052, 053, 054. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: October 6, 1997 Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application from John Way residents to rezone lorn Way to limit construction to one story homes. Fifteen of the twenty residents of John Way signed the petition to rezone to limit construction to one story. If the application is approved, the street will join five other Cupertino neighborhoods with the same restriction. With the restriction in place, it will be possible to construct an addition to a one story home, with the application and approval of a conditional use permit. Planning Commission Minutes 12 September 8, 1997 A slide presentation was shown illustrating typical homes in the neighborhood. Referring to an overhead street map, Mr. Cowan explained that thc 15 residents had petitioned to restrict construction on John Way to one story. He said that the lots were under 10,000 square feet and were below the FAR for the new bomes being built in Cupertino. If the restriction was approved, any future John Way homeowners would have to seek a use permit to build on a second story. Chair Harris opened the meeting for public comment. Mr. Joe Van Epps, 10525 John Way, said that the owner of the lower property was not contacted because they thought he resided on Kerwin as his home did not face John Way. Two owners of rental properties were not contacted because it was not known who the property owner was. He said that some of the older homes are sold, and they are tom down and replaced with huge second story structures which are inappropriate for the neighborhood and would have an impact on the residents' privacy. Ms. Jimai Chen, 10580 John Way, said that she purchased the home in December and was not aware of the petition until recently. She said she spoke with architects and real estate personnd to discuss the impacts on the home values and the neighborhood. Ms. Chen said that she lived with three children and her mother and had purchased the home with the intention of adding a second story to her home. She questioned being further restricted as Cupertino had more strict ordinances than other cities. She said she wanted to fit in the neighborhood and was not aware of the possible restriction when she purchased the home; and now felt that she would be rejected from the neighborhood. Chair Harris explained that the present home was 1238 sq. ft., an 18% FAR with an allowable .45 FAR; therefore the house could be doubled in space on one story. Ms. Chen responded that it would greatly reduce the hnckyard space and with three children, a more suitable addition would be a second story addition. Ms. Cben said she was opposed to the restriction of one story homes on John Way. Mr. Clayton N. Stokes, 10628 Lonna Lane, concurred with Ms. Chen, and said that he had a large family and if the need arose in the future to expand his home, he hoped he would be able to do what is best for his family and still fit in the neighborhood. He said that many people in the area do not like large houses in the area and the residents agreed that it was the ideal place to live. He said he wished there was another way to deal effectively with the question of whether or not a house fits appropriately in a neighborhood, instead of using a blanket statement Mr. Stokes said that his home was across from the two story in the neighborhood and he did not have any problems with that second story home and it did not infringe upon his privacy. He questioned what the result would be if a resident on his street, which backed onto John Way, wanted to put a second story addition to their homes. Mr. Voyle McFafland, 10567 John Way, said that the homes have been well maintained by the residents, yet they have had problems to deal with also. He said that he had four children and a parent in his home and accommodated them through adding rooms to his home and building laterally which still left a big back yard. Ms. Judy Craffney, 10553 John Way, spoke in favor of the restriction, stating that they had remodeled almost 90% of their home, tripling the kitchen size by building out into the side yard; adding a master bath and a family room. Chair Harris closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes 13 September 8, 1997 Com. Doyle said that he did not have a problem with it, that it was a clear majority. He clarified that there would be an exception process. Com. Mahoney said he agreed, as it was a majority. He said that he saw where larger homes in a similar neighborhood changed the character of the neighborhood. He was glad to sec this come forward and would be nice if more people did it; it took courage to do it because the homeowners are potentially sacrificing some future value. He said as long as them was an exception process,'he suppoflaxl the residents' request. Com. Austin said she was not comfortable with the proposal, although she did not like the large, unattractive, two story homes being built in other neighborhoods. She questioned the effect on the residents of John Way that second story home additions to homes on Lonna and Felton would have. She said it was a beginning and wished more neighborhoods would do it; there is an exception process so people can apply if things change. She concluded that it was their free choice and she was in favor of it. Chair Harris said that she was in favor of the restriction because the lots were 10,000 sq. ft. lots and the potential still exists to almost double the square footage on one story. She noted that other residents successfully increase their square footage with one story additions. She said the owners have decided to petition for the restriction and the possibility existed for them to ask in the future that the restriction be lifted. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to approve the Negative Declaration on Application 30-EA-97 Com. Doyle Com. Roberts Passed 4-0-0 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to approve Application 8-Z-97 Com. Doyle Com. Roberts Passed 4-0-0 Chair Harris noted that the application would be presented to the City Council on October 6, 1997. Com. Roberts arrived at 10 p.m. 10. Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: 5-GPA-97 and 9-EA-97 City of Cupertino Citywide Consideration of an amendment to the land use element of the General Plan to allow an intemhange of square footage between commemial and office/industrial uses (Policy 2-3). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: September 15, 1997 CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes 14 September g, 1997 Stofleorescntation: Mr. Colin lung, Associate Planner, said that basically staff's recommendation on the amendment could be expanded given thc nature of questions and thc overall status of retail development in Cupertino. He said they went a little beyond what the original amendment was with the idea that you take an action on the proposed amendment and send a separate minute order to the City Council notifying you of other concerns and actions that they may take in order to support the future of retail development in Cupertino. The issue before you had to do with the conversion of commercial development potential to office/industrial potential and the second part with some needed actions that needed to be accomplished with the Vallco Fashion Mail, which is out of our hands because it is in private ownership. The idea that given the fact that although the nature of retailing seems to favor the much larger sites and the fact that the largest retail site in the city is Vallen, that it be a high priority for reposifioning, or revitalization but aiso the understanding that even though we do not have a lot of other retail sites in Cupertino and go over that briefly. Mr. Jung said that the idea that there are successful small retailers out there in other cities, and if the City took a more aggressive posture in attracting them, perhaps the city could latch onto these vs. some other city, because we are competing against other cities for retail development. He said there are smaller retailers out there that might fit in well with some of the smaller centers that we have on Stevens Creek or DeAnza Blvd. He said the report also contains some potentiai combinations of consolidating parcels. Other things tha~ came up with self evaluation, was the idea that we don't have larger sites for retail to generate the big box retailers that erente a lot of revenues, and that we do have these smaller sites, that hotels take up little land and because we capture all the transient occupancy tax rather than share the sales tax, they essentially generate as .much revenue for the city as a big box retailer. A hotel on 2-1/2 acres can generate as much revenue for the city as a big box retailer on 10 acres without ail the accompanying traffic impacts and the extra service demands from a police department that you normally have with a retail operation vs. a hotel; so it is something the city needs to consider. He said the city hasn't aggressively looked for hotels. He said, however, that the City asked for a hotel at the Cupertino Village/Sandhill Properties. He said that there was one site at the Cupertino City Center designated for a hotel. Staff recommends 100,000 sq. ft. transfer of office to industriai as outlined on Page 2-7 of the staff report. Discussion continued wherein staffanswered Commissioners' questions. Mr. Deke Hunter, Hunter Properties, said the application was approximately 105,000 sq. ft., of which 20,000 sq. ft. is retail development. He clarified that there is an existing office component that is set in place; everybody wants more retail and more community oriented retail for that interchange. Over and above that they ask for an officc component in the incremental increase of the office components was the 86,000 feet that has in the report. He provided caiculatlons for the office and retail component. Chair Harris said that an analysis was done that said hotels brought in dollars to the community in terms of occupancy; and asked if there was analysis done on using the square footage for hotels which brings in only outsiders and outside traffic vs. retail which serves the community and brings in inside traffic. She asked if there was any traffic analysis done on value to the community other than the occupancy tax incentive? Mr. Jung said that a hotel generated much less traffic than a retail building. The traffic number used for 1,000 sq. ft. of retail, using a factor of 2.6 per 1,000 sq. lc. and for a hotel room it equals .7 per hotel room. Com. Roberts referred to recommendation No. 2 and asked if it applied specifically to the 100,000 sq. R. that was being discussed. Mr. lung said that it was being considered, and it applies Planning Commission Minutes 15 geptember 8, 1997 specifically in this instance for this General Plan a~nenchnent; the Commission had already previously expressed an interest at looking at ways of reducing traffic. One way of reducing traffic is by reducing the traffic that comes off of development potential; trading one retail square foot for one office square foot instead of 1 to 1.5. Com. Roberts, asked that if a Commissioner had some reservations about that policy in general but can see the benefit to the city of this particular change, would it would be imperative to state findings that justify that conversion? Mr. Jung responded that it would. Mr. Cowan clarified that the actual Page 2-7 indicates that there is a certain allocation in all along Stevens Creek Blvd.; and it was not meant to be specifically applied to a particular property. Com. Mahoney said the amendment is proposing to do 100,000 sq. ft. of conversion on development potential but also includes any other conversion from existing, such as Any Mountain. Mr. lung said it would be a separate category and it was not made part of this amendment because the direction from the Planning Commission at the previous meeting was that you consider each case on its own merits and the Planning Commission did not feel that converting existing retail to office space was really a General Plan issue. Com. Doyle reported on the Economic Summit held August 20, 1997. He said that local developers were present at the meeting and provided input on what was going on in the marketplace. He summarized the recommendations from the meeting. Vallco was the key of Cupertino's retail; most of the square footage and draws come from Vallco. Additional major retail development will not increase the amount of retail in Cupertino; it will only replace it. Conversion from retail to other uses is most likely for the small shopping centers and things like housing are options. He said his interpretation of what the committee said was there was not support for conversion of the Tandem site to any type of commercial resident retail element. There wasn't support for that from that group. They say go ahead and let them build their campus, but it was not to go and build a retail. They thought one of the things that should happen is to work to consolidate the existing developments to see if they could get some synergy, some ten acre or significant areas where they could do it. We as a community could take some zoning or other actions to support those types of actions to occur. Chair Harris opened the meeting for public input. Mr. Deke Hunter, Hunter Properties, said he concurred with Com. Doyle's comments in that Cupertino did have some significant retail challenges facing them irrespective of the pool of retail development possibilities that may be set aside within the General Plan. He said he took exception, in that one of the biggest problems with Cupertino's retail environment today is in the larger format centers, there is duplication within those categories, but if you weren't able to free up a 10, 12 or 15 acre site, you would be able to create an environment in which there wouldn't be immediate overlap. There would be a risk because some of the most active participants within those categories, such as Target, or Mervyns where you could easily overlap yourself, but in a 10 to 12 acre environment you would have the opportunity to do entertainment, home improvement, music, books and other things pertaining to community focus. Mr. Hunter added that in the earlier application, the average Walgreens generates $80,000 per year of sales tax revenue. He said one of the city's goals was smaller retail development, and when you have a successful retail operators such as Walgreens, the typical sales are from $8 to $14 million out of the 14,000 sq. ft. He said he would not try to minimize the impacts of putting that type of operation in a neighborhood than a commercial corridor, but along the lines of the goals you arc Planning Commission Minutes 16 September 8, 1997 setting out within, this General Plan review is a successful goal that can be implemented when those opportunities arise, not withstanding all the issues that the immediate neighborhood would have to deal with. That goal is a goal that will prove out and bear frnit if you are able to sustain that goal in appropriate places. Referring to the entertainment oriented complex concept such as the one located near Great America, Mr. Hunter said that in concept it was an entertainment oriented development, but most simplistically it would be a music or book store or theater operation. He said that there are other uses such as a Club Disney, or places that do science fairs. What you are trying to do is create a destination for the family to come and spend time and relate to their community. Chair Harris asked staff what the remaining available commercial space would be if they do this recommendation. Referring to Exhibit H, Mr. Jang said the balance would be about 360,000 sq. ft. of retail potential. Com. Roberts said he was not comfortable making a decision in the abstract, and would like to make the decision on a project-specific basis, and would like to see the clear benefit to the city on the actual transfer that is going to be implemented because he felt in the General Plan there was a balance in mind in the long term between retail and office and industrial components of the development, and the level of development was justified by economic benefits to the city. He said he would want to see those economic benefits to the city in that particular instances, especially if looking at something like a substantial proportion of the remaining retail. He said it may be in the short mn, the prospects for retail are not bright, but two or three years ago we had a surplus of office and industrial and everybody was wondering what was happening to that. Those situations change according to the market. He said he would be willing to consider such a transfer in a specific case where he saw the advantage to the city, but we could make that decision now in principle and some other project would come along and take advantage of that and it might turn out to be a mistake. He said he was opposed to No. 2; favored Nos. 3, 4 and 5. He said he did not see the one action in the list of recommendations for potential consolidation of parcels for retail development; and he requested that it be added as a recommendation. Mr. Cowan said that the vehicle to do that is redevelopment. He said the alternatives had not been covered, but he would like to see encouraged the consolidation of parcels and that would become a separate issue. He said he supported all of the recommendations but No. 2 only in the case of specific action where there is benefit to the city. Com. Austin concurred. Com. Doyle said he agreed with Com. Roberts, but felt it was important that people define the community and the downtown, not by the mall, but by the small shops in the shopping areas that aren't typically in those malls, and by us making the General Plan open blanket assessment or decision, it could significantly erode the retail base by itself. Similar to Com. Roberts' discussion about the office industrial, he said he feared there would be conversions of many of them. He cited the Monta Vista hardware site as one that turned into housing, and they cannot be reclaimed. Corns. Doyle and Austin said they were in favor of encouraging the consolidation of the parcel. Com. Mahoney said it was a tuning; there was an allocation based on how it was viewed; this is a tuning of that based on not looking forever into the future; and at least the future as we see it, it is not taking away from any retail that is going to happen; all we are talking about is other empty stores already there; and unless there is a change did not see it affecting the retail. He said he would be in favor of moving $100,000 into that category rather than do a General Plan amendment each time something comes in. He said he was in favor of the remaining ones with the inclusion of the consolidation because he felt it was the only way to make the change. Planning Commission Minutes 17 September 8, 1997 Chair Harris said she concurred with the others, except on one issue. She said she would like to sec the project come forward on DeAnza and make a decision on the square footage. The charette said we need an activity node by Stevens Creek and Wolfe, and there isn't an activity node ns an office development or hotel. She said she viewed an activity node as the lovely patio areas outside the Oaks where people at 5 or 6 restaurants sit outside at night, and there is a sense of community. She said if the allocation is converted, they won't get it. Chair Harris said that she was opposed to the transient hotels bringing outsiders that don't benefit the community; she would like to have one good sized, special community hotel, larger than noted in the report, for the Town Center. She said she would like to have a hotel with banquet facilities with several restaurants, something attractive for high school students to have their dances there, and have community events and wedding receptions. She said she felt it would be better than a string of small places. She summarized that she was opposed to No. 5, and that a site was already designated in the General Plan and that is the site we should go with and make it special. Otherwise she did not want any more hotels and did not want to put one in the activity node. She said she would like to see some sort of eatertainment area developed there. MOTION: SECOND: NOES: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to approve the Negative Declaration on 9-EA-97 for the potential General Plan amendment Com. Austin Coms. Roberts and Chair Harris Passed 3-2-0 Com. Roberts clarified his no vote, because he views the General Plan as the balance between developments of certain kind and the economic benefits, and he said he could imagine the circumstances where that benefit would be positive, and others where someone would come in with a project for 100,000 sq. ft. and it would be negative. He said he felt the additional development might not be justified on an economic basis. Chair Harris clarified that because there was a consensus opposing it, she did not see the purpose of approving a Negative Declaration. She also requested that when there was a split decision from the Planning Commission, the dissenting vote be commented on, because several staff reports arc forwarded to the Council when them is a 3:2 vote and there is no explanation of what the controversy was and a 3:1 or 3:2 vote is not the Planning Commission's recommendation. She requested that the negative comments testate by the Commissioners at the time of vote be included in the staff report. MOTION: SECOND: NOES: VOTE: Com. Austin moved to deny Application 5-GPA-97 Com. Roberts Com. Mahoney Passed 4-1-0 Com. Mahoney restated No. 5, encourage consolidation of pareels for retail development in a sense of approving large enough acreage to permit economic development. MOTION: SECOND: NOES: VOTE: Com. Roberts moved approval of staff recommendation No. 5, recommending that the City investigate specific sites for potential hotel development Com. Mahoney Chair Harris Passed 4-1-0 Planning Commission Minutes 18 September 8, 1997 Chair Harris added the caveat that she would like one large special hotel in the City Center. MOTION: Com. Doyle moved that staff recommendations Nos. 3, 4, 6 be forwarded to the City Council for adoption SECOND: Com. Mahoney VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 Mr. Cowan reported that the package of General Plan amendments would be presented to the City Council on October 6, 1997. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: None REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: None DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. the regular Planning Commission meeting on September 22, 1997 at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Minutes Approved as Amended: September 22, 1997