Loading...
PC 10-27-97CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETl/NG OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON OCTOBER 27, 1997 SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Austin, Doyle. Roberts. Chairperson Hams Mahoney Staff present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community, Development; Ciddy Wordell, City Planner; Eileen Murray, Deputy City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the October 13, I997 regular meeting: MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Roberts moved to approve the October 13, 1997 Planning Comrmssion minutes as presented. Com. Austin Com. Mahoney Passed 4-0-0 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: Application No.{s): Applicant: Location: 1 I-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 10.40-050 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED REQUEST CONTINUANCE TO NOV. 10, 1997 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: l 1-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. ff. retail (Walgreens) and other improvements related to parking and landscaping at an existing shopping center; and to allow 24 hour operation at Walgreens and a dnve-throu~ window for pharmacy. Planning Commission Minutes 2 October 27, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: November 17, 1997 REQUEST CONTINUANCE TO NOV. 10, 1997 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MOTION: SECOND: NOES: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Austin moved to postpone Application Nos. 11-EXC-97 and 29-EA-97 to the November 24, 1997 Planning Commission meeting; and Application Nos. 11-U-97 and 28-EA-97 to the November 10, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. Com. Roberts Chair Hams Com. Mahoney Passed 3-1-0 There was a brief discussion relating to the placement of future agenda items. CONSENTCALENDAR AppliCatnon No.: Applicant: Location: 20-U-86 (Mod.) Dance Academy (Oaks Cemer) 21269 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 600 Modification to add a 53 sq. ft. addition to a tenant space in an existing shopping center. Director's referral of minor modification in accordance with Chapter 19.132 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED Application No.: Applicant: Location: 10-ASA-97 Benchmark Homes 10741 No. Wolfe Rd/19590 Prunehdge Ave. Landscaping plans for 7 single family homes. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Roberts moved to approve Items 1 and 2 of the consent calendar Com. Austin Com. Mahoney Passed 4-0-0 PUBLIC HEAR~G Application No.: Applicant: Location: 15-U-96 (Mod.) Sandhill Properties 10741 North Wolfe Road Planning comnUssion Minutes 3 October 27, 1997 Modification to revise a parking plan of an approved hotel and approval of the landscaping plan. Director's reti:rral of minor modification in accordance with Chapter 19.132 of the Cupertino Mumcipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED Staff presentation: Ms. Ciddy Wordelk City Planner, Smd that the hotel site was being presented for modifications relating to the reconfiguration of the parking spaces and approval of the landscaping plan. She reviewed the proposed parking plan m eliminate 7 parking spaces from the Wolfe Road frontage to allow for a larger landscaping area around the existing ash trees as outlined in the attached staff report. Ms. Wordell explained that the existing conditions require 17 l spaces and an overflow parking agreement for 12 additional spaces, which would provide for 14 additional spaces. Staff supports the change in parking as it provides greater protection for the trees, and results in a net increase of only 2 spaces on-site which can be made up with the overflow parking agreement. Staff also supports removal of the redwood tree based on the arborist's recommendation for greater space for the remaining tree and on close proximity to the existing tree, which provides significant tree canopy in that area. Ms. Wordell explained the proposed changes m the landscaping plan, wherein staff recommended that the ash U'ees on the northern property be substituted for the liquid amber. Other modifications include adding some trees between the existing ash to provide more screening along Wolfe Road as well as a privet hedge around the perimeter. She pointed out that palm trees were proposed for the east and west building elevations, but staff was recommending they be substituted with other species. A discussed ensued wherein Ms. Wordell clarified the location of the trees and the parking plan. She reiterated that the overflow parking agreement would be increased to 14, with 157 parking spaces on site. Mr. Dave Rossi, representing Peter Pau and Sandhill Properties, reviewed the proposed changes to the parking plan, and stated that 5 parking spaces were being added back in. The proposed changes were made to provide emergency access and to ensure the overall safety of the trees throughout the construction project. He said that the fifth parking space was located in the loading dock. Ms. Wordell pointed out that staff did not count the loading space toward the applicant meeting their parking requirement as they felt it was not a realistic solution, and it should be made up in the overflow parking agreement. Mr. Rossi said that the applicant was willing m comply with 14 spaces in the overflow agreement. Chair Hams summarized that the three issues were removal of the redwood tree, the new parking plan and the new landscaping plan. Mr. Rick Sardell, landscape architect, said that they agreed with staff relative to increasing the ash trees, and the placement of the liquid amber trees. He explained that the palm trees complemented the Mediterranean style building. Mr. Sardell said that because of the Planning Comrmssion's objection to palm trees, a variety of red maple would be considered. A discussion ensued regarding the landscaping plan relative to the tree removal. Mr. Jim Clark, arborist, reported on the recommendations for tree removal. Chair Hams opened the meeting for public input. There was no one present who wished to speak. Planning Commission Minutes 4 October 27, 1997 Chair Harris sttmmarized the issues for discussion: removal of one tree; acceptance of the change in the par'king, and the landscaping consisting of what was shown with the exception of changing the ash, changing some of the sweet gum to ash. and comments on palm vs. red maple. Com. Roberts said that he was opposed to palm trees and felt subtropic vegetation did not blend with the other tree species to be used. He said he understood the argument of preserving the better of the two trees and would agree to the compromise of saving the more majestic of the trees. He said that the modification for the shared parking was acceptable, although he had not heard the details of the shared parking or its location. Com. AuStin said she concurred with Com. Roberts; agreed with the parking changes with the reciprocal agreement; agreed with removal of the tree and that the palm trees were not suitable trees, and she would prefer to see red maple or liquid amber trees. Com. Doyle said that the tradeoff of losing parking spaces on site and keeping trees was the right thing to do; and he was in favor of reducing one of the parking spaces and give the space for the growth of the larger redwood tree; he said he was in favor of keeping the other tree. He said he was supportive of a reciprocal agreement to make the spaces available offsite and still keep that many trees on the site as possible. He expressed concern that in 2 or 3 years the hotel might be used as a comparison of parking ratios for another hotel, when the reciprocal arrangement would be forgotten and some numbers would surface such as .72. He said that palm trees were not native to the area and something like a broad leaf or typical tree was more suitable; ash trees for the side was appropriate; and he said he would like to keep as many trees as possible bemuse from that area continuing west was a scorched earth type vegetation. He said supported the liquid amber trees. Mr. Rossi noted that there were 3 or 4 4-inch diameter trees removed from the Carlos Murph~v site and some flowering pears and ash trees. Chair Harris said that it was suggested that a number of good sized trees should be planted, because across the street there will not be any trees. She suggested 15 gallon replacement trees. Chair Hams said that she agreed with Com. Doyle relative to keeping the second redwood tree; she would be willing to count the employee of the month or manager space as a real space if it is used as a real space; she suggested a three foot kigh screen for protection. ,Mr. Clarke said that he had not seen the tree since the fall and said that if it was requested to be considered for preservation, he would request that it be pending a site inspection on his part by another member of his office. He said at this time he was uncomfortable about commenting about its survival following the grading and demolition without seeing it first. Chair Hams commented that Mr. Clarke's earlier comments recommended the removal because the other tree required the equivalent of two parking spaces in order to maintain the number needed. Mr. Clarke said that the impacts to both trees were significant, and he was not sure that the parking space around tree 172 would be adequate, and he would like to inspect the tree and discuss it further whether one parking space or two spaces was going to be needed. Com. Austin said she would agree if they would ensure that the root situation was protected even if it meant giving up one-half a parking space. Chair Harris said that she preferred to save the tree: agr2 ced with the adjusmaent in the parking plan; would count the extra manager's space; substitute the palm ri'ecs with red maple trees. Planning Commission Minutes 5 October 27, 1997 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE:' Com. Doyle moved to approve Application 15-U-96 with the modifications to retain the second tree dependent upon an arborist's review; the modification of the onsite parking and the numbers and reciprocal agreement to ensure the total parking requirement is covered; the change in replacement of palm trees based on staff input. Com. Austin Com. Mahoney Passed 4-0-0 Chaff Hams noted that the motion did not include the manager's parking space. There was a brief discussion about moving trees from one location to another. Com. Doyle requested a report for the future be given on the feasibility of moving trees. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS 6. Review 1997 Work Program Staffpresentation: Ms. Wordell provided an update on the 1997 work program which was approved by the City Council and Planning Commission earlier in the year. Referring to the Commullity Development 1997 Work Program chart, Ms. Wordetl reviewed the items which were not completed on schedule, but would be scheduled for the remainder of the year. They included creation of a new subcommittee for architectural review; Appendix B, specific buildout; review of single family FAR; and a strategy to address future development of ~:ansition parcels. Chair Harris commended staff on their efforts and remarked that some of the items illustrated on the chart were time consaaming; there was a shortage of staffperson during the year; and the addition of the urban pockets took up staff time. She said that it was a responsibly handled year; and that it would be beneficial to discuss the FAR issue because of its community interest. Ms. Wordell said that the FAR issue would be scheduled in Janumy or February.. Chair Hams suggested including the setbacks and other parts of the RI ordinance to cover mles about second story setbacks and wall planes not being two stories high and similar things not included in the residential. Mr. Cowan explained that since 1988 the ordinance has changed, and it was staff's plan to select a number of houses built before and aa°ret 1988 to address the positive and negative aspects of the style of houses recently built. He said that processes will be discussed, and noted that there were some jurisdictions with design review of homes, second story homes. Chair Hams pointed out that there were no rules for the new homes fitting in with the older neighborhoods relative to scale or color, and suggested that there should be some consideration for the R1 vis a vis a subdivision vs. the R1 relative to fitting into the existing neighborhood. In response to Com. Doyle's question relative to the fi:equency of the General Plan revision, Mr. Cowan said that earlier in the year it was discussed and decided to address revision of the General Plan every 10 years with a suggestion for a more rigorous annual review. Com. Doyle requested that staff work on a proposal for the General Plan review process for the five or ten year period, tbr Planning Commission Minutes 6 October 27, 1997 Planning Courtmssion review to ensure that the process is on target. Com. Doyle requested an update on the housing requirements submitted to the state. Ms. Wordell said that as a follow up to the most recent housing element changes sent, the state sent a letter to the city of Cupertino stating they were acceptable but that they would be closely monitoring to see if more was done because they were concerned that the city was diverging f~om its approved certified housing element. She said that she did not presently have a response to the bigger question whether there is teeth at the state level to go after cities or to impose it. She said that one of the bases of having the housing element approved was having sufficient silos, and because Cupertino has changed some of its densities, the available sites have diminished, therefore the measure wasn't how has the city built, but how much land is it making available for housing? Chair Harris commented that the city accomphshed half the plan in 1-I/2 years with 1,250 homes approved. Mr. Cowan said that the state s p an is concerned with the city's housing production over a 5 year period. He said the work program includes evaluation of the U'ansitional parcels, between the commercial properties, the aparmaent properties and the single family residential and there are some properties that have always been 5 to 10 per acre. He said he felt people will look for lower densities for those properties, and if so, the city would go back to the state and notify them that the General Plan would be modified. Discussion continued regarding residential development and annexation and the impacts to the community. Mr. Cowan noted that the state is also concerned with the issue related to jobs/housing ratio. Com. Doyle said that he would like to address the issue of the city's housing additions in the context of the surrounding communities, where other communities stand, and det~J~fine if Cupertino was in line, ahead or behind the other communities. He said he felt that Cupertino should not be responsible for providing all the housing. He said it was important to understand the letter of the law when dealing with the state. Com. Austin questioned whether the cutbacks at Apple Computers and closure of Measurex would affect the city's jobs/housing ratio. Ms. Wordell responded that the city was still operating under the 1988 agreement, with the numbers being expanded each year; and the fair share remaining the same for-8 years. Com. Doyle questioned whether it was reasonable to have staffrevisit the housing requirements for the city in light ora potential change in policy, their position and attempt to address it from the standpoint of are they accomplishing the right thing or over-achieving in some ways. In response to Chair Harris' question about the ASA committee, Ms. Wordell stated that it was staff's intention to return with a proposal. A discussion ensued regarding R1 relative to views from the hills, view of the hills from the valley floor, and house colors. Mr. Cowan said that staff will define what they feel the issues are and have a preliminary meeting to discuss the issues for the ordinances. He said he did not know what would result in the R1 modification, as it could be minimal or very extensive, and discretionary review involved other things in terms of staffing and ordinances. Ms. Wordell said that the 1998 work plan would be agendized for November 24. Com. Doyle expressed concern about the issue of the ta'ucks from Kaiser and Stevens Creek Quarries, and questioned what action could be taken. He pointed out that Kaiser was the number one point source polluter in the valley and some action needed to be taken. Planning Commission Minutes 7 October 27, 1997 Mr. Cowan said that the only control the city had was relative to noise and truck speed. He said that the Santa Clara County Board of Supermsors was reluctant to oppose capacity constraints on either quarry, and there are neighborhood committees trying to address the speed control, dust control and noise control issues, which are secondary considerations. Chair Harris suggested weigh stations or height lin'fits on tracks, and prohibiting truck traffic on some streets. Mr. Cowan pointed out that the city vehicle code would get involved in that area. He said that he could review the aged reports to determine what action could be taken. Relative to Com. Doyle's concern about the negative impacts of the growth on the schools, Mr. Cowan said the issue could be readdressed. Chair Harris requested input from the Planning Commission on issues for the 1998 work plan, and asked if there were requested changes in city zomng, use. density, or any issues arising from complaints received. Corr~ Roberts suggested that they be prepared to do a review of the development on steep hillsides in the event problems arise. Chak Harris suggested addressing net vs. gross for density determination and said that it needs to be changed across the Board. Com. Austin said that the house should be a single story, reduced size, if it has to be built on the ridgeline because there is no other suitable place. She said she felt there should be architectural review of the homes to fit in the guidelines other than 45%, with color palettes, design review because of the 'pink palaces' being built in the city, because the land is so valuable. Discussion ensued regarding the possibility of the city mapping out a whole area of lots rather than considering each lot separately. 7. Discuss possibility of a Planning Commission/StaffTraining Session. Mr. COWan discussed the possibility of providing the Commission and staff oppommities for creating a better understanding and of learning new techniques for Planning Commission meetings. He said that staffs recommendation for a consultant was Moore, Iacofano Goltsman (M/G) who facilitate such meetings. There was consensus that January would be the appropriate time to schedule the training session. In addition to topics listed in the staff report, Com. Doyle suggested that Community input on issues be included to ensure that the Planning Commission is meeting the customers' needs in a proactive manner. Chair Hams suggested that the training be goal based training; they should decide which are their goals and base the training on those goals. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: In response to Com. Austin's question about the Historical Ordinance, Mr. Cowan explained that the members concluded that the most important historical resources are already protected; they picked 8 from a list of 31 sites. He said that the conUmttee concluded, and the City Council concurred, that if the other 23 sites are not that critical why have an ordinance. When the commtttee went out to look at the sites they found other sites they felt should have been listed because they had more historical significance than some of the ones hsted, but because of the time constraints and the specific definition of their task they did not seek out those other properties. Their analysis was done on the 31 properties they were asked to analyze. Chair Hams said she agreed with their analysis on the 31 and the Council's decision on the 31; however the next step should be to send them or a similar group out to identify the other properties they think are there and were not put on the list. Mr. Planning C omn~tssion Minutes 8 October 27, 1997 Cowan clarified that there were two options in the staff report; one to stop at this point or pursue the ordinance for other possible sites. The Council unanimously decided on the first option. Com. Roberts referred to the issue of urban pockets, particularly Rancho Rinconada, where the city is designated by LAFCO to take over residential areas of Rancho; not including the commercial fi-inge along Stevens Creek and along on the eastern edge, and questioned whether the city had to accept it. Mr. Cowan said that Rancho Rmconada is within the city's urban sermce area, and the fi-inge has always been commercial. He reported that the Council at its last meeting concluded that the (~ty would have to pursue annexation of Monta Vista. ought to pursue Garden Gate; but in terms of Rancho because of the size of that block, it should be annexed in a structured fashion, beginning at the existing edge of the city and working east. He said that it would require a vote of the San Jose City Council to be annexed. DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. to the regular Planning Commission meeting of November 10, 1997. Respectfully Submitted, Minutes Approved as Presented: November 10, 1997