Loading...
PC 12-08-97CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 AMENDED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON DECEMBER 8, 1997 SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Mahoney, Roberts, Chairperson Harris. Com. Austin arrived at 7:50 p.m. Commissioners absent: Doyle Staff present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development; Ciddy Wordell, City Planner; Eileen Murray, Deputy City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the November 24 regular meeting: Chair Harris requested the following changes to the November 24 minutes: Page 6, 3rd Paragraph: "three letters' should read "three unspecified letters'". Page 11, Last Paragraph: "Chair Harris said that putting an anchor tenant..." shouM read: "Chair Harris said that just putting an anchor tenant... '. Page 12, Second Paragraph: After "revitalize Cupertino's retail base" insert "which is appropriate for the Planning Commission to do if City Council thinks it is a priority." MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to approve the November 24 Planning Commission minutes as emended Com. Doyle Com. Austin and Doyle Passed 3~0-0 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Application No. Applicant: Location: 8-U-74 (Mod.) Cathay Bank 10480 S. DeAnza Blvd. Harming Commission Minutes 2 December 8, 1997 Use Permit Modification of landscaping at an existing bank to remove and replace tre~s. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED REQUEST CONTINUANCE TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JAN. 12, 1998 PUBLIC HEARING Application No.(s): Applicant: Location: 12-U-97 and 37-EA-97 Monica San 19028 Stevens Creek Boulevard Use Permit to demolish an existin4 retail building and construct a 3,769 SCl. ft. retail and 6,208 sq. ft. residential (4 units), mixed-use building, and an amendment to the Heart of the City Specific Plan related to development requirements. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: January 5, 1998 REQUEST CONTINUANCE TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JAN. 12, 1998 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 grater than 30% m accordance with Chapter 19.40.050 of the Cupertino Mancipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED CONIINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 10, 1997 Application No.(S): Applicant: Location: 5-TM-97, 5-V-97 and 36-EA-97 Yun-Jung & Chin Yen Wu 10400 So. Stelling Road Variance to allow a 10 f. rear yard setback for an existing slxucture on the remainder lot as a result of a proposed subdivision where 20 ft. is required. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED A public hearing m consider procedural changes m Title 19 of the Cupertino Mtmicipal Code (zoning code) regarding the application of the Architectural Site Control process for various zoning districts. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERlvlINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended T. ENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: January 5, 1998 REQUEST CONTINUANCE TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JAN. 12, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes 3 December 8, 1997 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Maboney moved to continue Items 1, 2 and 5 to the January 12, 1998 Planning Commission meeting Com. Roberts Com. Austin and Doyle Passed 3-0-0 MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to continue Items 3 and 4 to the January 26, 1997 plannm~ Commission meeting, Com. Roberts Com. Austin and Doyle Passed 3-0-0 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS Com. Austin arrived during discussion of Item 6. 6. Annual General Plan Review and review of 1998 Work Program. Staff presentation: Ms. Ciddy WordeH reported that the General Plan covered some major implementations for the next year consisting of significant General Pan changes, and noted that there were several projects that have not been implemented. The attached staff report outlined two suggestions for Affordable Housing implementation, one for a proposed workshop for developers and one for a proposed second program for loans. She said the intent would be to take those implememafion items to the Affordable Housing Committee for further discussion to determine if they had merit and to prioritize those through the committee. Ms. Wordell explained the "silent second" program which would offer home ownership opportunities to first-time home buyers. The loan would be secured by silent second and third un, st deeds, and no payments would be made on the loan until the home is sold. The interest rate of the loan is based on the appreciation of the home value. A discussion ensued regarding the purpose of the workshop for the developers and the proposed "silent second" program. Chair Harris said that she was not in favor of the workshop to develop a new program for market rate developers to access city funds for the development of affordable housing. She pointed out that a program presently existed that required developers to provide the 10% affordable housing out of their profit margin. She said that a program that provides some people a different concession would set a bad precedent for the next development. Com. Mahoney said that the current program taxes developers to do affordable housing, which comes out of their profit margin. He suggested that the Housing Committee address the workshop issue. Ms. Wordell summarized that there were two commissioners in favor of the ftrst proposal, and three commissioners in favor of the second proposal. Referring to Exhibit A, relating to the growth in residential and non-residential development in various categories, Ms. Wordell reported that most of the categories had a lot of development left in them, some due to the fact that there had been demolitions or expiration of a use permit which significantly increased the amount of retail or office square footage that was available last year. She Plmming Commission Minutes 4 December 8, 1997 reviewed the categories not having significant growth remaining, as outlined in the attached staff report. Chair Harris referred to Exhibit & which illustrated designated amounts of square footage but no assigned parcels. She expressed concern that when REI approached the city for land, there was no pla~ available for them, and questioned the validity of an allocation if there was not any land dedicated or assigned or any pool of land assigned. She said that when some one wants to use the allocation, there is no place for thorn to do it except to go somewher~ that is already dense and increase the density. Mr. Robert Cowan, Dir~or of Community Development, said that staff pointed out at the economic summit there was an oversupply of retail and if the potential growth of all the existing shopping centers was addressed, it was found that the ~ity ~ould probably not absorb all the 460,000 SF left in all the categories, and the question remained of where to put it. He noted that unless some redevelopment of existing offices was considered, it was unlikely that it could all be absorbed. He noted that in the RE1 case, there were spaces available, but REI wanted to own the property, but the land was not for sale. Mr. Cowan said that in 1993 the growth potential was stripped away and put into pools be~anse there were properties that were marginal and might not be developed, and it was a way to better utilize the retail. He said he was not certain of the demand for retail space picture in the next five or ten years, but that theoretically there was an oversupply. Chair Harris said that she never felt the report ftom Sedway was unbiased, and they were clear in stming that the report was commissioned by someone who wanted to have a shift on some of that; therefore to say at the economic summit that a determination was made; it was based on a report that was clearly stated it had a view. Mr. Cowan pointed out that there were several brokers ftom diff~ia areas that provided street smarts, and the Sedway people tend to look out, and use abstract demographic studies and economic models to predict future retail growth; whereas the real estate brokers know what is the realm of possibility within the next one to two years maximum. He said the most revealing data was where the centers in town were looked at and it was questioned where the 400,000 SF would go. Chair Harris stated that in order for the allocation to be put in the General Plan, the other lands that are zoned differently would have to be considered and changed to retail, or the allocation reduced. Mr. Cowan smd that it was a cushion, which is why 100,000 SF was suggested to go toward some office conversion. Mr. Cowan smd that the purpose of the exercise was to review the General Plan policies and the annual report to see if staff should consider change. He questioned if the retail allocation needed to be reassessed the next time there was a General Plan amendment. Chair Harris asked if it was all traffic, and smd that it was the maximum development allowable to keep every intersection below LOS E. She questioned if it was the maximum. Discussion continued regarding the traffic levels of service wherein Mr. Cowan answered Commissioners' questions. Com. Roberts smd that he did not see any impetus in revisiting the level of the allocaton. He smd he felt there was an incentive to atiract viable retail and the city had the capacity in terms of the space limitation to do it. He said the city should keep that opportunity open and wait until market conditions change. Ms. Wordell smd thru Exhibit E relative to traffic levels of service was still not available, and noted the item would need to be continued for fin'ther discussion. Planning Commission Minutes 5 December 8, 1997 A discussion ensued regarding the school district's ability to handle the increase in class size due to new development. Chair Harris said dam Mr. Chuck Can-, ~om the Cupertino Union School DisWict, had indicated that the issue was not growth, but classroom reduction. She said his opimon for the Planning Commission was that its growth decisions would not affect the schools in the way that the classroom redu~ion is. Mr. Cowan said that the demographic study indicated that the big growth factor was the increased household size for the existing dwellings; it was the substantial increase, with more students per household, which was not anticipated 10 years ago. Referring to Item 5, additional required review items, Ms. Wordell explained that one of the requirements was to assure the state that the city was not creating constraints to the development of housing, and presented three examples of how the city was removing obstacles and providing opportunities and incentives for housing. Chair Hams noted that the city tripled its goal for the year, from 527 units to 1500 units, which she said should be pointed out in the state report. Ms. Wordell recognized that it was a significant accomplishment and was reported to the state. Referring to Exhibit F, the draft 1998 work program, Chair Harris indicated that staff was requesting that four projects on the work program list previously as a lower priority, be reprioritized as high priority, as staff felt that they would realistically get to only the high priority items The four projects were ASA Committec~ Comprehensive General Plan review, GIS, and Zoning Ordinance review. Staff reviewed the rationale for repriofifizing the items. A discussion ensued regarding reprioritizafion of the work program projects. There was consensus that the eight high priority projects were: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Single Family FAR Annexations Steep hillside development Density ASA Subcommittee/Advisor Comprehensive General Plan Review Geographic Information System (GIS) Zoning Ordinance Review The following projects were designated as a Medium+ priorities: Evaluate neighborhood (L1/L2) park acquisition Revise park data in GP Retail - Vallco, Monta Vista Mr. Cowan reported that the City Council would hold their goal setting meeting on January 16. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mahoney moved to continue the discussion of the traffic issue of the Annual General Plan Review to January 12, 1998 Com. Roberts Passed 54)-0 REPORT OF THE PLANN1NG COMMISSION: Chair Harris requested a brief report on the issue of the Portofino people suing the Corsica people, and putting liens on their property relative to a street issue. Mr. Cowan noted that it was related to bonding and said that Mr. Kilian was working Platming Commission Minmcs 6 December 8, 1997 on the issue and he would provide an update shortly. Chair Hah'is asked for reassurance that the Plannins Commissioners' actions were not responsible for the action being taken. Following a brief discussion, there was consensus that Mr. Cowan need not present a report if the two issues were not associated. Chair Harris norad that the Commissioners' dinner was scheduled for February 6, 1998 and the Annual Pl~mers' Conference was scheduled m Long Beach for March 5-7, 1998. Chair Harris thanked Com. Roberts for his service on the Planning Commission and expressed her pleasme in working with him. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Mr. Cowan reported on his attendance at the recent Santa Clara County Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Wordell said she would cheek on the status of the availability of the video "is anyone really sued on the housing element of their general plan?" DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: Mr. Cowan explained that if Planning Commissioners are misquoted by the newspaper, they should call the newspaper reporter directly. If there is an error in an article written, the Public Information Office, whose role it is to communicate with the press; will report it to the newspaper and resolve the issue. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. to the regular Planning Commission meeting on January 12, 1998. There will be no Planning Commission meeting on December 22, 1997. Approvedas amended: January 12, 1998