PC 11-14-83CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 TORRE AVENUE, "CUPERTINO, CA 950M
TELF.PHONE: ( 408) 252-4505
MINUTES OF THE rlEGULAR MEETltlG OF THE rLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON NOVEMBER 14, 1983 IN 1'HE COUNCIL CHAMBER., CITY HALL, CUPEiffINO, CALIFORNIA
Chairperson Blaine called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 1n th~ Council Chambers, City Hall.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Koenitzer, Claudy, Adams, Chairperson Blaine
Commissioners Absent: Sz&bo
Staff Present: Dir. of Planning & Development Sisk Assistant Planning Pireotor Cowan Assistant City Engineer Whitten Deputy City Cleric Villarante City Attorney Kilian
APPROVAL OF HINUTES
It was rnovt'...>d by Com. Claudy, seconded by Com. Jl.da>'!ls and pa~sed with Com. Blaine abstaining to approve thf:! r,11nutes of October 10, 1983 a5 submitted.
It was moved by Com. Adams, seoonded by Com. Koenitzer and passed with Com. Claudy abstaining t.o approve the minutes of October 24, 1983 with the followfog changes: 1. addition of motion for closi.ng nominations and 2. page 5, paragraph· 2, change near to 1.n.
POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS -None
WRITTEN C0!1MUNH;ATIONS -None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
L · CITY OF CU?ERTINO: PUBLIC HEARING to consider a Spe.cific Plan for pruperties located on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevar:!. between Stelling Road on the west. and Stern Avenue on the east. The primary functi.on of the Spf.ldfic Plan is to incorporate existing General Plan land use and eirculatino policies into a single document. The Plan also incorporates dee.ailed urban design pol lcies. ENVIRONMEIJTAL REVIEW: 11ie Environmental
R~view Committee determined that t;h~ project impacts were r ~viously assessed as part of the Environme11tal Impact Report for the General Plan Amendment 1-GPA-80. Firs\:. Hearing. Tentative City Council hea::--in:.; date~ -.Deoember 5~ 1983.
As3istant Planning Director Commii:lsion explaining that the Council 's request to bring the the General Plan.
Cowan presented a stat'f repQrt to tho proposed amendment wr:is as per tha City· zoning district into conformance with
Commissi.on discussion ensued regarding various minor changes in the proposed document.
Mark Krohl, Prometheus Development, questioned Commission as .4;-0 whether the s<1ndpile effect reff:rred to in the document included the Town Center area and whether the corrido':" one setback requirements applied.
Assistant Planning Directer Cowan pointed out the explanation to Mr. Kt•ohl 's question on page 8 of the document.
Joe Tembrock, 1079"1 Scofield, addressed Co1YmissiorJ with variou~ questions regarding height requirements and building restraints at
~!'!e Crossroads Shopping Center location.
Assistant Planning Dlrector Cowan restraints listed on pages 18, 19 the Crossroads question.
explained the various building· and 20 of the document regarding
Joe Tembrock, 10791 Scofield, eicpressed his concerr.s ·to· the Commission regarding high <oltage electrical wiring at th.a Cro$Sroads Shopping Center.
Assistant City Engineer Whitten, explained that Pacific Gas and F.lectric Company control the location of electrical wiring for the center.
Joe Tembrock, 10791 Scofield, questioned installation of bike lanes in the plan bike lane on Rodrigues.
Comnission as to future and the elimination of the
Assintant Planning Director Cowan stated that bike lanes were not in eluded in e:lther the General Plan or the Goneral Plan Amendment.
Chairper;;ion Blaine nummented to staff that the plan should be reintroduced with bike lanes included.
Richard Me.ncini ~ 19864 Wheaton Dr., stated td the Com.ni s~ion that. evergreen type Lrees should be considered in the plan.
Commission discussion ens1ied regarding the documen~ presented.
Howard Roberts, 11121 Clarkston Avenue, questioned regarding the FAR rntios and the relationship they buildings in the city.
the Go::imi.ssion have to old
It was moved by Com. Koeni t;:er, .seconded by Com. lldams and passed unanimously to continue the public hearing to consid~r :;i Specific Plan for Stev3ns Creek Boulevard between Stelling and Stern to the meeting of November 280 1983.
MINUTES Of TH!:: N,QVEMBER 114, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION
2. CITY or· CUPERTINO: Stevens Creek Boulevard CoMeptual Zoning,, .. Plan (3-Z-i33) ~ Publio hearing to consider amendments to the zoning plan including but not limited to alt1eirinB policies . c.ontrolling development intensity on exiut.ing shopping center.s~' The amendment itJ proposed to ensure that the zoning district is consistent with the recent amendments to the Cupertino General.· Plan. ENVIRONMEN'rAI.. REVIEW: The Environmerital Rev~.ow Committee determined tl'lat the proji::ct impacts were previously aasess"ld. · as part of the £nviror1mental Impact Report of General Plan Amendment 1-GPA-80. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing .date "". December 5, 1983. ·
Assistant Planning Director Cowan presented a staff report to ·. the ·· Commission giving an explanation of the changes.
There being no discussion it was move!:! by Com. Claudy, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimousl~ to close public hearing.
Chairperson Blaine collll!ented on a typographical error on page 2.
It was moved by CQm. Claudy, secondeJ by Com. Koenitzer and passed unanimously to recomnend the granting of an Negative Declaration.
There being no t\lrther discussion it was moved by.Com. Claudy, seconded by Corn. Adams and i.>assed unanimoual1 to recommend . approval of the Stevens Crc<ak Concept~al Zoning Plan (3-Z-83) with findingo and subconclusions as per staff recomnendations. ·
3. CITY OF CUPERTINO (1/ALLCO PARK); An amendment of a previously. apprvved zon.l.ng &pplioation ( 1-3-83) to conform with t.he recently amended Cupertino General Plan. The zoning amendment will permit a hotel to be constructed with a maximum of 1~000 rooms. (720 rooms previously approved) and a maximum of approximately 970,000 sq. ft. of office space including existing building area (330,500
sq. ft. was previously approved). , The amendment ~ill expand the zoning boundary to include property located east of Finch Avenue (exten.'>ion). EtNIRONMEt\'fAL. REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee determined that the project impacts were previously assessed as part of the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Amendment 1-GPA-CO. The subject property consists of approximately 41 acres bordered by Stevens Creek boulevard pn the south, Vallco Parkway and Highway 280 on the north, \folfe Hoad on the west and the easterly Tantau Avenue. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date -tecember 5, 1983.
Assistant Planning Director Cowan presented a staff report to •;he Commission commenting on the changes made t,o conform with the General Plan.
Commission discussion ensued with staff regardlng conformity of the document presented.
Com. Koenitzer commented that the 1.eRter property should be includ<id on page 5,
HlUU'fES Of· THE i'IOVEMBER 14, 1983 PLAf4NING COMMISSION
It was mov!lild by Com.. Claudy, seconded by Com. Adams and unanimously to c.lose the public hearing ..
It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Coin. Koenitzet' @nd pa~sect utianimously to recommend approval of' the amendment to 1 .. z .. s3 Valloo Park with pages 2. and 5 :amended and the addition of r.uisessment not
re~uired for EIR as the General Plan Environmental Impact Report sh.alJ. suf:tice, oonditfons 1 and 2 and findings and suboonolusions as per staff recommendation.
' 4. Application 17-TM-83 of MH~HACl.. A. 1'ANTROPHOL: TEN'U'r:tVE .MAP to amend condi tio:is of subdivision map appro\•al f'ot' Tract 5990 to permit reconfiguration of acoess for Lot 11t of said :;iubdivisi,011 and E:NVIRONMENTAL. REVIEW; 'l'he Environmental Review Committee recoromer1ds the granting of' a lfogativo Declaration. '!'tie subject propert:r is located on the sc:·uth slde of Rai11bow Drive approximately 500 ft. westerl;y of Bubb Road. First. hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date -November 21, 1983.
Assistant Planning Director Cowan prellented a staff report to .the Commission.
Assistemt City .L-:ng,ineer Whitten reported on the stability of the -lot in question stating that the corrections would have to be done before any building could take place.
Com. Koenitzer expressed his concern with a r·etaining Wllll on Rainbow Drive.
AsJistant City ~ngineer Wh~tten e~plained various methods for stabilizing the slide area on Rainbow.
Mr. Tanr.rophol, Rainbow Drive was site resulttng in the area re-keyed.
explained to the Conlnis!11on ~hat appare.1tly when constructed they failed to compact the dirt on the the slide and that he had been instructed to have
Discussion ensued between staf1~ and Commission regarding site stability and esthetics of t;1e proposed plan.
It was moved by Com. Claudy, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to close the public hear·ing.
It was moved by Com. Claujy, seconded by Com. Adams and passed 'With a 3-1 vote, Com. Koeni..l:.zer dissenting, to recommend .approval of a Negative Declaration.
It was moved by Com. Glaudy. seconded by Com. 3-1 vote, Com. Koenitz~r dissenting, to
Application 17-"fM-B3 w.ith •conditions subconclusion as per staff recommenC:at.tor~s.
RECESS: 9:15 p.m.-9:25 p.m.
Adaills and pa3sed with a recommend approval of 1-20 and fhldings and
H!~UTES OF THI:: NOVEMBER 14• 1~'B3 PLANNING COMMl.$S!ON
5. Applioation 32..,u-s3 OF VIRGIL E. El..!.SW::m:ni: USE: PERMIT to construot a single-family homG on an exiating parool and ENlflRONMEN'fAL REVIEW: The projcot is .categorioalljr exempt. hence, no ttction 11:1 requireJ. 'fh® subject pr•op>drty 18 located on the southwest side of Santa Clara Avenue approximately 50 ft. South of Grand Avenu~ and is zoned P (Planned Development with residential intent). Referred back to Planning Conminsion ·from City Council. Tentative City Council hearing date -November 21, 1983.
Director of Planning and Development Sisk presented a staff rep~.'t to
the Commission.
Terry l:lrown, de\•eloper, stated to the Commiv,sion that he p,,.:J ·;1.Dt ir1 favor of the 5 foot nidn yard requirement.
Com. Koenitzer stated that the sidewalk should he extendect along the side of the nousc to the rear entrance_.
Ann Anger, expressed her concel."n to the Com'Oission •·egarding a setback of loss than 20 feet.
It was moved by Com. K~~ni t:i:.er ~ seconded by Com~ Claudy and pa:3.sed unanimously to close public hearing.
Commission discussion ensued regarding the 9roposed plan.
it was moved by Com. Koenitzer,
with a Ll-0 vote to recomtl1"3nd conditions 1-16, 17 emended, 1B to show setbacks and findings rec0mmendattoo.
seconded by Com. Adams and passed approval of application 32-U-83 with amended, and with Exhlbi.t A modified and subconolusiont3 as pf?r staff
6. Application 27-U-81 (Revised) of WILLIAM A. KINST: AMENDMENT OF
A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED us~ PERMIT to construct a t1<!0-story office
building equaling ap1>roximat.ely 11 ,000 sq. ft. and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project was previously assessed, hence, no action is required. The subject property is located on the WEWt side of Pasaden;o Avenue approximately 150 ft. south of Steven~ CreaK Boulevard in a P (Planned Developr.ent wi.th commercial intent)
zoning district. First hearing. Tentatil!e City Council hearing date -November 21§ 1983.
Director of Planning and Development Sisk p•esent~d a st.aff report to the Commissior. explaining the architectural changes.
Wi 11 iari Kin st, 11116 Qui nee, Sunnyvale, explained to the Con:vnission that the change:; repre:o\ented c:m attempt to conform to the Monta Vista Design Guidelines to provide a contemporary yet conforming style.
Ann Auger, expressed to th<-? Commission that she was happy with the , proposed plan changes.
It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded b/" Com. Koen! ti.er and pa:rned unanimously to close the puhlic hearing.
MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 14, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION
Commission disoussion ;ensued re.;arding, the ohangea.
It was moved · by Com. 4-0 vote to recommend condHions 1-18, 19
subconclu~ion~ as ?Cr
Chudy, seconded by Com. Adl'lms and passed with a apptoval of Applicati.on 27-U-81 (Revised) with' modified, condition~ 20-24 and findings c:ind staff recommendation.
7. Application 1 O-Z-83 of DOUGLAS J. 8ER1'AIN: PRE ZONE approx:!.rnt.1te1y 0.17 aore3 of unincorporated territory from Santa Clara County R1-8 (Rasident.ial Single-family, 8,000 sq. ft. minimum lot she) zone to City of Cupertino Rl-'/ .5 (llesicl~ntial Single-family, 7,500 .sq. ft. minimum lot size) zi:me or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW: The project i.s categorically . exempt, ht'lnoe, no ao'Cion is .. required. The aubject prop\irty is loo&tf~d on the east sir.le or San Fernando Avenue a~proximately 350 ft. soutnwest of Byrne Avenue. first Hea~ing. Tentative City Council hearing date December 5, 1983.
Director of Planning and Dt'l:veloµment Sisk prese~?ted n :;taff report. to the Commission.
Doug Bertain, 1413 Pitman Avenue, Palo iUto, had no additional comments for the Commiasion.
There being no further discussion it was rr.0•1ed by Ccim. Claudy i seconded by Com. Adams and pa.s3ed unanimously to close the public hearing.
It was moved by Com. Claudy, seconded by Com. Adams and passed with a 4-0 vote to ree;ommend approval of application 10-Z-83.
8. Application 311-U·-83 OF DONALD K. JONES: USE PERMIT to construct
a veterinary clinic of approximately 1,900 sq. ft. and
ENV IROHMEtJTAl. REVIEW: The Enviror.mental Review Coll'linit tfi!e recommends the granting of Cj Negative Declaration. The subject property ls located at the northe<.wt cnrner of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Ci-eek Boulevard in a f> (Planned Developir.ent with office use intent). First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date -November 21, 1983.
Director ..:;f Planning ai'id Development Sisk presented a· staff report to the Commission commenting on the i·cst1·ictive use of parl<ing Pt the site,
Co~1iss1on discussion ensued regarding the proposed plan.
Donald Jones, Commission that staff because site.
630 Yosemite Avenue, Mountain View, stated to the the original parking plan of 1 spaces was rajeated by of additional dedication area l'..O be taken from the
Discussion en.sued between Commission e staff and Hr. Jones regarding the neces.sity of handicapped parkintt, at the site.
• MINUTES Of THE NOVEMBER 14. 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr. Jon en, questioned Commission as to the necessi t)' of sidewalk facing Stevens Creek Boul~vard.
As.nistnnt City Engineer Whitten explniried the completion of sidewalk to be extended down Stevens Creek Boulevard.
It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, .seconded by Com. Adams and t)assed unanimously to close public hearing.
Cornmi.ssion discussion ensued regarding the propoS4ld plan.
It was mov~ by Com. Koenitzer, seconded ty Coro. Claudy and pa$Sed unanimously to recommend approval of a ~Jegative Declaration.
It was moved by Com. Koenit:ter, seconded by Com •. Claudy and pasS1ed
with a 4-0 vote to recommend approval of Application 34-U-83 with conditions 1-14r 15 modified, concl1tions 16-20, 21 amended and addition of conditlon 22 with findings and subconclu.sions as per staff recommendati0n.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None
N~n BUSINESS -None.
REPORT OF THE PLANNIN'.'.1 COMMISSION
Com. Koenitzer commented on a tire shop in Monta Vista.
Com. C.laudy com:nented on garbage at the Bateh Bros. Liquor Store.
Com. Adams commented on an improper street sign at tl-\e Bateh Bros. Liquor Store on the corner of Blaney and Homestead Roads.
Chairperson Blaine commented on tr·affic problems at the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR
Director of Planning and Development Sisk questioned Commission as to
whether they would be convening for the se1!ond meeting in December,
It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to cancel the second meeting of the Planning Commission
in Dect."nbel" 1983.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Blaine adjour~ed the meeting at 10:45 p.m.
Attest: _, ,..--7 Approve: ~~4~.~~ "C~erk:;' Clu.iirperson