Loading...
PC 07-27-87CITY OF CUPERTI:-;o, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10430 So. De Anza Blvd. 0Jpcrtino, CA 95014 (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF REGCLAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IIE:. DON JULY 27, 1987 Meeting Held in the lnte1im Council Chambers, 10500 N. De. Anza Blvd. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Chainnan Mackenzie Vice Chairwoman ~)orcnsen Commissioner Adams Commissioner Claudy Commissioner Szabo Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Planning and Develapment' Steve Piasecki, Assistant Planning Director Travice Whitten, Assistant City Engineer Peggy M. Cocker, Deputy City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: Com. Szabo, to approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 22, 1987, as submiued. SECOND: Com. Adams VOI'E: Passed, Chr. Mackenzie abstaining 4-0-1 MOTION: Com. Claudy, to approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 13, 1987, as submitted. SECOND: Com. VOTE: Passed, Com. Adams, Sorensen abstaining 3-0-2 POSTPONEMENTS OH NEW AGENDA ITEIVIS: None. WRITTEN COMf\'lUNICATIONS: Letter rc:gm·ding the League of Californi<! Cities Meeting in October, 1987, received. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARINGS: -1- t { . l PLANNING CO'.\lMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 27, 1987 Page 2 PC -524 -·-----------------------·-----------···-·---- ITEM l 1\pplication No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Arca (Acres): USE PERMIT (35-U-87) 35-U-87 5..QQ..llinl..d:..~-~-­Ail.1.fillin_. S...<.rnth side QfJIQ!Jlc:.'iJ.nli.L.&!.il1..!.. ... n.12llliL~~k-. .150 ft. <:ilst of Grant..RQl.HL _____ , __ tllA To operate a l ,OOOsq. ft. dry cleaning shop with dry cleaning equipment or. premises. FIRST HEARING: ENVIRONMENT AL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt TENTATIVE CITI' COUNCIL HEARING DATE: August 3, 1987 . . S1a.ff.E~.S.f.llHulQ.O.:. Mr. Cowan presented a site map and <idded that the requirement to obtain a use pem1it for dry deaning establi~;hments had only recently corr,e into being; previously, a:!tomatic approval was granted. T11c following concerns were noted with regard to this Item: Possible noise impact to adjacent residential Storape of chem..icals required to operate a dry cleaning establishment. Staff suggested that this Use Permit application would enable the City to request an upgrading of the Center; substand,i..rd condition~ at this -··~and recommendations were noted in the Staff Report. ASAC would be reviewir1g the f site plan, including a parking and landscaping plan. Mr. Cowan stated that he had dis1 ed the City's interest in upgrading this site with the property owner and in turn, he ... dicated that he wished to make improvements to this site. Mr. Cow:m called attention to the revised C0nditions of Appro\1al 9 and 10 submitted: Aim.lkiln(~~n!ion..;_ Mr. Soogin Lee stated that he had a dry cleaning estabiit~ 1.·1r1~; operating in Saratoga for the r-1ast s.ix months; this, site has tenants livi'.Jg above t 11e o:vcruti.:'n and there have been no complaints received. He acJckd t.hat stat.e of the art equipment vou!d be installed at the proposed site. Com. Adams suggc:,tcd measurement of noise levels at the Sar;ttog<J site and before ar..d after. imtallation at the Cupertino :.;itc for purposes of comparison. Com. Szabo suggested that ;in ·acoustical engineer would be able to predict any noise im 1:!:.1cts. Mr. Lee stated that be undcrs!O(Xi the Conditions of Approval and confirmed that if he, as the Applicant, were responsible for the rcquirccJ irnprovcmcnts, the costs of establishing a dry cleaning business would be prohibitive. He added that since his prime hours of operation would be 7 A.M. to ncoP, there would not be a parking problem at. the· Center; restaurant tenant<; had other prime hours. In additicm, parking for a dry cleaning establishment was short term r)arking. •I .. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 27, 1987 Page 3 PC-524 ffEM 1 Continued Mr. Al Martin, Property Owner, questioned required improvements which would be very costly; he was agreeable to landscaping improvements z.nd intended to upgrade the site. He noted problems with maintaining the planters in front of Steamers Restaurant. He stated that the Center had existed for 24 years and wa.s originally in a commercial area; now, however, becam:e a residential use was located adjacent to the Center, over their objections, the Center was being asked to build a cement wall. He suggested considemti.on of' a one to two year time period in which to improve tne propr!rty. In resp01rne to Chr. Mackenzie's comment, Mr. Martin stated he was not opposed to the installation of a sound wall if the Center expanded 600 sq. ft., as he hoped it would. · The Public Hearing was then opened. ' Mr. Frank Nobleman, Woodsprings Condominium, Apt. 312, Cupertino, noted: Noise impacts from pedestrian traffic Odors from the Chinese Restaurant Noise from the live ente11ainment at Steamers Restaurant once a week His objections to a plant opera~ion at this location Concem regarding chemicals th"!• would be used on-site. Ms. Brenda Wong, Proprietor, Crown Cleaners, suggested consideration of th-:; fact that there were already five dry cleaners within a one mile radius; this Application, if approved, would be the sixth. She noted that other services may be required at this location. Ms. Sherie Dunn, District Manager, RREEF, noted the following: Concern for the business viabi.lity of Crown Cleaners The high professional standards maintained at Foothill Shopping Center would be dimished by a lack of the same standards at the adjacent center MOTION: Com. Claudy moved to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Adams VOTE: Passed 5-0 Com. Claudy questioned the equity of requiring the Applicant to build the sound wall; in addition, a 6 ft. wall would not accomplish the desired benefit as the first floor of the condominium was an underground parking lot. However, other necessary improvements should be required. Complaints regarding odors from existing restaurants could not be addressed; control of toxics and chemicals were already regulated by the EPA. · Ms. Cocker reviewed the purpose of the Fi'.1dings and confim1cd tlrnt Findings did not address either fr1e necessity nor the economic viability of any particular Application. Com. Szabo concurred and added that noise impacts should be carefully monitored; he agreed that there were problems in maintaining the planters in front 0f Steamers Restaurant; alternatives were suggested to the property owner. PLANNING C0/\1~1ISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 27, 1987 Page 4 PC -524 ----·----·----·-------------·----·- ITEI'v1 l Continued Corn. Sorensen concun-ed with the above spcak1.~rs and noted her concerns as follows: Potential overflow of parking unto adjacent property Current disrepair of the parking lot Visual appearru1ce of area in front of Chinese Restaurant Investigation of noise impacts of live entertainment at Steamers Restaurant Com. Adams concu..•Tcd with other members of the Commission. MOTION: Com. Claudy moved to recommend approval of Application '35-U-87 per the Findings and subconclm:ions of this Hea1ing: Conditions 1-6: Condition 7 to be omitted; Revised Conditions 9 and 10; Condition 11; CO'i1diti1m 12, adding a statement that removal of Condition 7 CMllS.Q.Qr:yJ.Yi_1ll} at thh: tirn:.: would not.pre- clude future a requirement to build the wall in the event of a major renovation of the Center. SECOND: Corn. Ad;ims VOTE: Passed 5-0. ITEM2 Application No(s) /.pplicant: Location: .SJ . .ill.i.6.fi.JIDQ.Jli:..B_8.:1i] ___ . __ _ .cily_Qf_C.u.psniil_Q.. __ Cl.tywidQ~~~--~~~~~~~ A Public Hearing to consider a possible ncv; ordinance or amendments to the General Commercial, Office, and Light Industrial Zoning Ordinances to regulate the design and operation of beverage redemption centers pursuant t.o the Stat9 of California's .Bcvcrn.,g~ ControLA.d.. FIRST HEARING ENVmONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Decla.ratio:i TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: August 17, 1987 .SJfilLE~fil:.Ill.IU.i.Qll~ Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and asked that the Commission prnvidc direction to Staff 011 how to proceed. Further infomiation to b~ provided by the Planning Department in response to questions addressed by the Commission. There were no members of the public who wished to address the Commission on this Item. lV10TION: Com. Szabo moved to Continue 81,025,66 and 36-EA-87 to August 10, 1?87. SECOND: Com. Adams VOTE: P~~sscd 5-0 OLD IHJSJNESS: None .. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 27. 1987 Page 5 PC -524 NEW BUSI~ESS: ITEM3 Application 2 l-U-86 -Grosvenor In!ernational -Requesting interpretation of minor modifications involving site and architectural changes. SJ.a.fLfu~illilflQD..:. Mr. Piasecki reviewed the Application and called attention to modifications requested by the Applica:-Hs; Staff raised a concern regarding the visibility of the service yard from Stevens Creek Blvd. and con filmed that the parking ratio of 1 :285 sq. ft of floor area. Ap_nlicant'sY-IT.S.cJllru.i.s.m.;. Mr. Mark von Stwolinski, Project Architect, addressed the concerns rai:,ed above: Parking ratio: due to an error, 399 cars were listed; correction to read, 339 cars Visibility of the loading docks: a revised plan presented to address this concern Mr. Brooks Kolb, MPA Landsc::!.pe Design Architects, stated that Aptos Blue Redwoods with shrubbery would be planted and a burm fr1stalled; in response to questions, he confirmed that this variety of Redwood would be fast growing and would survive at this location. Mr. von Stwolinski reviewed the proposed loading dock and service area. Mr. Piasecki confirmed that Staff concerns had been addressed. Com. Szabo asked that trees and landscaping be installed and maintained. Chr. Mackenzie noted the additional change to the Model Resolution that Exhibits presented at the hearing would be applicable. There were no members of the public who wish<..'.d to address the Commission on this Item. MOTION: Com. Sorensen moved approval of Application 21-U-87 subject t(nhe findings ami subconclusions of this Hearing and the Staff Rep011, and noting the addition of \vording to require mainten:111ce of trees and landscaping installed and that Lwdscapc designs presented at the hearing would be applicable. SECOND: Com. Adams VOTE: Passed 5-0 ITEM4 APPLICATIONS U-U-87 AND 8-TM-87 -Edwin and Carol Federspkl ··· l.Jse Permit to construct a 7 unit single family planned development and Tentative Map to subdivide 2 parei'.els into 7 parcels ..yith lot sizes ranging from 6,700 sq. ft. to 19,400 sq. ft. The propcny is located on the ..:ast side of Scenic Boulevard. (The project was sent back to Phnni.ng Commi~sion to review alternative design schcrncs.) PLANNII'\G COi\11\1ISSION Mli'\UTES Regular Meeting or July 27, 1987 Page 6 PC -524 ITEM 4 Continued Staff Pr~llim; Mr. Piasecki reviewed the history cf this Application <Uld noted direction given by the City Council to the Applicants; he slated that the proposed design relied upon wording in the zoning ordinance which suggested that the properties could be developed along existing lot lines. Staff noted that the principal objectives were to obtain joint access for the two parcels and abandonment of the rights to Riveria Rd. Applicants wished to address the issue of minimizing building mass through use of a daylight plane concept .as shown in the elevation cross sections. Staff recommended approval and concurred with the Applicants that consideration could be given to Lots 4 and 5, which had front yard setbacks off the private easement, reducing the setback to I 0 ft. and adding a condition r.hat the lot lines be altered either through a minor lot line adjustment or a tentative map application. Mr. Piasecki answered questions regarding the Applicant's proposal to rotate lot lines 90 degrees. Mr. Jim Jackson, Attorney, representing the new property owners, stated. that the tentative map application had been withdrawn; the current proposal was for a use permit to build 5 new housi;s (!he existing house to remain). He reviewed the history of the Application, noted the applicable Zoning Ordinance and stated that density was not an issue at this time. He noted the following with regard to the current Application: Each lot was 10,000 sq. ft. or more Five new homes would b~ built with one existing home lo remain' Private street would be 30 fr. curb to curb, at the lower portion only R-1 setbacks as related to adjacent neighbor to the north and to the south . Reduced building pad:;; however, any visual intrusion was being considered. 380 ft. ridge line would be maintained 40 parking spaces for the 6 homes; existing home has 4 spaces, 7 spaces on the private street \.vhich was 30 ft. wide, remainder in garages or aprons. Automatic garage door openers to be installed. Requested that in 17 . .QcvtlJ212ill.kllL.5..!1ll.d.n.rrl14 d), modified to read, " ... at least 5 ft. from the easterly edge of the intcxior cul de sac street." Noted that Lhc adjustment requested was to move the lot line a limited degree to enhance the building pad area In 24. DcvJ;J.mu:~r.UJli.i;llli .. delete, "available to the entire development" Consideration given to placement of the private road along the edge of the embankment; conclusion was reached to reject this rroposa! especially in light of the return to a six lot conriguration Testimony taken from those wbo wished to address the Commission. Ms. Helen Adzich, Cupertino, objected to the request for six units and cited previous hearings. She appealed for clcvclormi..:nt of four houses only on the site and. noted that the developers did not live in the neighborhoods they built. Mr. Dick Gallant, 10335 Scenic Dr., Cupcrtirio, cited the 4,800 sq. ft. of building area, unless the slope area was e<wsidercd buiidable area; actual buiiding sit-::. of Lot 4 was 7,000 sq. ft., Lot 3, approximately (>,000 sq. it. and Lot 5, 5,000 sq. ft. .. •· .. r '. PLANNING COMMISSff1N T\1I:'\UTES Regular Meeting of.I 1y :--7, 1987 Page 'i PC -524 ITEM 4 Continued Mr. Rod Caster, I 0440 Scenic Blvd., Cupertino, noted the limited area available at this site and suggested that the three middle lots be combined to create two lots. · Ms. Dianne Gallant Crosby noted the difficulty of attending these hearings and asked for consistency, namely, a !imitation of !he number of proposed houses to 4 or 5 and that standard setbacks be required. She felt that only 4 lots were bui!dable and reviewed the concerns expressed by members of the City Council. Mr. I<ichard Knight, 10222 Carmen Rd., Cupertino, addressed the issues of adequate fire access and parking requirement:::. He asked that only 4 new homes be allowed on this site. M~. Roy Adzich, Scenic Blvd., Cupertino, asked that the Commission to consider impacts of the proposed development from the viewpoint of existing property owners. He presented a map of the site and adjacent area for consideration. Mr. John Bjcletech, 10184 Carmen Rd., Cupertino, added that the avocados growing on this site had historical significance since the property originally belonged to Mr. Denton. There were no other individuals who wished tu address the Commission on this Item. Com. Claudy noted that while then:: \Vas sufficient space to develop legal lots, even with a reduction of the three middle lots to two, these lots would be long and shallow and added that a 90 degree rotation of lot lines was not a mino.r lot line: adjustment. He was favorable to the daylight concept; however, given the configuration of the site, a maximum of five units (including the one ex.isting house) could be allowed. Com. Szabo was not favorable to the design proposed and noted that this plan was designed to avoid a tentative map application, rather than gooc! planning of the site; he obj~ctcd to: Sharp turn in the cul de sac and noted potential tr<:<lTic l1<.1zards Rotation of the bt Hr1e 90 degrees He favored a total of five houses (including one existing house) and recommended an alternative layout be considered. Corn. Adams concurred with other Cornmissioncrs and noted that the present application had not complied witl1 recommendations illade by the City Council. Com. Sorensen concun-ed and favored five hnuscs (including the aisting house). Chr. Mackenzie noted that he ri~cogni1cd the property rights of the six lots and that the zoning ordinance allowed development; however, h(! questioned whether the proposed access y;ould be adequate. He did not sec the justification for ;rny re l:lxarion of setback requirements c.nd added that imrosiiion of these requirements would make the lots as proposed virtually unbuildab\e. ; !c was in favor ot the proposal under cor1sideration with adherence to setbacks requirement~ and an adequate access; he suggested that the Applicant may be required to begin at the tentative map stage with a five lot development. PLANNING C0\1:\11SSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of July 27, 1987 Pa~c 8 PC-524 ----·------------ ITE\.1 4 Continued Mr. Jackson questioned the legality of restricting the number of lots in this development; M~. Cocker stated that it was her understanding that the Applicants had offered to reduce the development to five lots at the Meeting of the City Council. She noted tliat the zoning plan allowed six lots if adequate access was provided on-site. · Com. Claudy summarized the concerns of the Cor.:mission M0110N: SECOND: VOTE: Corn. Claudy moved to send a Minute Order to the City Council stating that while six units were within the existing zoning and map rcgul.ations; the plan presented by the Applicarit did not allow sufficient setbacks, sufficient on-street parking 1.md had safety problems related to lhc proposed private street. Com. Szabo Passed · 5-0 Break: 9:28 -9:40 P.M. ITEMS Application 4-M-87 -Gary and Cheryl Jow -Requesting approval of a second story addition to extend vertically along an existing single story setback line. The property is located at 7524 Waterford Drive . .s.m.ff..P..rucrrtmfan.:. Mr. Cow:.<n reviewed the Application and presented a site map. He .noted that Applicants had obtained approval for this request. from property owners to the west but not to the cast arid added that ti1is property was originally within the San Jose boundary wherein the 5 ft. setback would have been adequate. L~rnt's .. fu.S.~JlliU.l.llil:. r-.1s. Cheryl Jow stated that the property owners to the east had no objection to this request; they simply did not wish to Utkc the time to sign a letter of agreement. She noted adjacent two-s 1'JIY homes and stated that granting this request would not set a precedent. · iv10TION: Com. Sz.abo moved to approve Application 4-M-87. SECOND: Corn. Sorensen Chd .. 1ackcnzie stated that he opposed this Appli..:ation a'ld noted that the only similar request was heard by the City Council at 1heir last meeting. He noted the s1:111clards set by the Council for reviewing similar requests; the current Applicant met only one of these standards for review, namely, that residents who lived in the formc:r San Jose area would be accommodated. Com. Clau<ly noted that in this Application, there had been not been any opposition from the neighborhood. The Chairman called for a vote. VOTF· Pass<:d, Chr. :\fackcnzie opposed 4-1 . , .. \,' . ; PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RegularMeetirigof July 27, 1987 Page 9 PC -524 ------·--------------·--·---·---------------------------- ITEM6 Application 5-M-87 -James H. Sisk -Requesting approval to modify the definition of front yard setback per Ordinance No. 1374, Section 5.27 The property is ·located on the South Foothill Boulevard, Lots 17 and 19 . .5.mff.P.ri:~.Illill~ Mr. Piasecki presented an aerial view of the property and reviewed the Application. He added that the two property owners most impacted had been notified of the Hearing on this Application. Al2Jlli.~Jl!~.t'.LPE:&Illi.Ull!n;, Mr. Sisk stated that the issue of restricting sideyard sctba.ck adjacent to the existing units coulri be done by recording a deed restriction or through the option of meeting the front yard setback on Foothill Blvd~ however, this would make the yard 5 ft. wider than originally intended and would require an exception to the 6 ft. fence height. limitation. · Com. Claudy commended the Applicant for the common driveway and stated t:hat he preferred the configuration prcsentr~d. There were no other individuals who wished to address the Corr.mission on this issue. MOTION: Com. Claudy moved approval of Application 5-M-!s7 per the Model Resolution. SECOND: Com. Adams VOTI::'.: Passed 5-0 OTHER BUSINESS: ITEM7 Request to initi<~te a. change of Lone for the fire station located on the ·west side of Stelling Road. " ' · MOTION: Com. Claudy moved approval of the request to initiate a change of zone for the fire station located on the west side of Stelling Rd, · SECOND: Com. Adams Von:: Passed 5-0 NEW BUSINESS: None OLD BUSINESS: None PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Me.eting of July 27, 1987 Page IO PC· 524 REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: None 1 · ' REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR: Written Report submitted DISCUSSION OF' NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: Non~ ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded its business, tbe Planning Commission adjourned at 10:06 P.M. to the next Regular Meeting of 1987 at 7:001'.M. Appr.ovcd by thP. Planning Commission At the Regular Meeting of August 10, 1987 .L~ e, Chai r<n~n----- -.J ATTEST; I / ' ' I i . ' ,,·,: :·; 0 1 ' ' •• -·-,L-···-· -' ~_i_-L,.:..._:__.£ .. .:LL.-L~L .. :...~/.-1 I / " . Dorothy Corncllus, C:l.ty Cler!.? I