PC 11-08-94
CITY OF CUPERTINO, STA'I'E OF CALIFOFtNIA
10300 Torre Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
MINU'I'ES OF 'I'HE ADJOUHNED MEE'rING OF 'I'HE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD
ON NOVEMBER 8, 1994
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
commissioners Present:
Chr. Mahoney
Com. Doyle (arrived 6:50 p.m.)
Com. Roberts
Com. Austin
Com. Harris
Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development
ciddy Wordell, City Planner
Colin Jung, Associate Planner
Bert viskovich, Public Works Director
Charles Kilian, city Attorney
Consultants present:
Don Skinner, Leon Pirofalo.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - No Discussion
POSTPONEMENTS/HEMOVAL FROM CALENDAR - None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
CONSENT CALENDAH - None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
L
Application No(s):
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Location:
l-GPA-93 and 6-EA-93
Diocese of San Jose
Same
Assessor Parcel Numbers 342-52-3, 342-5-
54, -56, -59, -60 Located south of 1-280,
west of Foothill Blvd. and north of
Rancho San Antonio county Park and
stevens Creek Blvd.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT to change the land use designation from Very
Low Density Hesidential 5-20 acre slope density to Very Low Density
Residential Foothill Modified l/2 acre slope density with a cap of
293 units.
The Diocese
amendment.
alternatives
of San Jose applied for the above General
The city Council directed that a total of
be analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report.
Plan
ten
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
An Environmental Impact Heport was
PLANNING CÛf.~J.~ISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 2
prepared. Ten alternatives were evaluated. Significant impacts
identified related to loss of and intrusion into open space lands;
elimination of potential park lands; loss of an intrusion into
natural vegetation, wildlife habitat and wetland areas; exposure to
adverse geologic condition; storm run-off erosion and pollution;
wildfire hazard; visual impacts; water tank failure and leakage;
and safety of school crossings.
staff Presentation: ci ty Planner Wordell
report noting the issues to be discussed at
follows: Traffic/circulation; Schools;
Electromagnetic Fields (EMF).
presented the staff
this hearing are as
Water Tank; and
Com. Austin questioned if any seismic studies had been done, given
that buildings on this property were damage during the last
earthquake. She also noted hydrology is a concern.
In response to Commissioners questions, Ms. Wordell stated
hydrology will be covered under Vegetation/Wildlife. She also
reviewed the existing General Plan designation for this area and
noted that Maryknoll is included in the 5-20 slope density, but is
not included in the general plan amendment.
Com. Roberts stated the issue of precedence setting is not included
in the list of discussion items, he believes this is a major issue.
He stated the general plan amendment, if approved, could be
precedence setting for other portions of this property which are
not part of this ErR and also other properties within the city.
SCHOOLS:
Mr. Chuck Carr, Director of Business Support Services, Cupertino
unit School District, stated the school district spends a great
deal of time working on demographic studies. He stated a committee
meets twice a year to refine their figures and to see how proposed
development will affect them and the mitigation needed. He stated
over the last 6 or 7 years they have been mOdernizing schools so
they can house more students. He added there are six reserve sites
which are available if needed. Mr. Carr stated the developer's
fees help meet the physical needs of the students and they receive
$3800 per student from the state. He noted they are watching
development as it occurs and keep in touch with city staff. He
stated if the project is developed as proposed, the schools can
handle this. Regarding a crossing guard, Mr. Carr stated they will
work with staff to determine which intersection needs a stop-sign
or crossing guard. He stated this is weighed on how many children
use this crosswalk and how many cars use the same intersection. He
noted studies have been done on the intersections near the diocese
property, and they believe the intersections are safe for children
to cross.
PLANNING CO~~4ISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 3
Com. Roberts noted that portable
students, as addressed by Mr. Corr,
issue of quality vs. quantity?
units can accommodate the
but he stated isn't there a
Mr. Carr stated these portable units are used state wide as the
schools cannot keep building permanent classrooms. He stated the
portable buildings are well built and meet all the structural
requirements as any permanent building. He noted they are
landscaped as if they are a permanent facility.
Com. Harris questioned if there is another street in the city which
is as wide as Foothill. Mr. viskovich stated they recently
installed a signal on Miller because of segwick school. He also
noted there is a crossing guard at stevens Creek and Blaney. He
noted they will monitor the intersection near this proposed
development and will add a crossing guard if warranted.
Mr. Cowan asked if the introduction of new students into the school
district change the support staff ratios?
Mr. Carr stated that schools are bigger nowadays and if one
particular school grows too large they will move students to other
schools. He noted this is discussed with the community and the
change is gradual.
The meeting was opened for public comment.
Ms. Nadine Grant, OAKS, stated although the schools have done
studies and believe they can handle the growth, the $3800 funds
from the state is inadequate. She also expressed concern about the
support staff. She stated there is a problem of overcrowding
today.
Mr. Carr stated the $3800 figure is controlled by Prop 13 and
whether adequate or not, it is not a discussion for the planning
commission. He noted for every 30 new students another teacher and
classroom is required.
Mr. Melvin caldwell, 10300 E. Estates Dr., stated
second time the school district has appeared before
commission to say that they can handle the growth.
school issues raised apply to the city as a whole and
diocese development.
this is the
the planning
He noted the
not just the
Com. Harris addressed the matrix as outlined in the staff report
and asked if they down grade the impact to not significant for the
crossing guard, could they add that this must be reviewed annually
if homes are developed?
Ciddy Planner Wordell stated they cannot mitigate for unknowns in
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8 1994
Page 4
the future. Mr. Viskovich stated based on the volume the
development will generate, is this sufficient to meet the crossing
guard warrant. He stated it will probably be other factors on
Foothill which will warrant the crossing guard. He noted it is
difficult to tie a nexus and say that the crossing guard is needed
at the development. Mr. viskovich stated crossing guard locations
are reviewed annually.
Chr. Mahoney stated the school district indicated they could handle
2500 new homes, as stated in the general plan. He also noted the
district indicated they could handle the development on the diocese
property.
Com. Roberts expressed concern about cumulative impacts when
considering densities above and beyond the general plan.
Mr. Cowan stated 2500 homes is a cap and will remain constant, but
the distribution can change.
Com. Austin stated the school district assured the commission that
they could accommodate 2500 new homes. She stated she feels
comfortable after hearing from Mr. Carr. She believes the EIR is
adequate with regards to schools.
Com. Doyle stated he believes the EIR adequately addresses schools.
Com. Roberts stated they have enough information at this time to
deal with the school issue.
In response to Com. Roberts questions, city Planner Wordell stated
there are other mitigations in the EIR which are not included in
the matrix. She stated the matrix only addresses issues raised at
the last hearing.
Com. Harris asked who is responsible for providing a crossing
guard? Mr. viskovich stated the city is responsible for the
crosslng guard as it is difficult to make a link with the
development and the crossing guard. He noted other issues may
warrant a crossing guard other than students.
Com. Harris stated the city should deal with the crossing guard
issue. She stated she would not be in favor of down grading the
impact to insignificant, and noted a mitigation measure could be
that the city will provide protection as appropriate under its
normal standards. Com. Austin stated she concurs.
Com. Harris stated they have heard from both school districts who
indicated there will be no impact and the funds are adequate to
meet their needs. She believes mitigation measure 13-5 is not
needed and the mitigation should deal with definable problems.
PLl\NNING COMMISSION MINU'l'ES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 5
WATER TANK
Mr. Bert viskovich, Director of Public \~orks, gave some background
information on how the proposed water tank will integrate into the
system and explained how the pumping system works. He stated the
proposed location is at 600 ft. elevation.
Com. Doyle asked about flexibility with regards to moving the tank
to another location at the same elevation.
Mr. Skinner stated the site chosen for the water tank was the only
site on the diocese property at the right elevation. He stated
there may be other locations across the ravine, but this needs to
be studied.
Com. Doyle questioned the possibility of moving this to county
property?
Mr. viskovich stated one of the reasons that the location was sited
was to keep it within the property so the developer has full
authori ty to grant the right-of-way for the tank. He stated if
they go outside the property there are many other issues to deal
with. He noted that the existing tank will not withstand potential
earthquakes and it leaks today. He stated a water tank is needed
regardless of this development. He added the proposed tank is 100
ft. wide and 30 ft. high and will be a 2 million gallon tank.
Ms. Wordell stated the visual impact is significant and not fully
mitigable.
Mr. Skinner addressed the issue of screening the site and noted it
is on a narrow mound. He stated they are still discussing the
possibility of planting trees for screening and the tank itself can
be painted to blend in with the surrounding area.
Mr. Viskovich stated there is the possibility of depressing the
tank into the ground or putting up a retaining wall and covering it
with ivy.
In response to Com. Harris' question, Mr. Skinner stated the tank
will not be seen from I-280, and it cannot be seen from the trail
on the open space land.
Mr. Viskovich stated the city needs a tank site and this is an
appropriate location because of the potential development. The
proposed water tank will serve more than the proposed development.
Com. Doyle stated he would like staff to explore the possibility of
moving this tank to another location, as it cannot be mitigated in
the EIR at its proposed location.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINU'l'ES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 6
Mr. skinner stated they did discuss, with the county, the
possibility of placing the tank on their property, but the county
expressed concern. He stated it may be a feasible solution, but
could not be reached quickly. He added, by moving it onto the
county property, they may find a site which would not be as
visible.
Mr. viskovich stated they also have to consider the location of the
major lines to the tank and also the location of earthquake faults.
He stated the location proposed is viable because it is on the
developer's property.
The Commission discussed possible mitigations if the tank is moved
to another location. Mr. Cowan stated this can be explored.
Mr. Skinner stated considering another location for the water tank
can be a condition of approval. He noted if another site is
selected, a supplementary EIR would have to be done on the impacts
of the tank at the new site. He noted the geologist indicated that
regardless of this location or any other location, subsequent
detailed geological investigations would have to be done when the
detailed information on the tank is available. He noted the
planning commission can state, as their intention to explore other
alternatives and there impacts.
Com. Austin stated she concurs with Com. Doyle and if they are
going to consider another location for the water tank it should be
part of this study.
Mr. Skinner stated the geologist indicated that when the detailed
information regarding the tank and access road is available, then
it would be necessary to make an examination. He stated based on
the information at this time, no serious geological problems were
posed.
Ms. Nadine Grant stated there seems to be confusion when discussing
the EIR and GPA. Mr. Cowan stated these go parallel with each
other.
Com. Roberts stated he would like to see staff explore more
effective ways to mitigate the tank.
City Planner Wordell stated that perhaps the mitigations could be
proposed or presented in a way to show that it would be less than
significant, this may be more acceptable.
Com. Harris stated the planning commission should make decisions
and suggestions for new mitigations if necessary and move forward
on this process.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 7
Mr. Cowan stated the question is whether the mitigation is
feasible? Ms. Wordell stated staff will bring back photos of
proposed location and will also look at alternative mitigations.
Com. Doyle stated he would like to know the height of the front
face of the tank. Mr. Viskovich stated what would be seen is 32
ft. above the ground.
Com. Roberts stated he would like to see better photos of what the
eye would see. Mr. Skinner stated the original photos of the story
poles are in color and he will present these at the next meeting.
He will also present photos of existing water tanks in other areas.
ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS (EMF)
Com. Harris addressed the report from the consultants regarding
EMF's and Mr. Skinner stated they are recommending more studies as
development occurs.
Planning Director Cowan stated there is no definitive information
at this time regarding EMF's.
Mr. Mike Bruner, Sobrato Development, stated the only power line
that would impact the 176/192 proposal would be along the PG&E
line. He stated they are between ll5 to 130 ft. to the first house
from the wire.
Com. Austin stated there is concern about EMF's but there are no
definite studies at this time. She does not believe this would
affect certifying the ErR. Com. Doyle concurred.
Com. Roberts stated they need to be careful because this is an
unknown, and they should exercise suitable caution.
Com. Harris stated after reading various reports regarding EMF's
she is concerned about a house being 115 to 130 ft. from a power
line. citing studies showing elevated leukemia rates in children
tied to EMF's, she noted any development should be considered at
the background level distance of two hundred feet. She did not
feel that the EIR should state that the impacts of EMF's would not
be significant.
TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION
Mr. Viskovich explained the possible traffic generated by the
proposed development, including the traffic generated by the Forum.
He reviewed the location of an alternative access road onto Stevens
Creek, but it may not get the benefit for the cost of the road.
He stated if the few cars that are diverted mitigate the problem,
the commission may want to have the alternative access. He added
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 8
they would also have to address the requirements of Southern
Pacific. He stated that staff believes the existing road will be
able to handle the additional traffic. He stated Cristo Rey Drive
does not have a residential frontage, therefore does not create a
significant impact. He added if st. Joseph's Ave. was opened it
would be utilized, but based on the facts today, they had to assume
this road is closed.
Com. Roberts stated the traffic on Foothill is approximately 25,000
vehicles per day. He expressed concern about safety on Cristo Rey
and noted there are no sidewalks.
Mr. viskovich stated there are no parked cars on Cristo Rey and no
driveways with cars going in and out. He noted the narrower road
keeps the speed down. He also pointed out that there are sidewalks
on one side of the street.
Ms. Diane Morena Ikeda, Co-Chair FAIR, stated if the city of Los
Altos would open up st. Joseph's Avenue some of the traffic could
be redirected. She noted the road is in place and should be used.
She suggested the planning commission consider this.
Fr. Mitchell, Diocese of San Jose, addressed Mayor Bruno's letter
dated October 27, 1994, regarding the closure of st. Joseph's
Avenue. He also addressed the city of Los Altos request that the
developer should discharge the obligation of the city of Los Altos
to maintain its roads on the proposition that the developer should
pay half of the local costs for the seismic retrofit of the bridge.
He expressed concern about such costs being passed onto the
residents of Cupertino.
Ms. Nadine Grant, OAKS, stated she would like clarification on the
date of the study regarding the ADT's. Mr. Viskovich stated the
studies are current. She noted a number of items were left open at
the last meeting and noted she has not heard any response to these.
city Planner Wordell stated the final responses to comments that
will go from the planning commission to the council will be
published at the time the planning commission wraps up their
consideration.
Ms. Grant stated the noise mitigation is a concern and has not been
addressed. Chr. Mahoney stated the red legged frog will be
addressed at the next meeting.
Mr. Mike Bruner stated the reason why the other side of the ravine
was eliminated for the consideration for the water tank was the
fact that it was a steeper access route. Also there would be less
trees impacted at the proposed location.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 9
Com. Roberts addressed the traffic impact from the Forum noting
this is greater than was foreseen. He stated if the traffic was
reevaluated it would be a larger impact and asked should this be
considered in the present environmental impact report?
Mr. Cowan stated when the Forum was approved it was based on
traffic as well as the slope density formula. He explained
Condition 25 as written in the conditions of approval for the Forum
project. He stated the traffic analysis done in 1985 for the Forum
development was based on lower trip counts. He noted traffic was
a concern in 1985, but was not the primary emphasis that changed
the numbers.
city Planner Wordell reviewed the Diocese General Plan Amendment
Flow Chart - ll/8/94.
It was a consensus of the Commission that no further seismic
information was needed at this time.
It was a consensus to continue this hearing to December 6, 1994.
2.
Application No:
Applicant:
Property Owner(s):
Location:
81,152
city of Cupertino
various
Properties along or near stevens Creek
Blvd. from Highway 85 to the eastern city
limits.
HEART OF THE CITY SPECIFIC PLAN meeting to review the progress
of the work on the draft land use and development character
policies, development standards and design guidelines, and
financing of streetscape and other improvements.
subject:
Land Use and Housing.
Associate Planner Jung presented the staff report noting the
discussion at this meeting will be limited to the land use
component, which include a specific plan land use and development
policies and a land use map which also identifies candidate housing
sites. He presented the land use map noting the policies and map
are premised on two general principals: a) Provide a mixture of
land uses that promotes activity; b) Provide additional housing
along the boulevard. Mr. Jung reviewed the land use and development
approach as outlined in the staff report. He noted he would like
input from the Planning commission with regards to the activity
centers. He outlined and reviewed the potential uses for the
activity centers.
Associate Planner Jung discussed the housing policy noting the
general plan calls for additional housing along the boulevard. He
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 10
reviewed the areas for potential housing as outlined on Exhibit D
in the staff report. He stated the purpose of the land use plan is
to identify some future land uses, should the existing businesses
change. He also reviewed the density proposals as outlined in the
staff report.
In response to Com. Doyle's questions, Mr. Cowan stated a location
for a big box retail was not identified, but the most likely
location would be in Vallco Park.
The Planning Commission discussed
including the old post office
Chevrolet.
other possible sites for housing
and the land behind Davidson
Com. Harris asked why the number of housing has increased since the
original general plan objective?
Mr. Jung stated it was not staff's intent to increase the general
plan objective, but to demonstrate that there are a number of sites
that could fall into the 500 cap. He stated staff has presented a
list of potential sites. He noted the City Center project was
approved for 120 units.
Com. Harris addressed the design guidelines for the activity nodes.
Mr. Jung stated the design guidelines proposed by Michael Freedman
are for the streetscape. He noted design guidelines are meant to
address buildings fronting on stevens Creek Blvd., and not designed
to address developments and the activity centers. He noted the
funding for design guidelines for the three activity centers was
not included in the budget.
Mr. Cowan stated in the streetscape map there are three distinct
patterns being proposed. He stated in terms of the streets cape
there will be continuity between all three activity centers.
Com. Harris asked the reason for identifying the three activity
centers?
Mr. Jung stated
activity in these
similar uses.
it is appropriate to concentrate development
three areas and staff believes it should be of
Chr. Mahoney stated at the current densities the city may have more
housing than the city thought they would need. He asked if this
provides the flexibility to reduce the densities?
Mr. Jung stated, city wide, they have more land for housing than
what will be built. He noted the densities can be reduced. Mr.
Cowan stated there is a cap of 500 units.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 11
Chr. Mahoney asked about the density bonus? Mr. Jung stated the
density bonus law has been in affect for many years and has not
been utilized.
Mr. Jung stated that housing is located outside of the activity
centers with the exception of the city Center area which is
appropriate for high density housing.
The commission discussed the requirements for parks. Mr. Jung
stated this issue was discussed with the parks and recreation
commission and it was staff's and the commission's opinion that it
would be difficult to find a 3 acre park on stevens Creek Blvd.
Mr. Jung pointed out that the park ratio is 3 acres per 1000
residents. He stated given the distribution of the housing units
staff felt that no one park could accommodate the housing proposed
along stevens Creek. He noted staff took a look at the park and
recreational facilities available in this area and staff believe
the residential proposed is well served with the existing
facilities. He stated staff proposed to the parks and recreation
commission that a 3 l/2 acre park in this area would be infeasible,
and the commission concurred. The commission stated that private
recreation should be considered as well as considering passive open
space as part of any development.
Mr. Farokh Deboo, 10257 Nile Dr., noted that out of the 500 units
proposed 120 units have been approved to the City Center. He
stated he does not see how there can be 500 units along stevens
Creek and the numbers presented are not very clear. He suggested
that the parks and recreation reconsider their recommendation and
may be use the triangle piece of property in city Center area for
open space. He stated he would like to be involved in any hearings
regarding this matter. He stated the density numbers need to be a
little more concrete for city Center.
Mr. Jung explained how the density acreage was calculated for the
City Center area. He stated the 120 unit project approval did get
credit for a park.
Ms. Nancy Burnett, 729 Stendhal Ln., stated it was her
understanding that during the general plan hearings the height of
buildings would be 3D ft. for properties which abut existing
residential and 45 ft. elsewhere. She noted this may need to be
addressed. Regarding the parks, Ms. Burnett stated the general
plan does provide for pocket parks and maybe a stronger look at the
area may reveal small parcels that could be used as pocket parks.
She stated her neighborhood would like to use segwick School for
recreational purposes, but it is gated off.
Mr. Cowan stated the parks and recreation commission looked at the
possibility of pocket parks and made the recommendation as stated
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 12
earlier.
Mr. Jung noted some of the larger projects proposed for housing
will have private recreation.
Mr. Cowan stated Vallco Park area has land set aside for housing
and if this is developed, the question of a park in this area will
be raised.
Corn. Austin stated sites for housing can be identified, but they
should not be specific as to the number of units on each site.
Chr. Mahoney stated some guidelines are needed. Corn. Austin stated
she would also support housing in the activity centers as mixed
use.
In response to Chr. Mahoney's question regarding requiring housing,
Mr. Jung stated if they don't require housing it won't be
developed. He believes specif ic sites should be identif ied in
order to achieve the general plan goals.
Mr. Cowan stated the distribution of the units may need to be
changed.
Corn. Doyle stated if the city requires a 3 acre park, there needs
to be the density to utilize it and this will not work with what is
proposed along the boulevard. He stated as the units are
distributed it would be difficult to meet the requirement of mass
transit. with regards to housing, Com. Doyle stated the concept
should be that the nodes have specific applications with housing in
between. He stated they need a better definition of what
constitutes a node and what are the benefits of being in the Heart
of the City?
All commissioners concurred that they should expand the boundaries
of the crossroads.
Chr. Mahoney stated he would like more specific information as to
why the parks and recreation commission did not consider pocket
parks. Corn. Roberts concurred.
Mr. Cowan stated staff will provide more information on this.
Corn. Roberts questioned the overlay use and asked what happened to
the mixed-use? Mr. Jung stated the residential overlay will have
some residential component. He noted he will make this language
stronger.
Corn. Harris stated if the maximum density is calculated they have
over 1000 units and this needs to be considered. She noted there
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Adjourned Meeting, November 8, 1994
Page 13
may need to be lower category of density. Mr. Cowan stated the
most valid sites for housing will be selected and the density will
be on the lower end of the scale. He noted that the planning
commission will have and annual general plan review and staff will
update the commission on the status of housing development.
In response to Com. Harris' question regarding a big box retail,
Mr. Cowan stated Vallco would like this on their property. Com.
Harris pointed out that the frontage of site #8 on stevens Creek
should remain commercial. She also noted that both sides of the
major street should be included in the specific plan. She stated
that the north side of stevens Creek Blvd. should be included in
the civic center activity center and also the west side of De Anza
Blvd.
Mr. Jung stated he excluded the property addressed by Com. Harris
because he does not believe much higher density is appropriate in
these areas, because of the shallow lots and the balance between
parking and landscaping. Mr. Jung stated that Mr. Freedman pointed
out that if the city is trying to create a signature street, they
should not make every street the same signature.
Com. Harris stated that open space needs to be provided for the
residents. She noted school sites are good recreational areas, but
do not replace parks and she would not be opposed to pocket parks.
She also said that the she did not feel the private space in
developments would replace the need for residents to have park
space outside the development.
Chr. Mahoney stated they should look at densities as it relates to
adjacent uses, particularly residential uses. He does not believe
that 45 ft. height adjacent to single family homes is compatible.
He stated that the NE corner of Stevens Creek and De Anza should be
included in the activity center.
with regards to noticing, Mr. Cowan stated notices are sent to all
property owners in a uniform basis. He stated it may be appropriate
to send out more direct notices to property owners. The commission
concurred.
Com. Doyle stated he is opposed to specifically identifying lots
and the densities and would like more information on this. He
noted high density next to single family residential will be a
concern and needs to be mitigated.
Mr. Jung stated the next meeting will address design principals
which will include buffers to adjacent uses.
It was a consensus of the commission to continue this discussion to
the meeting of December 12, 1994.