Loading...
PC 09-22-94 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Ave. Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1994 ORDER OF BUSINESS SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chr. Mahoney Com. Doyle Com. Austin Com. Roberts Com. Harris staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development Ciddy Wordell, city Planner Bert Viskovich, Public Works Director Cheryl Kershner, Deputy City Attorney ~ Consultants Present: WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Don Skinner, PAA Bob Harrison, PAA Leon pirafalo, PAA No discussion POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVALS FROM CALENDAR - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None CONSENT CALENDAR - None PUBLIC HEARING 1. 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, -60. Located south of I-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 Residential 5-20 acre slope density to Very Low Density Residential Foothill Modified 1/2 acre slope density with a cap of 293 units. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES september 22, 1994 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: An Environmental Impact Report was 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 and intrusion into natural vegetation, wildlife habitat and wetland areas: exposure to adverse geologic conditions: storm run-off erosion and pollution: wildfire hazard: visual impacts: water tank failure and leakage: and safety of school crossings. staff Presentation: City Planner Wordell presented the staff report noting that staff recommend the following order of business: staff report: Planning commission questions: Applicant/Public comments and questions: Determine if new information is needed: continue hearing to October 6, 1994. Ms. Wordell stated tonight's oral comments will receive response in writing before the next meeting as well as the written response. She also reviewed the schedule for future meetings. She noted the request from the Diocese is to change the land use designation from very low density residential 5-20 acre slope density to very low density residential foothill modified 1/2 acre slope density with a cap of 293 units. She noted an Environmental Impact Report was prepared and the city directed the evaluation of 10 alternatives, so their request is one of 10. She outlined the project area requested for the General Plan change. Ms. Wordell noted that the Cemetery and Mary Knoll properties under the General Plan are institutional and Quasi-Public and allow 5-20 residential with a rezoning. She stated staff would like to include the cemetery property as part of this project and consider that the 5-20 not be included on the General Plan, but it be a cemetery use. with regards to Mary Knoll, it is not a part of this project and if property owners want to rezone to PD the General Plan does allow this. Ms. Wordell briefly reviewed the 10 alternatives as listed in the EIR and noted 6 of the alternatives were completely analyzed as outlined in the staff report. She noted the Diocese has been circulating a new al ternati ve of 178 units and the Planning commission can direct staff how to proceed on this if they so wish. city Planner Wordell stated if the commission choose to recommend an alternative, they will need to decide, at that time, what level of detail they are approving. She reviewed the alternative plan locations and also reviewed the site constraints as outlined on the map presented to commissioners. She noted that the Williamson Act Boundary is also a site constraint. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES september 22, 1994 Page 3 Major issues related to the proposal are the following: Traffic and Circulation; Visual and Open Space; Vegetation and Wildlife; Schools. Traffic and circulation - Access is along Cristo Rey with emergency access proposed to Stevens Creek. st. Joseph's's Ave. will remain closed. No significant traffic impacts. Visual and Open space - Reviewed the four view points used for visual analysis. significant impacts from Cristo Rey, the water tank and also from the Forum Development. Visually Sensitive Areas - I-280 area; area by the cemetery; back drop areas. Ms. Wordell showed computer simulations of what the development would look like from several surrounding views. Vegetation and wildlife - Tree removal is a major issue. 180 trees proposed to be removed on Seminary property. Applicant will give the Planning commission some additional information on this issue. There will be significant grass land loss. Some mitigations are to retain or replace the trees with natives, setback from riparian corridor and wetlands, control evasive landscaping. The conclusion is that loss of trees and grass lands is not fully mitigab1e. She reviewed some of the habitat in this area and mitigation which may be needed. Schools - Foothill Blvd. is not warranted for crossing guard and bussing is not mandated. Financial and facility impacts addressed and the School District, at this time, feel satisfied that they could accept the alternatives. City Planner Wordell pointed out the location of the proposed water tank and noted the visual impacts are considered significant and not fully mitigable. No significant impacts from EMF. She stated the EIR concluded that there are some unavoidable significant environmental affects that would require overriding consideration if a General Plan Amendment was to be approved. Those include: loss of open space, visual impacts, impacts on bats, loss of grasslands and woodlands, loss of marsh, intensification of human use and introduction of domestic pets, earthquake damage, and visual impact of water storage tank. Ms. Wordell reviewed the Environmentally Superior Alternative as outlined in the staff report. The following comments are answers to Commissioners questions. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 22, 1994 Page 4 Ms. Wordell stated staff would like to remove the residential landuse designation from the cemetery property so there would be no future residential on this property. Regarding Mary Knoll, it is not a part of this project and would remain as is. with regards to defining the level of detail, Ms. Wordell stated this would include lot lines, some assumptions about house size, roads and setbacks. She added that the commission could choose to have all or as many hillside policies included in this project. Chr. Mahoney opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. ADDlicant Presentation: Fr. Michael J. Mitchell, Diocese of San Jose, presented additional information to the Commissioners and staff. He noted after four years they are glad to reach this point. He believes this process gives the city the chance to deal with the Diocese property specifically and deal with the sensitive areas on site. Fr. Mitchell stated this development will have a positive fiscal affect on the City, both in the Schools and the Fire Department. He noted the changes in the plans will ensure l38 acres of open space, permanently dedicated for public use. He stated the Diocese is proposing a 178 unit alternative which clearly resembles parts of alternative 3 and alternative 5. Ms. Marie Cooper, Attorney for Diocese, outlined technical corrections to the report presented by Fr. Mitchell. She noted the l16 units on the Seminary Property are similar to the 125 units studied under alternative 3 in the EIR and the 62 units on the Cristo Rey parcel are similar to the 65 units studied under alternative 5 in the ErR. She noted the information is available in the ErR for the Diocese proposal and no further studies are needed. She noted the applicant has gone from 293 units to 178, leaving approximately 75% of the land open space. She noted the 178 unit proposal leaves 100 ft. minimum as a riparian corridor and leaves it in public ownership. She addressed the report regarding schools and noted the impact is fully mitigated at this time. Ms. Cooper briefly reviewed the fiscal report as included in the report presented to the Commissioners. She also addressed a letter from Earth Systems Consultants, regarding the grading and the affect on the ground water. She noted there is an error in the ErR regarding the tree canopy, on the Seminary Property there is 8.7 acres of tree coverage. She addressed the visual analysis and noted the impacts will be fully mitigated when the trees are fully grown. Ms. Cooper stated the Diocese has presented conceptual site plans and they are not prepared to be more specific at this time. In response to Commissioners question, Mr. Cowan stated the EIR is designed to deal with many alternatives. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 22, 1994 Page 5 Mr. Robert Shick, 1046 Cuesta Drive, Mountain View, stated he is a hiker at San Antonio Park and noted his comments will be based on the 178 unit proposal. He stated he would prefer that the plan have separate areas for both high density and open space. He stated he would support the Diocese plan to leave many areas undeveloped. He stated there are four issues: 1) Noise impact on Rancho San Antonio; 2) Are tighter regulations needed on pesticides and fertilizer use in the development proposed and the wetland water shed basin? Are there special needs during construction to protect the wetlands? 3) Lots 62 and 59 do not lie within the contour of the hillside. Lot 62 should not be developed and the development on lot 59 should be setback in order to preserve the view. 4) Hopes the Diocese will preserve the monastery building. Mr. Alan Dina, 10479 Heney Creek Place, read a letter into the record from Nadine Grant and presented a copy to staff and the commissioners. Mr. Brett Melendy, 23500 Cristo Rey Drive, member of the Board of Directors at the Forum, summarized his comments wrote in his letter. He noted the easement for the Seminary property is dangerous for the residents of the Forum. He expressed concern about traffic and safety. He stated he would like to wish to endorse the Diocese' willingness to shift some of the housing from the Seminary Property to the Cristo Rey property. Ms. Arlene Armstrong, 2465 Cristo Rey Place, stated the EIR and the General Plan address impacts on the City of Cupertino, but does not mention the impacts on the residents of Los Altos. She expressed concern about the increase in traff ic, noise and safety. She stated the number of trips generated by this development would be twice the number of homes. She addressed the parking on Cristo Rey Drive and noted there are no sidewalks in this area. She stated further development using Cristo Rey as an access will make the situation worse. Ms. Armstrong addressed the emergency access road proposed and suggested that the planning Commission consider this emergency road to be built as a permanent road for access to this development. Ms. Armstrong also expressed concern about property values and requests that the number of homes developed be kept to a minimum. Mr. Clyde Armstrong, 2465 Cristo Rey Place, stated he is concerned about increased traffic on Cristo Rey as a result of this development. He stated he would support a permanent access road and expressed concern about property values, noise and traffic. He believes it is not logical for all the traffic to go onto Cristo Rey Drive. He stated he would like the number of homes developed, kept to a minimum. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 22, 1994 Page 6 Ms. Mavis Smith, 22734 Majestic Oak Way, read a quote from Wendall Berry. She expressed concern about wildlife on the property and noted there should be as much undisturbed open space as possible. Mr. Melvin Caldwell, 10300 E. Estates Drive, stated he spoke in support of the 293 units previously proposed and would ask the Planning commission to look at the positive aspects of the proposed development. He noted schools and libraries will benefit financially from this development. Ms. Diane Ikeda, FAIR, stated she would like to stress the positive factors of this development. She stated with the 178 units there will be a significant amount of open space preserved for the community. She stated it will be financially beneficial to schools, and the Planning commission should treat this matter fairly. Mr. John Johnson, 2405 Cristo Rey Place, expressed concern about traffic impacts and safety. He believes another access road is needed. He noted there have been several accidents on Cristo Rey and the Forum development has already doubled the traffic in this area. He believes the schools will be negatively affected by the proposed development. He spoke in support of another access road and additional traffic being forced to take this road. He stated development should be kept to a minimum. Mr. Randy Anderson, 330 Distel circle, Los Altos, Mid Peninsula open Space, addressed a letter dated August 15th from the General Manager at Mid Peninsula to Ciddy Wordell. He stated the open space needs to be configured to be as continuous and contiguous as possible. He stated traffic impacts on ingress/egress from the County Park entrance have not been addressed in the EIR and should be addressed. He stated the visual impact analysis does not fully recognize the projects impact as a distant view. He stated the recently adopted General Plan was well thought out and should be applied. In response to Com. Roberts' question, Mr. Anderson stated there are a number of corridors linking the open space, but they are also separated by development and this is not conducive to achieving wildlife habitats. Ms. Ruth Troetschler, 184 Lockhart Lane, Los Altos, stated she is a biologist. She noted she has not seen the proposed plan for the l78 units. She stated she does not favor the current EIR, but does support the protection of the environmentally sensitive areas on the property. She stated none of the alternatives indicate low cost housing or to preserve contiguous open space. She stated higher density housing on a smaller footprint near Cristo Rey would PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 22, 1994 Page 7 be better for the property. She stated a portion of the seminary property retains oak savanna and some development is proposed for this area. She noted the residential development will threaten the oak trees. Ms. Troetschler stated even dead and dying trees provide habitat and should be considered. Mr. Mike Westphal, P.O. Box 1069, Los Gatos, stated he is a wildlife biologist and works for a non-profit organization. He addressed the Red Leg Frog and noted this is an endangered species and a project buster. He stated any significant development in Cristo Rey area will cause the frog to become extinct. He stated the loss of this frog cannot be mitigated. He stated these frogs do not do well in suburban areas. Ms. Patricia Wood, 10656 Amulet Place, Treasurer, Committee for Green Foothills, stated the Committee submitted a letter and she would like to reiterate the Committee's position. She noted when Cupertino adopted its present low density code for the foothills, the City was hailed as the first city to adopt the greenbelt concept. She stated the Committee for Green Foothills supports the current code with the provision that all opens space be dedicated to the public. She stated if the General Plan is changed, the Committee urge that the condition that all open space etc. be dedicated to the public to ensure permanent and continuous access. She stated there are volunteer efforts to help maintain the public open space and noted it is imperative that the open space not remain in private hands, because the threat of additional development would always exist. She stated the Committee encourages that any zoning change not be viewed as a precedence for the rest of the Cupertino hillside lands which are within the sphere of influence. Mr. Tom O'Donnel, Attorney for Kaiser Cement, stated Kaiser is not opposing the use of this property, but would like to make people aware of the Kaiser cement facility in this area. He stated there is no mention in the EIR that the facility is open 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. He stated the volume and noise of trucks from the Quarry have been the subject of debates. He stated that a Stevens Creek access should not be considered because of safety with regards to truck use from the Quarry. He stated Kaiser would like to see the Diocese use their property, but they must work with Kaiser. He addressed State and City law regarding the protection of mineral resources and noted this is not mentioned in the EIR. He suggested some use of landscaping to screen the views of the Quarry from the development. Mr. craig Brean, 22221 McClellan Road, representing the Santa Clara Audubon Society, stated the membership shares a passionate interest in the preservation of open space for both wildlife and the quality PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 22, 1994 Page 8 of life. He stated he does not believe that the city has explained why they are considering a General Plan amendment, other than the fact that the Diocese has asked for it. He noted this needs to be addressed. He stated he hopes that development would be concentrated on the Seminary property, the part which is paved. He noted dead trees are valuable and some should be saved. He added preservation of grasslands is important as is the preservation of contiguous open space. In response to Com. Roberts' question, Mr. Brean stated, in general, native trees should be preserved over non-native trees. Ms. Julia Bott, 3921 E. Bayshore, Palo Alto, representing the Sierra Club, stated they would recommend denial of the General Plan Amendment proposed and the Planning Commission need to make a decision by listening to the community. She noted the existing General Plan is a good solution and much thought went into developing this. She expressed concern about the impact of increased traffic and the impact on wildlife, as a result of the development. She stated she would urge the Commissioners to respect the process the community has already gone through in developing the existing General Plan. Ms. Kendel Blau, 23005 Standing Oak Court, representing OAKS, stated the alr quality data IS inadequate in the EIR. She addressed the noise from Kaiser Cement facility. Ms. Blau also addressed the financing for schools and noted there is inadequate programming money and the development will have a negative impact on the schools. She stated she would like to see some kind of context for this decision. She noted the General Plan has policies which reflects what the community want to accomplish. Mr. Joe Tembroch, 20791 Scofield Drive, Co-Chair FAIR, stated he enjoys the foothills frequently. He stated the diocese proposal of permanently dedicating l30 acres is very positive and the open space land is a tremendous benefit to the community. Mr. Stephen Rottenborn, 36 Barnes, Palo Alto, Member of the Coyote Creek Riparian station in Alviso, stated if contiguous open space is not available, local extinctions of some species will gradually occur after development. He addressed the creek and noted pollutants will travel into the creek and eventually into the San Francisco Bay. He added ground water will be reduced significantly by development. He noted the loss of oak trees will adversely affect the wildlife habitat. He stated there is no guarantee that new trees will survive to accommodate the existing habitat. In response to Com. Doyle's question regarding buffer distance, Mr. Rottenborn stated there has been very little research regarding PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES september 22, 1994 Page 9 this issue. He stated 200 ft. is a good start. Chr. Mahoney asked how the new plan proposed differs from the existing general plan, which allows 36 homes, spread out over the property? In response, Mr. Rottenborn stated it depends on the kind of habitat matrix around the homes. Ms. Deborah Jamison, 21346 Rumford Drive, stated the draft EIR is a very comprehensive document. She noted the development on this property will have adverse impacts and the necessary time must be taken to discuss any decisions made. She expressed concern about the Non-Point Source Pollution and the change in hydrology. She stated the EIR does not adequately address the impacts that development and impervious surfaces will have on the overall hydrology of the land, water quality, and the very existence of the seep, on which an endangered species was found. She stated a thorough hydrology study must be done. She stated mitigation to overcome environmental impacts needs to be monitored and directed over the long term. She stated the EIR is inadequate in addressing economics and noted an independent study is needed. She stated the draft EIR is inadequate in identifying all the impacts and should not be accepted at this time. Mr. Robert Hawn, 2942 Julio Ave., Santa Clara County Greenbelt Coalition, spoke against the proposal to amend the General Plan. He stated Cupertino has designed a General Plan that shows itself at the fore-front of planning technology and this is needed in the County. He stated to amend the General Plan as proposed, would reverse a good policy which was designed with much citizen input and staff analysis. He expressed concern about the amendment and noted, although open space is proposed, it would create value for the project only. He stated this type of development adds to the urban sprawl that has been plaguing this County for the last 30 years. Mr. Hawn addressed the issue of development on the City's fr inges, gi ven the cost of providing services. He expressed concern about the message this amendment would send to other property owners in the area. He would urge the planning commission to protect their hillsides and deny the General Plan amendment. Mr. James Dozier, 972 st. Joseph Ave., Los Altos, stated he owns property in Cupertino. He stated the Diocese should not be treated any differently than any other developer. He stated if there is development, another access road should be considered. He believes that eventually the property owners of Mary Knoll will want to develop their property. Ms. vicki Moore, 1922 The Alameda, San Jose, Greenbelt Alliance, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES september 22, 1994 Page 10 stated she would urge denial of the General Plan Amendment and uphold the existing General Plan. She stated they have not seen articulation of the overriding pUblic benefit which is necessary before considering amending the General Plan. She addressed the proposed development dedicated open space. She stated the best option is to stay with the existing General Plan and minimize the development. Ms. Moore presented a letter for the record. Mr. Roman Yanovsky, 1420 Cristo Rey Drive, stated the biggest impact will be upon the people who live on Cristo Rey Dr. He stated development should be kept to a minimum and they don't want increased density along Cristo Rey. He spoke in support of another access onto Stevens Creek. Mr. Howard Johnson, 22600 Alcalde, stated he testified when the General Plan and hillside policies were being considered and believes the existing General Plan should be upheld. He stated he represents ClJRB and it was the consensus of CURB that the people of Cupertino have worked hard to create the hillside policies and do not believe the current proposal justifies any change in the General Plan. Mr. Johnson stated he believes opposition to the proposal is the direct result of people being educated about the environment and do not want more development. Ms. Betty Tlysen, The Forum, spoke in support of the rural atmosphere and expressed concern about the Savanna Oaks in this area. She stated she objects to the density proposed and opening the gate on st. Joseph Ave. will impact the area. She also expressed concern about the impact on wildlife if development occurs. Ms. Nancy Lee, 1415 Kring Way, Los Altos, expressed concern about the traffic impact of this development. She spoke in support of an additional access road. Ms. Lee also expressed concern about the decrease in property values and would like to keep the number of homes proposed to a minimum. Mr. Howard Levitan, 19661 vicksburg Drive, Chair, Sierra Singles, stated they are interested in what happens to Rancho San Antonio Park. He stated the park is being used more causing parking problems and traffic on Cristo Rey Dr. He suggested that the Planning commission look at the proposal in a larger context with regards to Rancho San Antonio Park. He stated the City and County should meet to discuss long term use of the park and then discuss the property in question. He stated if use at San Antonio continues to grow another access should be considered. Mr. David Medin, 940 st. Joseph Ave., spoke in support of another access road. He expressed concern about the impact on schools as PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 22, 1994 Page 11 a result of development and would support limiting the number of homes. Mr. Bill Henderson, 626 Twelve Acres Drive, Los Altos, stated he is on the Board of Directors of the Los Altos Homeowners League. Mr. Henderson explained this organization. He noted many Los Altos homeowners oppose the proposed General Plan change. He stated they are concerned when the use of Cupertino lands adversely affects the citizens of Los Altos. He noted there are no cost benefits to the city of Los Altos. He added that another access road, built on cupertino land, should be considered. He noted Los Altos and Cupertino have been good neighbors and would like to continue this relationship. Chr. Mahoney continued the public hearing at this time. The following comments are answers to Commissioners questions. City Planner Wordell stated the commissioners will receive written responses to the oral and written communications. She noted there will be a response to the comments made regarding the mineral resources at the next meeting. Com. Harris stated she would like input regarding the dead tree issue and the concern about fire. Ms. Wordell stated the EIR does contain information regarding the hydrology study. She also noted that financial impacts, as a result of this proposed development, are included in the General Plan. Regarding setting a precedence if the General Plan Amendment was approved, Ms. Wordell stated findings could be made for this property only. She noted the issue regarding the Seminary Property being hillside property will be addressed at the next meeting. City Planner Wordell stated the responses will deal with all the questions and concerns raised at this meeting. Com. Roberts questioned the alternatives and the comparison made by the Diocese and some speakers. He also addressed site constraints. Ms. Wordell stated the Commission may want to identify any site constraints which have not been identified by the alternatives. She noted in most alternatives, development is proposed in the less constrained areas. She stated contiguous open space may need to be addressed. Com. Roberts questioned whether all site constraints were PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 22, 1994 Page 12 identified on the map. He stated the protection of the endangered species addressed at this hearing are not addressed adequately in the E1R. Ms. wordell stated staff will provide better visual materials before the Commission make decisions on defining the sensitive areas. Com. Austin suggested transparent overlays which show sensitive areas and the various proposals of the development. Com. Roberts stated the traffic analysis seemed to focus on the impact at Cristo Rey/Foothill intersection. He stated he would like staff to explore the impact on 1-280 with Cal-Trans. Com. Doyle addressed Kaiser's impact, Ms. Wordell stated this will be addressed at the next meeting. Regarding another access road, Mr. Viskovich stated there would have to be a redesign to force people to use a stevens Creek access. Com. Doyle stated he would like information on the following: Buffer between the permanente creek and the surrounding development. Ownership or administration options available for the open space proposed. Project busters regarding endangered species. overriding considerations applicable to the General Plan Amendment Com. Austin expressed concern about the following: Open space Impacts on schools and traffic What are the benefits to the city? Mr. Cowan stated the Public Finance Officer can review the financial data. Chr. Mahoney stated he would like to see an alternative on the traffic regarding another access and what the pros and cons would be. Com. Harris stated when she took the there was a house on the property. a recommendation on this. tour of the Diocese property, She requested that staff make Ms. Wordell stated this has been addressed in letters to staff and will be addressed by staff. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES september 22, 1994 Page 13 Ms. Wordell noted written comments and responses will be available before the October 6th meeting. Mr. Don Skinner, comments and will at this meeting. PRA, stated they are working on the written have responses to some of the oral comments made Chr. Mahoney requested any work in progress. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m. and continued to the special meeting of October 6, 1994, 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, c~ 't-J\.~cl Catherine M. Robillard Minutes Clerk Approved by the Planning commission at the Special Meeting, October 6, 1994. If Ý)JJ Orrin J:lJahonk Chair Attest: . ~fL Kim smith, City Clerk ,-