PC 12-09-91
CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
1Q300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA. 95014
(408) 252-4505
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON DECEMBER 9, 1991
SALUTE TO THE FLAG:
ROLL CALL:
commissioners Present:
Chairman Mackenzie
Vice Chairman Fazekas
Commissioner Mann
commissioner Mahoney
Commissioner Austin
staff Present:
Robert Cowan, Director of
Community Development
ciddy Wordell, City Planner
Michele Bjurman, Planner II
Steve Dowling, Director of
Parks & Recreation
Cheryl Kershner, Deputy City Attorney
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Chr. Mackenzie corrected the minutes of November 18, 1991 as
follows: Heading, changed the words "study session" to "Meeting";
Page 2, 2nd paragraph should read "... ci ty Counsel..."; Page 4,
change word "pole" to "poll"; Page 6, last paragraph, add the words
"to continue this item at that meeting."; Page 7, delete the words
"Having concluded business" and the words "special study session"
should be changed to "adjourned meeting".
MOTION:
Com. Austin moved to approve the minutes of November 18,
1991, as amended
Com. Mann
Passed 5-0
SECOND:
VOTE:
Chr. Mackenzie corrected the minutes of November 21, 1991 as
follows: Heading, changed the words "study Session" to "Meeting";
"continuation of 3-GPA-90" to be added after Oral Communications;
Page 10 add "General Plan Amendment continued to regular meeting of
November 25, 1991" before adjournment; delete the words "Having
concluded business".
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Austin moved to approve the minutes of November 21,
1991, as amended
Com. Mann
Passed 5-0
MOTION:
Chr. Mackenzie corrected the minutes of November 25, 1991 as
follows: Page 2, note that the public hearing was continued from
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 2
November 21, 1991; Page 7 change word "workshop" to "meeting"; Page
8, delete the words " . . . this discussion..." and add the words
"...the rest of the General Plan..."
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Austin moved to approve the minutes of November 25,
1991, as amended
Com. Mann
Passed 5-0
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
Sobrato Development
City Attorney
POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS:
6. ADPlication 10-U-89 (Amended) - Portofino Development Corp.
Applicant request continuance.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Mahoney moved
(Amended) to January
Com. Austin
Passed
to continue
13, 1991
1-U-89
application
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
5-0
Mr. steven Haze, San Juan Rd., provided the Commissioners with a
synopsis of the last public hearing regarding the Seminary
property.
Chr. Mackenzie informed Mr. Haze that this subject will be
discussed at this hearing.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Application 1-M-91 (Amended) - Louis Lau: Request to remove a
condition of approval on the placement of an accessory
structure.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Mahoney moved to approve the consent calendar.
Com. Fazekas
Passed 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued)
2. APPLICATION 3-GPA-90 - CITY OF CUPERTINO: ADJOURNED PUBLIC
HEARING to continue discussion of the General Plan, including
goals and technical analysis. Subject: Seminary Property.
Chr. Mackenzie informed the public and the Planning Commission of
the process of this meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 3
Staff Presentation: city Planner Wordell presented the staff
report. She noted two of the basic options presented were rural
and suburban characters. Ms. Wordell stated, for purpose of
discussion, outlined in the staff report are areas which can be
considered developable areas and also pointed out the sensitive
areas. Ms. Wordell outlined the assumptions as explained in the
staff report. A map was presented outlining the elevations.
She explained the rural and suburban characters options and how
many units would be involved. Ms. Wordell gave a slide
presentation of Porto1a Valley Ranch showing the rural character
with clustered development. She stated most of the landscaping is
natural with no fencing.
In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Ms. Wordell stated if there
is going to be high density, staff is recommending the seminary
property for this, as it is less visible.
Chr. Mackenzie opened the public hearing.
Mr. John Sobrato, Sobrato Development, presented a site plan to the
Commission. He stated 150 ft. buffers have been placed on either
side of the park. The setback from the riparian corridor is 150
ft. which addresses the Commission and the pUblic's concern. He
feels the density should be placed by the PG&E lot and explained
this on the site plan. The are proposing a village concept in the
seminary property. He stated this plan proposes 96 acres of open
space exclusive of road and 114 acres of development including
roads. Mr. Sobrato feels this plan provides the housing needed at
a more reasonable price. He stated after running economic studies
on this plan, the Diocese of San Jose feel they can donate 10 acres
to the City. He feels it is not realistic to think that this
property can be purchased for a fair market price. Mr. Sobrato
pointed out open space areas could be retained for the exclusive
use of the residents in the area, and the natural habitat would be
preserved.
Fr. Eugene Boyle, Diocese of San Jose, stated the church is trying
to receive what is best for the diocese and the city. He noted at
the present time the bank has a lien of $27 million on the property
so the church would need this amount as a down payment and does not
feel this is available, unless the development takes place. He
noted they are donating many acres for open space.
Corn. Fazekas questioned the public access to the southwest corner?
Mr. Sobrato stated there may be a trail system built along the
riparian corridor with bicycle and pedestrian access. He noted
they have not planned on any automobile access at this time. A
Barton, Aschman study concluded that a secondary access is not
necessary. He reiterated his comments regarding an access across
the railroad lines from the last hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 4
In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Mr. Sobrato stated there
are no homes being developed on ridge lines above a certain
elevation.
Corn. Mann expressed concern about being too specific as this site
plan can be changed.
Mr. Cowan stated the Commission should view this plan as an
opportunity of what various types and forms of development will
look like on this site.
Mr. Richard Schumacher, FAIR, 11331 Bubb Rd., stated the plan
presented provides a reasonable amount of development that is
consistent with other development in the city. He stated there is
lots of open space being donated.
Mr. Leonard John Ray, FAIR, 20913 Alves Dr., commended the
Commissioners on the process of the hearings. He feels the revised
plan does not maximize the return of the property to the church as
the church is sensitive to the Community.
Mr. Melvin Caldwell, FAIR, 10300 E. Estates, stated it is unfair
not to allow development of this property. He feels a compromise
can be reached.
Mr. Joe Tambrock, FAIR, 20791 Scofield Dr., stated that affordable
housing is needed within the City.
Mr. Jay Butara, FAIR, 19703 La Mar Dr., stated that the church
agreed on 293 units when it annexed into the City of Cupertino and
feels that the staff proposal to reduce the number of units
allowed, is unfair.
Diane Moreno Ikeda, Co-Chair, FAIR, stated staff's proposal is not
significant when trying to reach ABAG's goal.
Mr. Jack Birkholz, 21381 Milford Dr., stated that controlled
development is favored over no development. He stated a ban on
development results in stagnation.
Mr. Phil Zeitman, Chairperson, CURB, feels the Commission is
working on the wrong approach and not listening to the voting
public. He stated open space is the number 1 priority. He
expressed concern regarding the possibility of another Forum. He
stated high density is not appropriate for this site and state
needs are not a good argument for this area. Housing belongs
elsewhere in the city. He stated the plans presented do not
address open space and this should be the number one priority. He
stated the General Plan should be maintained and a model for all
hillside property in Cupertino.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 5
Com. Mahoney asked Mr. zeitman what is his view or CURB's view on
private open space vs. public open space.
Mr. zeitman stated the open space should be for both animals and
people.
Mr. Richard Carey, 10138 Barbara Lane, expressed concern regarding
the staff report he feels it is contradictory with regards to the
housing needs in cupertino. He stated open space is needed. He
stated the highest priority is open space and this should be
pursued. He stated the Planning commission should look to the
future when making decisions. He noted there is confusion as to
the density and the amount of open space proposed. He feels the
staff report needs to be clarified. He suggested the
recommendation be that there is no significant or compelling reason
at this time to build residents on the st. Joseph's property, but
there are significant and compelling reasons to recommend open
space.
Ms. Nancy Burnett, Co-Chair, CURB, stated the zoning priority
should be public open space as this is the first priority. She
feels the housing units in the Forum should be counted as residents
regarding the State mandate. CURB suggest having visually
attracti ve, moderate density, affordable housing throughout the
city, including this property. She stated use of all or part of
the property as open space should be high on the Commissioners list
and also it should be indicated that the property should be
acquired for open space only. She suggested providing the amount
of time legally allowable to acquire the property.
Ms. Kindal Blau, Chair, OAKS, stated the areas identified by staff
as sensi ti ve should be preserved. OAKS requested that the
Commission consider implementing a zoning designation similar to
Ordinance 71-98. She expressed concern as to why open space
consideration is not addressed in the staff report. Open space
land use scenarios should be given the same consideration as the
development. She feels it is not up to the City to solve the
financial problems of the property owner. She noted OAKS requested
that the Commission create and implement an inclusive policy
regarding the seminary property, a policy that reflects the value
of the entire community of Cupertino.
Ms. Blau went on to read a statement from Ms. Nadine Grant who
noted she is disappointed with the staff report regarding the
proposed development. She noted environmental data is missing from
the report. She noted OAKS is still working with the church. Ms.
Grant also expressed concern regarding value to homes in the area
as well as the traffic impact if the property is developed. She
requested that staff not submit anything to the City Council until
a report regarding open space is provided.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 6
In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Ms. Blau stated the open
space should be publicly accessible.
Mr. Thomas Bornheimer, 41 Pepper Dr., Los Altos, stated there needs
to be a study of a financial cost benefit relationship. He stated
the majority of people prefer open space, being all accessible is
another issue. He stated development would maximize the return on
the property. He questioned if residents would benefit the city.
He stated there needs to be further study of the open space.
Ms. Sharon Colman, Parks & Recreation Commissioner, stated that the
Parks & Rec. Commission have a lot of support on this issue because
it is very important. She stated the open space is priority and
the Commission should be dealing with this issue. She stated open
space needs to be pUblicly accessible. She feels developing this
property would be setting a precedence throughout the City and
county. She urged the Commission to adopt the recommendations made
by the Parks & Recs. Commission.
In response to Com. Fazekas' question, Ms. Colman stated the Parks
& Recs. commission had discussed trail linkages, but not parks.
She noted the Commission can address the parks issue.
Ms. Lynn Fause, Canyon vista Dr., stated this is the last piece of
open space in Cupertino and there needs to be time spent on this
issue. She expressed concern regarding the development plan. She
stated it cannot be true open space if surrounded by residents.
She stated she would like to see the impact of the Forum before
development of this site.
Mr. Debra Jameson, Milford Dr., stated saving patches of open space
is not preserving open space, it needs to be contiguous for the
wild life. She suggested expanding the valley of oaks on the
property. She stated open space is not necessarily habitat.
Mr. steven Haze, San Juan Rd., presented a letter to the Commission
outlining the constituents and Council's preference for open space.
He stated the Planning commission did not conduct discussions or
study to establish findings regarding acquisition scenarios. Mr.
Haze submitted this letter to the Commission, outlining his
concerns and what should be discussed at the hearings, as part of
the record.
In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Mr. Haze stated the
commission should look at the development on the Seminary property.
Chr. Mackenzie noted Sobrato had submitted design guidelines to the
Commission for discussion. He noted they would work on the hand
out presented by staff regarding the key issues of this property.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 7
Chr. Mackenzie stated the number one priority is open space and the
Planning commission is planning for the second priority if the
funds cannot be obtained to purchase the property for open space.
Com. Mahoney stated the property is open space now and the Planning
commission does not need to study the property to visualize the
open space. He stated the Commission does want open space, but the
discussions of plans are in case the property cannot be purchased
for open space. Com. Mahoney stated if it was assumed that the
property is worth $65 million, for the city to purchase it, it
would cost $4,000 per household. He stated one of the issues is
how to get open space, the proposal will ensure 96 acres of open
space.
Chr. Mackenzie stated the Commission have had hours of public input
and have had no ideas on how the money could be raised to purchase
the property.
The Commissioners proceeded to work with staff's handout regarding
the key issues.
A. DEVELOPMENT/OPEN SPACE
1.
The highest
open space.
a. Pursue
priority is all or part of the property as
Yes (5-0)
every option to acquire property. Yes (5-0)
Com. Mann suggested putting a time period on this so people could
explore the chances of receiving the funds to acquire the property
as open space. She suggested two years.
Mr. Cowan stated it is valid to discuss development timing as a
General Plan statement. He noted there had been discussions with
the City Attorney regarding the relationship of the williamson Act
Contract to the decisions in terms of land use. He noted there is
statement in the General Plan regarding the urban surface area
which has a five year growth line.
Mr. steve Dowling stated the amount of money is significant and the
outside agencies are not interested at this time. He concurred
wi th Mr. Cowan regarding the development timing. He felt two years
would be adequate for a review of the acquisition of the property.
Com. Austin stated the Williamson Act should be maintained.
Chr. Mackenzie felt that two years is adequate to find out if there
is enough interest and money to purchase the property. Chr.
Mackenzie stated the two years would be a bench mark to come back
and review if development is possible or continue trying to obtain
the money for open space.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 8
Com. Fazekas stated they would need proof of feasibility to
purchase the property.
Mr. Dowling stated in two years the Commission will have a better
feel for the capability of purchasing this property, but the Parks
& Recs. Commission feel that they already have in place a mechanism
to allow time to review this issue, which is the Williamson Act.
Com. Mann suggested leaving it until the next General Plan review,
which is in five years. She also stated that all the property
cannot be protected by the Williamson Act.
b. No development proposals
1. In next two years,
2. If purchase is reasonably feasible.
Yes (3-2 Mann, Austin opposed)
2.
If all or part of the property is
and open space purposes, then
considered. Yes (5-0)
not acquired for park
development may be
3. The highest priority for the property is development. No
(5-0)
B. LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
1. Residential (Park and open Space assumed as permitted
land uses)
Ms. Wordell stated if residential is acceptable it would be assumed
that parks and open space would be acceptable.
Parks and open space. Yes (5-0)
Residential. Yes (5-0)
2. Institutional
Maryknoll. Yes (5-0)
Seminary. No (4-1 Mann opposed)
Retail. No (5-0)
Mr. Cowan questioned if the vote on institutional use is no, can
st. Joseph's and Maryknoll remain?
Com. Fazekas stated that what is there could remain as legal non-
conforming.
C. DENSITY
1. Rural character ('Portola Valley Ranch" character and
medium density townhomes). This was not discussed.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 9
2. Suburban character (typical "Valley floor" pattern and
medium density townhomes)
Com. Fazekas proposed 290 single family homes, 100 of these on
5,000 s.f. lots; 150 townhomes; 40 apartment units, possibly low
income through City's housing program.
Com. Mann feels the density is too high.
Com. Fazekas suggested increasing the center line 200 ft. from the
creek. Public property dedicated should be 96 acres and a parkway
concept along Cristo Rey.
Com. Mahoney concurred, but would make the apartments market rate.
He feels what is proposed by the developer is not high density.
The Commissioners discussed the units per acre and the density on
the developable areas as outlined by staff.
Suburban development: 209 single family homes, 100 of these on
5,000 s.f. lots; 150 townhomes; 40 apartment units, possibly
low income. Yes (3-2 Austin, Mann opposed)
Com. Austin and Com. Mann strongly objected to the above proposal.
Com. Mann suggested, if it has to be suburban, she recommends 2
acre lots with 100 homes.
Com. Fazekas proposal was discussed.
Com. Fazekas stated affordable housing should be included in this
project. It would also alleviate the developer from paying nexus
fees.
Chr. Mackenzie stated he would rather limit the house size as
opposed to the lot size.
Com. Fazekas suggested 1800 s.f - 2200 s.f.
Com. Mann stated there should be minimal grading.
Chr. Mackenzie stated he is in
suggested a higher number of
regulated.
favor of
apartments
the
and
apartments, but
not government
Corn. Fazekas stated low income housing is needed and would like to
see the apartments run by a non-profit organization.
Com. Mahoney suggested discussing this issue at a later time, when
they have received more information on the housing needs.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 10
Both Chr. Mackenzie and Com. Mahoney concurred with Com. Fazekas
proposal.
3. Higher density (maximize housing opportunity). No (5-0)
D. SENSITIVE AREAS
Com. Mann suggested 250 ft. for the riparian Corridor.
Mr. Cowan said if there is going to be an equestrian trail and a
pedestrian linkage between two open space preserves the habitat
will not support exotic animals.
1. Riparian Corridor: 200 from center of creek, with exact
width determined by a study. Yes (3-2 Mann, Austin
opposed)
2. Southwest Corner. Yes (5-0)
3. Northeast face of hill between Foothill Blvd. and Cristo
Rey Drive. No action
Com. Fazekas suggested allowing construction on this face, but
limit the location of the grading of structures to slopes less than
30 percent.
Com. Fazekas suggested deleting #3. Yes (3-2 Mann, Austin opposed)
4. Sensitive areas near Maryknoll. Yes (5-0)
5. Ridgelines and hilltops
Chr. Mackenzie suggested treating #5 the same as the overall
General Plan.
Com. Mahoney stated he would not make this a specific sensitive
area and hope other guidelines would address this in the overall
General Plan.
Corn. Fazekas suggested changing it to read prominent ridgelines and
hilltops.
Com. Mann suggested if more restrictive guidelines are implemented
in the future, than being discussed, they should apply to this
property.
Com. Fazekas suggested #6 read:
6. Slopes greater than 30 percent shall not be graded on or
houses placed on. Yes (4-1 Austin opposed)
E. PARKS AND TRAILS
1. Provide a neighborhood park, location to be determined by
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 11
a study. Yes (5-0)
2. Establish trail linkages between seminary property and
adjacent properties. Yes (5-0)
3. Establish trails within the Seminary Property.
Ms. Wordell stated the concept of 2 and 3 are to create trails from
the Seminary property to other parts of the city and to create
trails within the property.
Com. Mann stated it is already in the General Plan to support trail
linkages.
It was a consensus of the Commission to delete #3
4. Prepare a trail plan for both trail needs. Yes (5-0)
F. DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND DESIGN REVIEW
1. Cluster residential development away from sensitive
areas. Yes (5-0)
2. Buffer private development from public open space.
Com. Fazekas suggested 100 ft. Buffer next to park and consider a
150 ft. landscape corridor for Cristo Rey Drive. Yes (5-0)
3. Blend development with natural surroundings; limit
grading. Yes (5-0)
4. utilize common recreation areas. Yes (5-0)
5. Reduce or eliminate fencing.
It was a consensus to delete the words "or eliminate".
Yes (5-0)
6. Use native plants, minimize lawn area. Yes (3-2 Mahoney,
Mackenzie opposed)
7. Provide a high level of plan review. Yes (5-0)
8. Include site plan, grading, pad elevation, model or
computer simulation, and massing study in preliminary
development review. Yes (5-0)
9. Require project EIR consultant to be qualified to provide
alternative designs. Yes (5-0)
10. Avoid soundwall on I-280 through appropriate design. Yes
(5-0)
G. ACCESS
1. Require a second access - for emergency purposes only.
Yes (5-0)
H. PARKING
1. Consider parking needs for Rancho San Antonio County Park
and a city park
Ms. Wordell stated the open space district suggested providing more
spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 12
Mr. Dowling stated if the property is developed the eastern
boundary of Rancho San Antonio is being exposed to access and this
is the issue.
Ms. Wordell stated the County is requesting that the City consider
providing more parking spaces at the park with this proposal. The
vote was, Yes (5-0)
Mr. Sobrato stated the City's map is different from his map
regarding the sensitive areas and explained the differences. He
noted they will conform to the 30 percent slope.
Chr. Mackenzie informed Mr. Sobrato that he will have an
opportunity to present his points at a later hearing.
In response to Ms. Blau's question regarding open space scenarios,
Chr. Mackenzie stated that open space is the first priority and
development will not begin until open space alternatives have been
investigated and pursued. He stated the Council will address the
acquisition.
Ms. Debra Jameson questioned the flood control measures.
Chr. Mackenzie stated this is part of the ErR.
Mr. Phil zeitman commended the Commission for the process of the
hearing.
MOTION:
Com. Fazekas moved to continue the General Plan hearings
to December 12, 1991 at 5:30 p.m.
Com. Mahoney
Passed 5-0
SECOND:
VOTE:
3.
Application No(s)
Applicant:
Property OWner:
project Location:
Parcel Area:
5-EXC-91
steve Eckman
Karin Tompkins
22490 Palm Ave.
.3 Acres
EXCEPTION to Ordinance No. 686, section 16.28.040 to allow an
8 ft. fence within 12 ft. of rear property line which adjoins
side property line of key lot.
Staff Report: Planner Bjurman presented the staff report. She
stated the existing use is consistent with both the zoning and
single-family residential designations. She stated the city
traffic engineer supports the applicant's request. She stated due
to the width of the lot, the property owner would not experience a
boxed in feeling because of the proposed fence. Ms. Bjurman noted
the applicant does meet the four findings required and staff are
recommending approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 13
In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Ms. Bjurman explained a key
lot, which is a side to rear yard situation.
Ap91icant Presentation: Mr. steve Eckman, representing the
property owner, stated the individual who is residing in the key
lot, placed the fence 25 years ago and the property owner has then
replaced the fence in its exact location. He stated they were not
aware of the jog necessary in the fence line and the property in
the rear of the house has been developed according to the original
fence line. If the fence is to be constructed according to the
ordinance it would mean jogging the fence directly into a concrete
deck and creating a problem around the existing pool.
Chr. Mackenzie opened the public hearing.
Chr. Mackenzie closed the public hearing.
MOTION:
Com. Fazekas
findings and
Com. Austin
Passed
moved to approve 5-EXC-91 subject to the
subconclusions of the hearing.
SECOND:
VOTE:
5-0
4.
Application No(s):
Applicant:
Property owner:
Project Location:
12-U-9l
Deep Cliff Assoc., Inc.,
Same
10700 Clubhouse Lane
USE PERMIT for an increase in parking spaces from 106 to 124
spaces.
Chr. Mackenzie noted that as three of Commissioners have part
ownership in property close to the property in question, they
cannot participate in the hearing. Chr. Mackenzie handed the
meeting over to Vice Chair Fazekas. After pulling straws it was
determined that Com. Austin and Mahoney would leave the hearing and
Chr. Mackenzie would stay for voting purposes.
Staff Presentation: Planning Director Cowan presented the staff
report. He stated the application is to modify the parking at the
Deep Cliff Golf Course. He presented a plan showing the parking
area and outlined the changes. The total number of increased
parking spaces will be 18. There will be no significant
reconstruction which will affect the neighboring properties. He
stated staff will add a condition that no specimen trees will be
removed. He stated there will be an entry gate installed which
involves pylons. staff recommends approval.
Apulicant Presentation: Mr. John Telischak stated there have been
no changes to the course or club house, but is in need of some
improvements and at this time are proposing the improvements to the
parking lot.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 14
vice Chair Fazekas opened the public hearing
Mr. Ray Mollard, 10725 Deep Cliff Dr., stated he is not opposed to
restriping the parking lot. He complained about other aggravations
regarding noise and trash. He requested that the Commission
require the applicant to do the construction between 8 a.m. - 5
p.m. weekdays only, and to keep the noise levels down.
Mr. Cowan stated there is a noise ordinance which would address Mr.
Mollard's concerns and he would pass on his concerns to the noise
officer. He stated the City had no control over maintenance.
Mr. Tom Issak, Manager, stated he would like to discuss these
problems with Mr. Mollard and hopefully resolve them. He stated
they are sincere about being good neighbors.
Com. Mann questioned the trash pick-up.
Mr. Cowan stated they cannot pick-up before 6 a.m. and will look
into this.
Com. Fazekas requested continuing this item for 2 weeks to address
concerns.
Mr. Issak stated they will comply with staff's recommendations and
would like to proceed.
Corn. Mann did not feel it is necessary to continue this.
Deputy City Attorney Kershner informed the Commission that recent
research has shown that the person who draws the shortest straw may
participate in the discussion as well as vote.
MOTION:
Com. Mann moved to approve application 12-U-91 subject to
the findings and subconclusions of the pUblic hearing,
adding to condo 4 that all existing specimen trees shall
remain.
Com. Mackenzie
Passed 3-0
Com. Mahoney, Austin
SECOND:
VOTE:
ABSTAIN:
NEW BUSINESS:
5. Finding of consistency with General Plan for proposal of
Central Fire District to expand an existing fire station site
on Stevens Creek Blvd. near Prado vista Road (APN 342-14-097)
Staff Presentation: Associate Planner Jung presented the staff
report. The request is for the future expansion of an existing
fire station. The fire district proposal is to purchase the
adjacent property and bank it for future expansion. At that time
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 15
both properties will be redeveloped in order to allow for
additional fire engine and fire fighters. He stated it is a
general policy of the city to improve emergency services and fire
safety.
Chr. Mackenzie opened the hearing for public input.
Ms. Mendez stated she lives next door to the fire station and has
experience many problems. There is diesel smell from the fire
engines and generator in her house, she cannot open windows.
Mr. Cowan stated the district has put mufflers on the diesel to
solve the noise problem. He suggested sending a minute order to
Central Fire informing them of Ms. Mendez's concerns.
In response to Ms. Mendez's question, Mr. Jung stated there is no
indication as to when the fire station will be developed.
MOTION:
Com. Mann moved to approve the finding of general Plan
consistency
Com. Fazekas
Passed 5-0
SECOND:
VOTE:
MOTION:
Com. Fazekas moved to send a minute order to the Central
Fire District and the Fire station, requesting that they
consider relocating the diesel generator
Com. Mahoney
Passed 4-1
Chr. Mackenzie
SECOND:
VOTE:
NOES:
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Com. Fazekas requested that the City Attorney look into the concept
of mitigated density
Ms. Wordell stated this issue will be placed on the next agenda
under New Business.
Com. Fazekas stated this is a letter he wrote in April, the request
was to see if the Commission agreed to send a minute order to
Council requesting they pay for the research.
Deputy City Attorney Kershner stated that the City Attorney's
office received a memo from Com. Fazekas to Chr. Mackenzie that had
two issues. She stated the first issue regarding sending a minute
order to Council can be placed on the agenda as suggested by Ms.
Wordell. She noted the City Attorney feels this is a large
research project and requires an estimate of 20 hours of research
which would cost $1500-$2000. The second issue was sending a
minute order to Council requesting they add professional staff to
ASAC, she informed the Commission the method to do this is to make
a request to ASAC that they amend the Ordinance to include this,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of December 9, 1991
Page 16
and this could be decided at the next meeting of December 12, 1991
Chr. Mackenzie stated the 7-11 at McClellan and Bubb need a
reminder to clean up their trash as part of their use permit.
REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
- None
DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS:
- None
ADJOURNMENT :
Having concluded business, the Planning Commission
adjourned at 11:10 P.M. to the next Meeting of
December 12, 1991 at 5:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
c..~ M - ¡<~n...UO--<fo\
Catherlne M. Robl11ard,
Recording Secretary
Approved by the Planning commission
at the Regular Meeting of January 13, 1992
r·~-·--
'\
Attest:
Amended 1-13-92
Clerk