Loading...
PC 10-29-90 , CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue cupertino, CA. 95014 (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON OCTOBER 29, 1990 ROLL CALL: SALUTE TO THE FLAG: commissioners Present: Chairman Claudy vice Chairman Mackenzie Commissioner Adams Commissioner Mann Commissioner Fazekas Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development Mark Caughey, City Planner Michele Bjurman, Planner I Travice Whitten, Assistant City Engineer Charles Kilian, City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: ABSTAIN: Com. Adams moved to approve the minutes of the October 8, 1990 meeting with the following amendment: Page 6, last paragraph "...there is a housing problem in the city, he is hesitant about putting a requirement on this property because the city has not supported moderate or high density housing in the past. Regarding noise..." Com. Fazekas Passed 4-1 Com. Mann ITEM 2: POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Auulication No(s): 33-U-87 (Amended) - Applicant request continuance to November 13, 1990. Com. Mackenzie moved to continue item 2 to November 13, 1990 Com. Adams Passed 5-0 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: state Department of Housing and Community Development regarding draft Housing Element. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: - None PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR: - None PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application No(s): Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area: ll-U-90, l3-TM-90 and 19-EA-89 Sobrato Development Companies Sobrato Interests II East side of North De Anza Blvd., between I-280 and Mariani Ave. 32.5 Acres USE PERMIT to demolish 564,000 s.f. of industrial building space and construct 785,000 s.f. (net) of office space with related site improvements. TENTATIVE MAP to divide an existing 32.5 acre parcel into six (6) lots ranging in size from 0.6 acres to 1.2 acres, with one (1) additional lot to be held in common ownership. Staff Presentation: Mr. Bob Cowan presented the staff report. He noted this was continued from the October 8, 1990 meeting and a consensus was reached by the Commission at that time that additional work was required for the architectural detail. Also, concerns were expressed regarding roof equipment. Mr. Cowan stated the conditions of approval are outlined in the staff report. He noted there were no major site issues. Also, there is a proposal for an increase in retail to 10,000 s. f. He stated staff recommends approval of the project. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Bill Valentine, Architect noted the plan is to have a certain amount of stone run through the building to divide it into parts. He showed graphics explaining the shadows on the off-set windows where there are balconies. He noted there would be air ducts on the roof, but would be hidden under the parapet. In response to Com Mackenzie's question Mr. Valentine explained how the shadows and flush windows will work. In response to Com. Fazekas' question Mr. Valentine stated the granite on the bottom will be black and tan bands around the building. In response to Com. Adams question Mr. Valentine explained where there are spaces on the parapet a railing may be installed. Com. Claudy expressed concern regarding the visibility of air ducts on the roof. Mr. Valentine explained that these are back 60 ft. and the roof will slope down so they will not be seen. In response to Com. Adams question regarding the expansion of retail, Mr. Bob McIntyre, Apple Computer, Inc., stated the retail PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 3 will go on the first and second wing of building one. He noted the concept of the retail is to keep Apple employees on-site at lunch time, the retail will also be open to the public. He noted they would like the flexibility to increase the retail to 10,000 s.f. In response to Com. Mackenzie's question Mr. Valentine stated they are working on making the project visible to the public. He noted the retail will be on the edge to make it more active and visible, also the links will be transparent. Com. Mann questioned the pedestrian sidewalk in front of the buildings. Mr. Whitten stated there is a sidewalk which will be expanded to Homestead when the Mariani development is completed. Mr. Whitten also stated that the overpass will be widened on both sides and the Sobrato property was taken into account stating there may be a minor shift of the sidewalk. Com. Adams expressed concern regarding the freeway overpass and future growth. Mr. Bob McIntyre asked to review the Conditions and give input. Condo 1, request clarification as to the applicant's obligation for the De Anza Blvd. bridge widening. He noted they are fully agreeable with the condition, but request a modification so the applicant's share is no more than $500,000. Mr. Cowan stated the condition was drafted a year ago. Additional research will be done before this goes to Council to get more accurate figures. Condo 9, Mr.McIntyre noted that under the original ordinance it is not a requirement for commercial property to provide a park dedication fee for retail and would request the "park dedication fee" be removed. Mr. Cowan stated that if the project is built over a five year period and in two years there is a requirement for park fee for office buildings the new phases would have to pay the park fee. Mr. Whitten ordinance. required if development. stated the park fee could only be required under Mr. McIntyre suggested the park dedication fee the ordinance changed prior to completion an be of Condo 18, Mr. McIntyre stated they are committed to providing bike lockers for every bike commuter, but request that they provide half of what is proposed, but will provide lockers for additional bikes. Mr. Cowan stated he has no problem with this noting that Condo 18 could be deleted as it is included in the TDM plan. Condo 19, Mr. MCIntyre noted the figure should read 2,670 rather than 2,760 and requested 2,600 parking spaces. Mr. Cowan had no objections to this request noting if the TDM plan is successful there will be no need for 2600 spaces. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 4 Con. 22, Mr. McIntyre noted they are in support of the public arts concept but requested the applicant's art budget not exceed $100,000. Mr. Cowan stated there will be a meeting with the Planning Commission and Fine Arts Committee. Mr. Caughey past out guidelines of Fine Arts process for grantsmanship for art work in public places. Condo 24, Mr. McIntyre stated they were comfortable with the hours of operation for deliveries but requested earlier drop offs for pastry and produce vans to provide breakfast service in the cafeteria. Mr. Cowan stated the Ordinance states no deliveries between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. for alleyways or private roads. He noted a change of delivery times would mean a change in the Ordinance. Mr. Kilian noted an addition to the Ordinance maybe added to read "unless otherwise required by conditions" He noted the Ordinance was not the problem, but must be specific in the condition. Condo 24(b), Mr. McIntyre noted the concept of the amphitheater on- site is to provide a place where employees could get together for meetings. He noted they will comply to the noise ordinances but would need loudspeakers. He noted this condition is holding them to a higher standard than the noise ordinance. Com. Mackenzie noted he expressed concern regarding noise at the last meeting and felt that with the surrounding buildings a P.A. system would be adequate. Condo 14 of Tentative Map, Mr. McIntyre requests modification to the manner of executing this concept and that the same level of control be granted to this condo through the CC&R's with the City as a beneficiary. He stated the reason is, when property is subdi vided the number of lots are set. Mr. McIntyre requested some way in which the common building can be distributed into each of the buildings if needed. Mr. Cowan stated staff had no problem with this as long as the future purchaser of the property knows the commons building cannot be used alone. In response to Com. Mackenzie's question Mr. Kilian stated that parcel 6 can be sold as part of an overall planned development and suggested development right encumbrance on that piece of property. Mr. Kilian suggested new wording for condo 26 with the phase I of the development will commence within otherwise the permit is automatically revoked. intent that five years The commission and city Attorney discussed the use permit and the reasons it could be revoked. Mr. McIntyre explained the construction phasing of the first building in 14 or 15 months and the other buildings on line every three months thereafter. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 5 The public hearing was opened. In response to Corn. Fazekas' question Mr. Cowan stated an initial study was done which was forwarded to the state Clearing House and noted Cal-trans support the TDM plan as proposed. In response to Corn. Adams' question Mr. Whitten stated the bus turnout is adequate. Corn. Mann expressed concern regarding pollution. Mr. Cowan stated that traffic should not reach level D so will have no significant increase in pollution. He noted the initial study was sent to the Air Quality Board and no comments were made. Com. Mann also expressed concern regarding the geological report she did not feel there should be a difference in commercial and residential geological reports. Mr. Caughey stated that the Environmental Review Committee requested that when granting a Negative Declaration it is done so on the basis that the applicant be obligated to implement the monitoring mitigation program. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend granting a Negative Declaration on 13-TM-90 provided that the noise traffic demand monitoring mitigation program provided on the initial study are obligated to the project developer. Com. Fazekas Passed 5-0 SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: Corn. Mackenzie Declaration on Com. Fazekas Passed moved to recommend granting a Negative ll-U-90 with the same conditions. SECOND: VOTE: 5-0] Corn. Adams suggested that condo 14 of the tentative map read as the city attorney suggested and use CC&R's. Mr. Caughey suggested eliminating Condo 14 and modifying Condo 15. Mr. Cowan noted that staff will review the redistribution of building 6. Use Permit revocation was discussed by the Commission and City Attorney if the Conditions were not adhered to. Corn. Adams stated the biggest problem is future owners complying with the conditions. He noted this project was a good development and would have no problem with use permit revocation if the conditions were not adhered to. He did not think it was necessary to corne back with a permit review process. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 6 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Fazekas moved to close the public hearing on 13-TM- 90 Com. Mann Passed 5-0 Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend approval of 13-TM-90 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing with the following modifications: Condo 14 removed; Condo 15 to read "The CC&R's shall define trip credit allocations to each of Parcels 1 through 5 based on the building area allocations referenced in Condition 20 of the Use Permit 11-U-90. The Common Area shall have no stand-alone use credits upon recordation of the final map; Condo 16 to read "The project CC&R's shall provide that the Property Owner's Association shall be responsible to the City for carrying out all conditions in this Use Permit and shall assume liabilities for penalties or sanctions for failure to meet these standards. 2nd paragraph delete "underground parking areas" add "common areas". A new paragraph added to read " Said CC&R's shall specify the City as a beneficiary of the CC&R's" an additional paragraph to read "Said CC&R's must be approved by the city Attorney". Com. Fazekas Passed 5-0 The Commission went on to discuss ll-U-90. Chr. Claudy, Com. Fazekas and Com. Mackenzie agreed to leave condition one as is. Com. Mackenzie requested that the last sentence in condition six be removed, everything after "unless". He noted if the height needs to be changed a minor amendment can be made. The Commissioners went through the conditions making modifications as outlined in the Motion. Com. Mackenzie question if the retail space should be tied to the CG Ordinance. Mr. Caughey stated all food service establishments can be included in the Use Permit. Com. Mackenzie stated he did not want to see a factory outlet as part of the retail. Chr. Claudy stated he did not want to restrict the type of retail. Com. Mackenzie suggested that in Condo 22 a cap on cost be put in so the Council can think about it. Com. Mackenzie expressed concern regarding the noise of early morning deliveries and suggested only vans with man doors be used. Mr. Chuck Kilian suggested sending a Minute Order directing staff to bring before the Commission an amendment to the Noise Ordinance. Chr. Claudy stated the noise should be kept to a minimum. Regarding Condo 26 Com. Mackenzie suggested setting two time periods. Parking was discussed and noted that there must be adequate parking throughout phasing. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 7 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the public hearing on ll-U- 90 Com. Fazekas Passed 5-0 Com. Fazekas moved to approve ll-U-90 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing with the following modification: Condo 6, removed the words after "frontage"; Condo 9 to add a sentence "and as also required by City Ordinances" after the word "utilities". Condo 18 to read" The developer shall initially install 60 bike lockers and may be required within the constraints of the TDM to install more if demand increases: Condo 19 change 2,760 to 2600: Condo 20, 3rd paragraph remove 3500 s.f. and add 10,000 net s.f. of retail uses permitted under the CG Zoning including food service: Condo 22 Sentence added to reflect $100,000 would be the maximum amount expected to be spent by the developer on Public art: Condo 24 to read .....Building C shall be limited to vans only through a man door between 8:00 p.m and 7:00 a.m.; Condo 24(b) words added to last sentence to read "...during night time hours as defined by the municipal code"; Condo 26 to read "The first building of the development shall be occupied no later than four years from the date of issuance of the Use Permit and no Building Permit will be issued in any event for any building after seven years from the date of issuance". Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Chr. Claudy informed the public that Item 3 will be postponed to the next meeting and only public testimony will be heard for Item 4 with no action to be taken at this time. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to continue Item 3 to November 13, 1990 Com. Fazekas Passed 5-0 Application No(s): Applicant: Location: 4. I-GPA-90 Update of the Housing Element City of Cupertino City-wide The public hearing was opened. Ms. Roberta HOllimon, President of League of Women Voters, Cupertino/Sunnyvale, stated there has been a Study Committee looking at the General Plan and the Chairperson of that committee is present at this meeting to address the Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 8 Ms. Nancy Burnett, Chair, study Committee, noted the League has a goal to provide low income housing. Ms. Burnett outlined the ways to obtain this goal as outline on slides presented to the commission. She noted that low income housing is inadequate in Cupertino and explained who the low income people and urged the commission to look at the Salaries of these people. She noted the newcomers to Cupertino's work force cannot afford to live in Cupertino. Ms. Burnett went over the General Plan regarding the developers involvement in low income housing. She noted transportation is a problem and suggested the city convey a survey to find out where city employees live and where city residents work. She noted there were no specifics yet as to this problem which will come under Stage III of the General Plan. Com. Mann asked if the League had any suggestions on how to solve the NIMBY problem. Mr. Burnett stated it is important to protect neighborhoods. She noted education of the pUblic as to the problem, needs to be implemented. Com. Fazekas stated that San Jose's low income projects are small developments. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to continue the public hearing to November 13, 1990 Com. Adams Passed 5-0 SECOND: VOTE: 5. Application No.(s): Applicant: Property Owner: 17-U-90 and 25-EA-90 Chevron Research/Technology Co. Northeast corner of Homestead Road and De Anza Blvd. USE PERMIT to demolish existing service station improvements and reconstruct a new self service fuel station with 1,500 s.f. of building area encompassing a food market and car wash, with related site improvements. Staff Presentation: Mr. Mark Caughey presented the staff report. He noted staff has several concerns regarding this project. He noted a traffic study was completed concluding the site generates 25 trips per acre. In comparison with other service stations he fel t this is a reasonable approximation of the trip generation standard. Staff is concerned regarding noise control of the car wash, but stated a noise study found the ambient sound level of traffic will exceed the car wash. Staff suggested not permitting a 24 hour service, but operate as the current Use Permit provides. Regarding the design issues, ASAC suggested redistribution of parking and garbage to a more centralized location. He noted concerns regarding the architecture of the project in relationship to surrounding buildings and suggested ASAC look at this. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 9 Mr. Caughey explained the Arborist's report noting the two largest trees are in bad condition and the 13" pepper tree will be lost. He noted the pavement may encroach on to the 3111 pepper tree and noted other solutions will be researched to preserve the tree. He noted staff is recommending approval with conditions that would require additional review by ASAC of details and also require a transi t turnout with appropriate grants of easements and the operating hours be limited to 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. Com. Mackenzie expressed concern regarding the relocation of parking and garbage as the site was full. Mr. Caughey stated there is enough room to do this. Ap~licant Presentation: Mr. Dale Wahlen, Chevron, noted the layout of the service station has allowed for the widening of Homestead and for a bus turnout. He noted the building could not be moved forward, as the sidewalk had been moved back to allow for the bus turnout. He noted ASAC suggested putting in landscaping where the two parking spaces were originally and they are agreeable to ASAC suggestions. In response to Com. Fazekas' question Mr. Wahlen noted there is no landscaping on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road because it had been removed to allow for the bus turnout. He noted smaller landscaping may be put in. He noted it was agreed with the owner of the apartments near the service station that a sound wall will be installed. Mr. Wahlen stated he is in support of the car wash operation to 11 p.m. but would like to be able to serve gas 24 hours. Mr. Bill Scudder suggested, if permitted to operate 24 hours they could shut down a pump closest to the apartments to cut down on noise. Com. Fazekas felt one driveway was too close to the corner. Mr. Whitten stated that the City has the right to close a driveway if it becomes a hazard. Mr. Wahlen stated that the two driveways are necessary as one driveway creates a street traffic problem. Com. Fazekas suggested 36 ft. driveways. Com. Adams felt the building's architect should blend with the surrounding buildings. The public hearing was then opened. Ms. Doris Hijmans, Cupertino De Oro Club, noted she did not have any objection to the removal of the eucalyptus trees and replanting of trees native to the area. Mr. John Delmare, Mariani Development, questioned the noise study and possible impacts of the car wash on the Mariani Development. He noted he was more concerned regarding night time hours. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 10 Chr. Claudy stated the study indicated that it is only late night and early morning that the noise exceeds the existing ambient level. He noted the hours of operation of the car wash will be limited. In response to Corn. Adams' question Mr. Caughey stated there was a ground contamination study done on this site. Com. Mackenzie stated there is too much on the site and would like to see landscaping on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. He felt the driveways should be narrower and would like to see where the parking spaces will be. He would not support 24 hour service as it is next to residential, but if 24 hour service was granted the cash register should be visible from the street for security reasons. Com. Mann concurred with Com. Mackenzie and felt there was too much on the site. Com. Fazekas concurred with Com. Mackenzie and did not see the need for a drive-thru car wash and have to sacrifice landscaping on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. He would support two driveways, but would like to see one eucalyptus tree left. Com. Adams stated he would like to see this development compatible with the other corners, he felt is was too much like a box structure and would not support it as is. Chr. Claudy stated he would concurred with Com. Adams. landscaping. not support this development and He noted there was a lack of MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to continue l7-U-90 and 25-EA-90 to November 27, 1990 Com. Mann Passed 5-0 SECOND: VOTE: NEW BUSINESS: 6. APPLICATION 10-U-90 (Revised): MARIANI DEVELOPMENT CORP. - Requesting approval of revisions to the approved architectural exhibits for the townhouse portion of a planned residential community at the southeast corner of Homestead Road and De Anza Blvd. Staff Presentation: Mr. Bob Cowan presented the staff report. He showed drawings of the approved buildings and one of the proposed, both front and rear views. He noted the request is for a minor amendment to change the architecture and form and explained this as outlined in the staff report. He felt the first proposal was a richer presentation. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 11 Applicant Presentation: Mr. John Delmare, Mariani Development, explained the changes. He explained the changes on the roof line were due to the building department's request for the structures to stand separately for drainage issues and also because of a problem with the Homeowners Association regarding drainage. The primary reason for moving the garden wall elements at the front entryway back was to obtain more visible landscaping from the street and the stairways were redesigned for the same reason. The back yard deck over the 2nd floor made the 1st floor to dark, also there was a drainage problem. He noted the changes increases the size of the back yard and makes it more usable. Com. Fazekas questioned the windows all being the same, Mr. Delmar stated they are all the same type of rooms. Mr. Tim Kelly, Mariani Development, stated the building department required the curve stairways be removed. Mr. Delmare stated that although this was a different design it was still an attractive project. Chr. Claudy noted if the new proposal was the only proposal would it be approved? He noted the homes probably will sell for less and this is meeting some of the housing needs in Cupertino. Mr. Delmare stated these would sell for less and there is more demand for low to mid-range housing. Com. Mann suggested taking out the turrets and putting in sky lights. Com. Adams stated if this plan was presented for the first time he would approve it, but would like to see alternative treatment to small bathroom windows on the back. Com. Mackenzie stated he would support what Council approved. Com. Fazekas stated he did not like the back of the houses which it look like 3 story stucco boxes. He preferred the original plan and would not support the new proposal. Com. Mann stated she was not opposed to the new stairways, but does not like the turrets. Chr. Claudy stated he does not disapprove of the new proposal, although the 1st plan is better, he will support the new proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 12 MOTION: Com. Mann moved to approve lO-U-89 the findings and subconclusions of Com. Adams Com. Mackenzie, Com. Fazekas Passed (Revised) subject to the hearing. SECOND: NOES: VOTE: 3-2 7. APPLICATION 19-U-89 (Revised) - LaMancha Development Co.: Requesting interpretation of Condition 21 of 19-U-89 concerning window glazing and merchandise display for a commercial building under construction at the Southeast corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Stelling Road. ,~ Staff Presentation: MS. Michele Bjurman presented the staff report noting that the applicant had received approval September 1989 and as it nears completion the single tenant is seeking interpretation of Condition 21 as it compares to their merchandise display scheme. She noted the applicant proposes to place interior displays against several portions of each wall, including those facing public streets and to hide these displays the applicant is proposing 738 s. f. of opaque panels in place of glass. Ms. Bjurman showed diagrams on where the applicant is proposing the opaque panels. She noted most of the opaque panels are on the south and east elevations, which will not af~ect views from passing motorists. 20% of north elevation is also proposed. She noted staff recommends approval with the exception that the north elevation be reduced to 10% to be in conformance with the Condition. Chr. Claudy stated the original approval was all open windows. Ms. Bjurman also stated that the applicant is proposing seven internally lit display panel. As these displays are mounted staff interprets them to be permanent window displays. ASAC did review this and did not lend it's support. staff recommends approval of opaque panels and denial of the window display. Applicant Presentation: MS. Debra Lim-Schlackman stated they are requesting the south and east elevations be replaced with obscured glass and asking for support of the Commission to approve some solid wall on the north elevation. She noted an alternative would be frosted glass which is permanent, but if the function is changed it can be removed. Com. Mackenzie stated it should be 5% instead of 10%. He spoke in favor of display boxes, but would support condition 21 as is. He suggested window boxes for display. ,- Com. Fazekas stated it is a change to the architecture and is opposed to any opaque glass at eye level on retail stores. He noted he would like to see into the store and suggested picking some walls and converting them to stucco. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of October 29, 1990 Page 13 Com. Mann concurred with Com. Fazekas regarding the stucco walls. She felt the area around the bathrooms should be blocked off. It was agreed by the Commission that the south west corner should be obscured with whatever staff recommends. The display windows are acceptable, but cannot obscure view into the store and only to be merchandise display. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to adopt 19-U-89 modification to Condo 1 that the south (area marked receiving on the floor material maybe replaced subject to staff 2 remains as is. Com. Mann Passed (revised) with and east walls plan) obscured approval; Condo SECOND: VOTE: 5-0 8. Designation of two representatives of the Planning commission to attend a joint meeting with the Fine Arts Commission. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to designate Com. Fazekas and Com. Mann as representatives. Chr. Claudy Passed 5-0 SECOND: VOTE: REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: - None REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: - None DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: - None