Loading...
PC 02-14-90 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA. 95014 (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURIIED MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON FEBRUARY 14, 1990 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: 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 Travice Whitten, Assistant City Engineer Leslie Lopez, Deputy City Attorney PUBLIC HEARINGS: 3. Application No(s): Applicant: Property OWner: Location: 28-U-89 and 35-EA-89 Morteza Abdollahi Same 22510 Stevens Creek Boulevard USE PERMIT to demolish an existing service station and construct a 6,000 sq.ft. multi-tenant retail building with related site improvements. Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey presented the staff report. He noted that this item was continued to further discuss the refinement of possible tenants. He stated the applicant contemplated a convenience store and noted this would require a separate Use Permit. Staff made it clear to the applicant that if they wanted to pursue a convenience store at a later time they would be subject to a traffic study under the extraordinary use policy and stated at this time only retail tenants would be permitted in this development. Mr. Caughey reviewed the revised conditions stating that landscaping would be subject to ASAC approval and the Xeriscape guidelines. He noted that staff is concerned about fuel leakage from the existing service station and stated that as a condition of the negative declaration, a clean-up is required prior to reconstruction of this site. He went on to discuss the different possibilities as to the size and placement of the trash enclosure. In response to Com. Adams question Mr. Caughey stated that a use permit would not be released until staff received a clean up certification from the Fire Department and Water District. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 Page 2 Com. Adams questioned the possibility of fast food services and convenience store and suggested a condition in the model resolution prohibiting either at this time. Chr. Claudy stated the applicant has the right to come back before the Planning Commission and ask for a change. Com. Mackenzie suggested adding a finding that a convenience store and fast food service is not suitable at this time. Mr. Caughey stated that parking is not an issue with the convenience store but it is with use intensity and traffic generating characteristics. Chr. claudy expressed concern about garbage and suggested citing Los Altos Garbage for code violation regarding pick-up times. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Dennis Kobza, Architect, stated that staff had touched on all points and noted that he had discussions with Los Altos Garbage regarding pick-up. In response to Chr. Claudy's question Mr. Kobza stated that if the building is large enough multiple entrances can be placed out front. The public hearing was then opened. Mr. John Molnar, 22432 Ramona Court, objected to the placement of the trash enclosures. In response to Chr. Claudy's question Mr. Molnar stated his windows are equal to the fence and had no objections to the wall being raised two feet. Ms. Jerri Sellers, 10132 S. Foothill, stated she would like to see the wall raised to twelve feet and no shorter than ten feet and noted this should be done before construction. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Adams moved to close the public hearing Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Com. Adams stated the wall should be increased and if this was done he has no objections to where the trash enclosure is located. He stated staff should make sure that Los Altos Garbage adhere to the correct pick-up time. Com. Fazekas stated that an eight or nine foot wall would be acceptable with a roof to enclose the back three sides of the trash enclosure. Com. Mackenzie stated an eight foot wall and controlling the pick up times would be acceptable. He stated the smell would be controlled because there are no food services in the project. Com. Mann stated she would like to see the wall higher. Chr. Claudy stated that a larger trash container would be more acceptable but he did not think a large enclosure would be a good idea out in the front. Com. Mann was concerned about traffic PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 Page 3 congestion pertaining to the trash enclosure and suggested the building be smaller. Corns. Mackenzie, Adams and Chr. Claudy stated the building size was acceptable. Chr. claudy, noting that this was a retail site, asked how much could go to office use. In response Mr. Caughey said in theory all of it could go to office use. Chr. Claudy would like the development to keep the look of a retail center. He also expressed concern about the left hand turn onto foothill and asked staff if this was adequate. Staff stated that the traffic engineer did not express reservation about this. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: NOES: Com. Adams moved to recommend granting a Negative Declaration. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend approval of 28-U-89 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing with an added finding to section I; whereas the development as approved is not suitable for food sales and the applicant is aware of this; Modification to Condition 9 to require the masonry wall to be eight feet; Modification to Condition 13 to add, windows on the exhibit are to remain as windows and may not be blocked; Modification to Condition 14, last sentence to read 'The limitation on food service is due to concerns of parking, noise and odors from the trash enclosure'; Modification to Condition 19, delete last sentence and add, all parking may be available for all tenants and may not be reserved for specific tenants; Modification to Condition 21 to require a written certification for hazardous material clean-up prior to issuance of the permits; Modification to Condition 22 to state that no exits are permitted to south elevation; Condition 18 adding that a trash enclosure design with solid wood doors be subject to approval of ASAC. Com. Adams Passed 4-1 Com. Mann Chr. Claudy stated this item would go to City Council February 20, 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS (New Items) 4. Application No: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: 30-U-89 Sudarshan Sarpangal Same 10629 Felton Way USE PERMIT to allow the continued occupancy of an existing second unit created through the unauthorized conversion of a residential garage structure. Staff Presentation: Ms. Ciddy Wordell gave the staff report. She stated the illegal second unit requires a Use Permit. She pointed out the need to correct other illegal structures and noted the second unit zoning requirements. She stated the applicant will be remodeling adding additional square footage, a garage, and an addi tional parking space. Ms. Wordell stated that the construction should be accomplished within six months of the Use Permit. ADDlicant Presentation: Mr. Sudarshan sarpangal, 10629 Felton Way, explained that the garage had been converted into a living space prior to his purchase of this property. He stated he will be remodeling the main unit and the smaller unit will be joined to it. Com. Adams noted that the second story plans should be verified by the Planning Department regarding the setbacks. The public hearing was then opened. Mr. Larry Hernandez, 10615 Felton Way, stated he had no objection to the remodeling. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Adams moved to close the pUblic hearing Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve 30-U-89 sUbject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing with Modification of Condition 4 to read at the end of the first sentence... 'including the side yard setbacks.' Com. Adams Passed 5-0 SECOND: VOTE: Chr. Claudy stated that the Commission's action is final unless appealed by 5:00 p.m. Tuesday February 20, 1990. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 Page 5 5. Application No(s): Applicant: Property OWner: Location: 3l-U-89 and 44-EA-89 Jon Rayden West Valley Companies, Inc. 350 ft. east of stevens Creek Boulevard and Miller Avenue. USE PERMIT to convert an existing 15,400 sq. ft. savings and loan building to a 19,500 sq.ft office center with related site improvements, and amendment of previously approved trip- end accounting. staff Presentation: Michele Bjurman presented the staff report. She stated the proposal is to add a 4,000 sq. ft. addition to an existing 15,000 sq. ft. building with interior remodeling and exterior renovations. She stated the project is in conformance with the General Plan and is within the Stevens Creek Blvd. Conceptual Plan area. She noted there is 19.5 trips allocated and 19.5 trips generated therefore there would be no trips transferable. Ms. Bjurman stated parking is adequate. She also stated the decision of ASAC regarding the parking light fixtures was to work with staff and obtain light fixtures compatible to existing buildings in the area. She addressed the balcony issue and stated it is not built for long term use. AD9licant Presentation: Mr. Jon Rayden, 19400 Stevens Creek Blvd., noted that there would be no privacy intrusion regarding the balcony. He noted that they had designed a light fixture which is compatible to both the proposed building and the buildings at either side. He noted that the buildings on adjoining sides had linear sidewalk and asked the commission if he could modify the sidewalk in front of his site at a time when the buildings next to him were required to do so. Mr. Cowan explained that the Lucas dealership at the corner of Stevens Creek and Finch was conditioned to install the landscapeing and sidewalk improvements in accordance with the zoning plan when the Mercury building or the SCVWD flood channel redeveloped. He asked the commission whether they would recommend the same for the Rayden property. Mr. Steve Yang, Architect, explained the material used on the building. In response to Com. Fazekas question Mr. Yang stated they had done the minimum amount of landscaping in the back. He stated on the east side of the property there were existing trees. The public hearing was then opened. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 Page 6 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the public hearing. Com. Adams Passed 5-0 Com. Adams stated it was an acceptable upgrade. Com. Mackenzie stated he had no objection to defer sidewalk improvement but stated the planning commission should retain the right to decide on this issue or the linear sidewalk be replaced when the adjoining building are required to do so. Com. Mann agreed with Com. Mackenzie and noted she had no concerns with the balcony. Com. Fazekas stated that the wheel stops should be replaced with curb and more trees added. The commissioners discussed the possibility of a time limit as to the replacement of the sidewalk. Com. Adams suggested putting a three year time limit on this issue. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Adams moved to recommend granting Negative Declaration 44-EA-89. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Com. Adams moved to recommend approval of 3l-U-89 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing, with Condition 17 modified to permit the installation of the Stevens Creek Conceptual Plan, landscaping to be accomplished on the triggering of modification to either building to the east or west, city Council requirement for landscaping plan upgrade, or after three years. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Application No(s): Applicant: property OWner: Location: 6. 9-Z-88 and l6-TM-88 Noor Billawala Same Westerly terminus of Rainbow Drive. REZONING of 10.9 acres from Al-43 (Agriculture Residential) zone to RHS (Residential Hillside) zone, or such other zoning district as may be deemed appropriate by the Planning commission or City Council. TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide a 10.9 acre parcel into two lots encompassing 1.0 and 9.9 acres respectively. Staff Presentation: Ms. Ciddy Wordell presented the staff report. She stated this is a rezoning from agricultural residential to residential hillside zoning district to make it consistent with the General Plan and noted that this is a routine procedure. She noted the two lot subdivision does not meet the minimum lot requirement. ~ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 Page 7 staff recommended the subdivision be continued. Ms. Wordell explained the layout of the access roads. She stated the reason for the location of the proposed building sites was because the geologist report noted landslides in other areas. She noted that the geologist report indicated that prior to the issuance of any building permits additional geological investigation should be performed on the landslide on the lower portion of the property and also on soil instability problems. She also stated the applicant would be responsible for a road maintenance agreement for access to the property prior to development. Ms. Wordell pointed out the possible hazards associated with the high voltage power lines across the site and noted the participation of the applicant to make road improvements. In response to Com. Mackenzie's concerns for off-site road improvements, Leslie Lopez, Deputy City Attorney, pointed out that the City could not make the applicant provide soil stability improvements on someone else's property. Mr. Cowan explained that road improvements were being made as a part of a Public Works project for the nearby water tank. In response to Chr. Claudy's question, Ms. Wordell referred to the geologist finding that the lower portion of the site is unsuitable for construction purposes. Mr Cowan stated that a separate analysis would be done to determined if the larger of the two lots could be subdivided at another time. He also stated that zoning the parcel to Rl with a specified lot size would prohibit the parcel from being further subdivided. Com. Mann commented on the narrow access to the lower portion of the property and Com. Fazekas asked if a grading plan could be provided showing the driveway. Mr. Cowan suggested that staff provide slides and photographs of the site. In response to Com. Fazekas's question Ms. Wordell explained that houses could be built on the two parcels meeting all the setback requirements. Applicants Presentation: Mr. Billawala explained that there is no access to Regnart Canyon Road from his property. The Public Hearing was then opened. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Adams moved to close the public hearing. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend granting a Negative Declaration of 9-Z-88. Com. Adams Passed 5-0 MOTION: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 Page 8 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend approval of 9-Z-88 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing. Com. Adams Passed 5-0 The Commission offered direction for adjustment of the property lines. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to continue item 16-TM-88 to February 26, 1990. Com. Adams Passed 5-0 Application No(s): Applicant: property Owner: Location: ll-Z-89 and 43-EA-89 City of cupertino various Owners Area bounded by Stevens Creek Boulevard and Byrne Court to the North; Orange Avenue to the East; Granada Avenue to the South and by private lands to a depth of 200 ft. east of Byrne Avenue. AMENDMENT of Zoning Ordinance 1050, approved under zoning action 40-Z-80, to add a condition specifying applicability of setback, height, bulk, floor area ratio, and similar requirements in Ordinance 1449 (R1 Zone) to said area. 7. Staff Presentation: Mark Caughey presented the staff report. He stated that the zoning regulations for the subject area are unclear and suggested the zoning regulations be similar to the adjoining areas which require a Use Permit only if new construction does not meet the current R1 ordinance. The public hearing was then opened. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the public hearing Com. Adams Passed 5-0 Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend granting a Negative Declaration 43-EA-89 Com. Mann Passed 5-0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 14, 1990 page 9 SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend approval of ll-Z-89 subject to the findings and subconclusions of the hearing. Mann Passed 5-0 MOTION: NEW BUSINESS: 8. Discussion of General Plan Citizens' Goals Committee process. Mr. Cowan described the structure and process of the General Plan citizens' Goals Committee. He stated that the City Council would like to meet with the Commissioners. OLD BUSINESS: - none REPORT OF THE PLANlfING COMMISSION: Com. Adams reported on the Mayor's luncheon Com. Mackenzie gave a report of the Post Office. He stated the need for expansion is a concern and the Post Office building will be pushed back 60 feet from Stevens Creek Blvd. In response to Com. Mann's question he stated there is a snorkel lane. Com. Mackenzie stated he would be attending another meeting to discuss landscaping. He noted that the Director of Public Works would be meeting with the architect of the Post Office to discuss traffic circulation. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - none DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: - none