Loading...
PC 07-08-85 r CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 TORRE AVENUE, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 TELEPHONE: (408) 252-4505 Ilk MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JULY 8, 1985 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Claudy at 7:30 p.m. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Com. Adams, Mackenzie, Sorensen, Szabo, Claudy Staff Present: Dir. of Planning & Development Cowan City Clerk Cornelius Assistant City Engineer Whitten Planner I Lauzze APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Mackenzie to approve the minutes of June 24, 1985 as amended with a 4-0 vote, Com. Szabo abstaining. POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS ., None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR None ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR None PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1 . Application 7-TM-85 OF TERRY BROWN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP to subdivide approximately .4 acres into two parcels measuring approximately 6,000 sq. ft. and 8,000 sq. ft. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located on the east side of Stelling Road across from and 40 ft. north of Robindell Wayin a R1-6 (Residential Single-family, 6 000 s . ft. minimum lot > q size) zoning district. First Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FINAL APPROVAL. -1- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JULY 8, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION Director of Planning and Development Cowan reviewed the application with the commissioners. Mr. Cowan submitted two suggested amendments to the • conditions of approval; one substituting the original second sub point of condition 18 and addition to condition No. 20, allowing a maximum 3 ft. high fence within 15 ft. of the south property line of parcel B. The applicant, Terry Brown, informed the Commission that he had no problem with the suggested conditions and he could comply. Kathryn Nickerson, StellingRd. ,11360 South told the Commission that timely and proper notice had not been given and objected to the process. Sandra Chadd, 1135! South Stelling, expressed opposition to development of the property. LaVerne Nelson, 11350 South Stelling, urged the commission not to change the flavor of . the area, she expressed opposition to an additional building. It was moved by Com. Szabo, seconded by Com. MacKenzie and approved unanimously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Mackenzie, seconded by Com. Sorensen and passed unanimously to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration. It was moved by Com. Mackenzie, seconded by Szabo and passed with a 5-0 vote to recommend approval of Application 7-TM-85 per standard conditions 1-15, per conditions 16, 17, as submitted, condition 18 with sub point 2 amended as per staff recommendation, condition 19 as submitted, condition 20 amended as per staff recommendation and findings and subconclusions as per staff report. 2. Application 8-TM-85 of CHARLES T. MASTERS: TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP to subdivide approximately 1.5 acres into six parcels ranging in size from 7,300 sq. ft. to 11 ,600 sq. ft. and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located on the north side of Jollyman Lane 350 ft. east of Stelling Road in a R1-6 (Residential Single-family, 6,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zoning district. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - July 15, 1985. Dir. of Planning and Development Cowan reviewed the location of the property and the application with the commission. Mr. Cowan presented an optional plan which had been submitted by an area resident, Mr. Ed Jauch. Mary Kirkeby, civil engineer, stated that the width puts the church at a disadvantage. He said that Mr. Jauch has an easement across his property and should the development be approved it would still be necessary to provide Mr. Jauch with an equivalent access. Mr. Kirkeby said that the developer has asked for as wide a lot as possible. Mr. Kirkeby answered the Commission's questions regarding lot 6. Mr. Leroy May, 10758 S. Stelling Rd. , and adjacent property owner, told 111 the Commission that he had not been notified of this hearing. He said that if this development would be approved there was a potential that in the future property would be taken from him for a road. -2- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JULY 8, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION Upon verification it was determined that Mr. May did receive the original notice, he had just not received any follow-up notice. Mr. May asked what would be on the property line and was informed that there would probably be no change. Charles Masters, applicant, expressed the opinion that the proposed development is a sensible development for the property. He said that he had tried to talk with the church representatives, Mr. May, Mr. Jauch, and other residents and all except Mr. Jauch seemed to feel that the project is reasonable. He requested that the Commission take some kind of action and not table the item. The City Attorney informed those present that it is a tradition that should an easement be used as a public roadway, dedication does occur. Mr. Ed Jauch, 10760 S. Stelling Rd., property owner to the east of the proposed development, said that he was unaware of the owner's intent as far as configuration. He is recommending an amendment that lots 5 and 6 front on Jollyman Lane. He said that lot 6, 72 feet, is inadequate as 20 feet from 72 feet does not leave 60 feet. He urged the Commission keep Jollyman Lane a 20 ft. right-of-way its entire length. Mrs. Irene Jauch said all houses at this time do face Jollyman Lane and that she would like to keep the integrity of right-of-way from Stelling to the end of her property. Mr. May stated that the Jauch's have the right of a 20 ft. ingress/egress. It was suggested that something be prepared regarding how the back of the church will be developed. Michael C. Rehack, 11235 Redondo Ct. , pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church, addressed the Commission regarding the church and the proposed development. Jean Bayard said that she was disturbed with the idea of taking people's property away. She stated that one is not bound to policy ° just because it is something that is always done. She asked if the city were run for the people of Cupertino. Chairperson Claudy said that the concern is for the general good of the City in long term planning, therefore it is not always the best in the short run for an individual property owner. . The Commission requested that staff work out the answers, that staff work with Mr. Jauch and other property owners. Director of Planning and Development Cowan stated that he would like to address the concerns regarding dedication. It was suggested the application be continued 2 weeks in order to allow for schematic drawings 41) of a workable solution particularly in regard to the church property. It was moved by Com. Sorensen, seconded by Com. Mackenzie and passed unanimously to continue the public hearing for two weeks to the regular meeting of July 22, 1985. -3- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JULY 8, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION It was moved by Com. Szabo, seconded by Com. Sorensen and passed unanimously to continue items 5, 6, 7 and 8 to Wednesday, July 10, 1985 at411 7:30 p.m. 3. Application 9-TM-85 of DEANZA PROPERTIES (PATRICIA STEARS): TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP to subdivide approximately one acre into three parcels ranging in size from 10,500 to 12,400 sq. ft. and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is categorically exempt, hence, no action is necessary. The subject property is located on the east side of Ainsworth Drive across from Vista Knoll Boulevard in a R1-10 (Residential Single-family 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zoning district. First Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FINAL APPROVAL. Director of Planning and Development Cowan reviewed the proposal with the Commission and the question regarding Amelia Ct. John Vidovich, applicant, stated that he had no idea that Amelia Ct. was an issue. Beulah Graves, 10170 Amelia Ct. , urged that the Commission keep the court a closed street. She said the area compromised 6 years ago so school children could use the area for bicycles and as a pedestrian access. She said that a chain is put up once a year so that it can not become public right-of-way. Jean Bayard, a resident whose property backs up to Varian Park, asked if opening of the street were a dead issue based on previous Council action. Alex Daemion Simonich, 10185 Amelia Ct. , said it was dangerous turning left into traffic out of Amelia Court. Pat Jarrett, 10201 Amelia Ct. , said that Varian had always been considered a neighborhood park and therefore should be a walk-in, not a drive-in area. Upon being asked what the Commission was considering if not opening the street those present were informed that what was being considered was a parking lot at the park property and the building of 3 houses. Dir. of Planning and Development Cowan stated that the Council had acted to say that there would be no access through Amelia Ct. at that time (1979) , therefore staff was concerned regarding the access issue as approving this development would be a final, permanent decision. Virgil Baurasa, 10076 Cresent Dr. , said that Varian was no longer a neighborhood park but a regional park as ball teams play there. He supported a pedestrian bridge from Pharlap Dr. Ruby Bowers, resident off Amelia Ct. , said that the park was too small for another parking lot. Jackie Somatovich, said "If it ain't broke don't fix it". She said there are policing problems in the park and a need for more garbage cans. She urged the Commission to keep this as a walk-in park. -4- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JULY 8, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION Mary Kirkeby, civil engineer, stated the opinion that the plan being presented gives the best of both worlds. He did not see the proposed project as a problem. He also saw no need for special conditions. It was moved by Com. Mackenzie, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Mackenzie, seconded by Com. Sorensen and passed with a unanimous vote to approve Application 9-TM-85 with standard conditions 1-15, no special conditions, per exhibit A, staff report and testimony as submitted. Chairperson Claudy informed those present that an appeal of their decision may be submitted in writing within 5 working days. 4. Applications 11-Z-85 and 17-U-83 (Revised) of TOWN CENTER PROPERTIES (JASON CHARTIER): REZONING approximately 13.4 acres from P (Planned Development with Commercial, Office and Residential 15-30 dwelling units per gross acre intent) zone to P (Planned Development with Commercial, Office and Residential 25-5- dwelling units per gross acre intent) zone or whatever zone maybe deemed appropriate the by Planning Commission fission ; USE PERMIT AMENDMENT to construct 496 dwelling units and 90,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office space in lieu of a previously approved 248 dwelling units and 45,000 sq. . ft. of commercial/office space and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. ® The proposal involves construction of a four-story 220 unit Senior Housing project, a five-story 164 unit apartment complex/parking structure and three-story 45,000 sq. ft. commercial/office building, in addition to the 112 condominium units and 45,000 sq. ft. office building currently under construction. The subject property is located between Rodrigues Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard east of Torre Avenue. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - August 5, 1985. Director of Planning and Development Cowan stated that staff did have some concern regarding the height and to a degree the architecture of the proposed development. He stated that the surface parking will be for visitors. John Vidovich, applicant, said that the project is designed so that there is a separate entrance to it for the residential easements. There will be a driveway with trees and landscaping. Parking for the elderly will be located in front. The apartments have a separate level of parking deck. All residences set aside for the elderly are under one roof. Dale Gray, American Residential Chateaus, submitted a copy of the resume of those who would be involved in the senior housing and a background covering that particular form of development. She stated that she does have a commitment to senior housing/care facilities. She expressed the opinion that Cupertino is an excellent site for such a facility, reviewed 41) a conceptual plan for operations and said she would be available to answer any questions Commission might have. Ms. Gray said a typical resident would probably be a widow, 78 to 80 years old, desiring an easy, comfortable lifestyle. A typical retirement residence is about 75% women. The proposed development will not look institutional. The -5- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JULY 8, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION furniture being planned is specially built for seniors. They will have an "antique" appearance, there will be a general store on the premises that411 will be run by residents, three meals a day will be served, there will also be a guest dining room that can be reserved when a guest is expected at no additional charge. There will be a full time social director and three activities per day as well as educational programs and church services. It is estimated that the cost to the resident would be $895. a month for a studio apartment, $995. for a ,large studio, $1195 for a one bedroom unit and $1395 for a two bedroom unit; this is a package rate. There would be no age limit and the facility would cater to those 65 and older. Units would contain kitchenettes. The cost would be on a month to month basis with no security deposit, lease, etc. There would be no on site medical or personal care available, however, each unit would have an emergency pull cord. Some rooms would be equipped for the handicapped. In regard to parking, Ms. Gray stated that usually in this type of facility there is a low percentage of residents with cars. The staff would be consist of approximately 33 people with maximum day shift about 15 persons. Mr. Vidovich, applicant, requested that the Commission delete the condition regarding the masonry wall. The Commission made various suggestions such as eliminating the massiveness on Stevens Creek Blvd. and dropping down the height of the top floor. Upon asking they were informed the proposed shared parking would be in the commercial area and that the second deck of the garage was reserved for residents. 111 It was moved by Com. Szabo, seconded by Com. Sorensen and passed unanimously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Sorensen, seconded by Com. Mackenzie and passed unanimously to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration for Application 11-Z-85. It was moved by Com. Mackenzie, seconded by Com. Sorensen and passed with a unanimous vote to recommend approval of Application 11-Z-85 with standard conditions 1-11 and 13 through 15, conditions 16, 17 and 18 on the proposed office complex, senior housing and apartments not on the existing condominiums. It was moved by Com. Mackenzie, seconded by Com. Sorensen and passed with a unanimous vote to recommend approval of Application of 17-U-83 (Revised) with standard conditions 1-11 and 13 through 15, conditions 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24 (future apartments) , 25 with the site plan to provide adequate safety access to the senior citizen housing and to be approved by the staff and Central Fire Protection District, conditions 26, 27 and 28; prior to issuing building permits on the office complex the interim parking plan is to be approved by the Architectural and Site Approval Committee. It was moved by Com. Sorensen, seconded by Com. Mackenzie and passed unanimously to extend Application 5-U-82 for one year. • -6- • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JULY 8, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 12:25 a.m. to Wednesday, July 10, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, City Hall, City of Cupertino. ATTEST: APPROVE: /s/ Dorothy Cornelius /s/John Claudy CITY CLERK CHAIRPERSON �► 0 -7-