Loading...
PC 08-26-85 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PC-473 10300 Torre Avenue,Cupertino,Ca. 95014. Page 1 ® Telephone: (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON AUGUST 26, 11985 SALUTE TO THE FLAG 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present : Com. Mackenzie Com. Adams • Coma Szabo Com. Sorensen Chr. Claudy Staff Present: Dir. of Planning & Developmnt .Cowan Assistant Planning Director Piasecki City Attorney Kilian Assistant City Engineer Whitten APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to accept the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 12, 1985 as submitted. SECOND: Com. Adams VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Com. Mackenzie abstaining) POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS • WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS A letter from Norma Brodlyn, 22344 Riverside Drive rogarding Item #5 on the Agenda, to be considered at that time. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Application 25-U-85 of WEST VALLEY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: Request for extension •of use permit . 2. Application 9-U-85 of INTERLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: (SEVEN SPRINGS RANCH) : Request for extension of use permit. MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to adopt the Consent Calendar. SECOND: Com. Adams VOTE: Passed 5-0 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS: 3. 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 25-30 dwelling units per gross acre 4 intent) zone: Use Permit Amendment to construct 96 dwelling units and 90,000 sq. ft . of commercial/office 411, space in lieu of a previously approved 248 dwelling units PC-473 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 26, 1985 Page 2 and 45,000 sq. ft . of commercial/office space and ENVIRON- MENTAL 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 a 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: (REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING. COMMISSION FROM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 5, 1985 AND THEN BACK TO CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF September 3, 1985) . Director of Planning and Development Cowan gave the Staff Report and summarized the City Council's requests. He confirmed the basic pattern was unchanged, but that parking had been reduced to a single level with 1-3 stories on top, more massive towards the west. The 3 storey office building would be similar to the Cupertino National Bank building closeby, he said, and roofs for the apartment and office buildings would be ribbed metal to match it . He commented that the Staff was not really in favor of the roofing on the senior building, which was to be composition shingle. He said that the decreased number of apartment units had resulted in a better parking ratio, and also meant that the 1. 5:1 set-back to height ratio request of the City Council would be honored. He outlined new Condition 27, to limit occupancy of the senior units to senior citizens. Com. Adams established that the only changes in the senior411 section was the roof and shifting around of some units to attain the ratio. John Vidovitch, representing the Applicant, asked to peruse the new Condition which they had not yet seen. He stated that they did not have an age limit, and , was concerned about the Condition. Mr. Cowan cautioned that the senior part of the project was implicit, because of parking. Mr. Vidovitch stated that sometimes people in need of such housing were not elderly, though they met the other criteria. He went on to list the concerns of City Council and how they had been addressed; that the footprint of the office building had been salvaged, but in adding a metal roof compatible with the Cupertino National Bank building, some of the original roundness had been lost ( he presented a plastic model for the Commission' s perusal) . He explained the asphalt shingle roof on the elderly building had previously been discussed, that there had been no prior objection, and that the idea was to give a residential look. He described increasing the setbacks and removing the entire top row to get the ratio required. They had reduced the apartment units from 160 to 80; the three story element was now in the middle and appeared very low, he said. The Commission sympathized with the need to have some elderly units Ask available for younger residents who fitted the criteria. • { PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 26, 1985 PC-473 Commissioner. Adams, noting his, disappointment with the Page 3 410 decrease of residential units, inquired about an anticipated expansion on the Adobe Inn site. Mr. Vidovitch confirmed this was still their desire. Com. Adams asked Mr. Vidovitch if he felt the office space was needed, since it seemed office was being overbuilt. Mr. Vidovitch reminded that the project was tied to the office element for feasibility, and reported that the two tenants in the Cupertino National Bank building had • approached him about future expansion. He commented that an excess of office space would bring down prices and encourage more companies to move into the area. . Questioned by Com. Szabo, he confirmed the apartments were the same siz - as before, and that the senior housing had been redesigned on the outside only. Com. Szabo expressed his concern that the residential units had been cut, since they were badly needed, and confirmed this was a result of the sloping look required by City Council. Chr. Claudy established there would be three different roofing elements in the project . He noted the senior building and apartment complex blended well and had a similar flavor, but was somewhat concerned about the green metal roof on the apartment building. Dennis Henmi, Architect, described the changes reflected in the new Exhibits, and said changes might occur later to better identify the entry point. Com. Adams established that Exhibit 1A, first revision, which the Commissioners had received had been further revised because the Applicant had been unhappy with the reduction of open space within the central plaza. He discussed the parking below the condominiums with Mr. Henmi and Mr. Vidovitch, and was concerned about the security of the below-grade parking. Mr. Henmi explained they had isolated the office and residential circulation, that the second, above-grade, level was primarily for the use of residents, and that there was pedestrian access only between the two levels. Mr. Vidovitch confirmed there would be a security gate system and:- security controls where necessary, and commented that the Sheriff's Department had reviewed the plans and had said the height of the units made them safer. The garage was similar to other parking garages, and access could be controlled, he said. Com. Adams noted the first level parking, as office parking, did- not have a gate control arrangement, and would be an unpatrolled area that would require security during evening hours. 411 Director of Planning and Development Cowan confirmed the plans had not met with concern from the Sheriff. li PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 26, 1985 PC-473 Com. Mackenzie, concerned about1the loss of residential Page 4 units, confirmed with Staff that the Adobe Inn property had residential potential, 411 MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to clolse the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Szabo VOTE: Passed I' 5-0 Com. Adams felt the residentiial aspect was improved, but was concerned about the reduction in the number of units. Com. Szabo wanted to send a Minute Order to City Council on the subject . Com. Sorensen liked the blend 'of the senior and apartment element. Com. Mackenzie liked the architecture also, but felt the apartments were more important' that the slope element, and also suggested a Minute Order 'to City Council. Chr. Claudy also objected to raving the office building resemble the Cupertino National Bank building, which he disliked. Mr. Cowan explained the City Council' s decision on the zoning, but also described a quirk Staff had found which necessitated a Minute Order to'lgive City Council further direction. MOTION: Com. Adams, to send alM!inute Order to the City Council to the effectlthat Application 11-Z-85 be changed to delete th'ie previous zoning condition that connects! this Application to a 1983 Use Permit. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed I� ' 5-0 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to adopt a Minute Order advising the City Council that the Commission has reviewed these Applications with the Exhibits submitted at the Meeting and recommends City Council approve the project with Condition 27 added, requiring thatat least 80% of units be occupied by senior citizens, and also advising that the Commission is concerned by the loss of apartment units, and that the City Council endeavor to find a way to increa a the number of apartment.. units in the project: SECOND: Com. Sorensen I� VOTE: Passed 5-0 4. Application 13-TM-85 of MONTA VISTA WOODS (DOUG HEALY) : TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide a mixed use office/residential building into four office and four residential condominium units and ENVIRONMENTAL ;REVIEW:" , The project was previously assessed, hence, no action is required. The subject property is located on the southeast corner of Granada Avenue and Pasadena Avenue in a P (Planned Development with it PC-473 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 26, 1985 Page 5 Neighborhood Commercial, Light Industrial and Residential ® 4-12 dwelling units per gross acre intent) zoning district . First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - September 3, 1985. Assistant Planning Director Piasecki had nothing to add to the Staff Report and relayed that Staff had no concerns. The Applicant had no comments. Chr. Claudy had heard from a Monta Vista resident who could not attend the Meeting, but who saw no problem with the project . 'He confirmed with the Applicant that the number of condominium units were the same as previously proposed. MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to close the PUblic Hearing SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 5-0 MOTION: Com. Szabo, to recommend approval of Application 13-TM-85, subject to the Staff Report, with Standard Conditions 1-15, and Conditions 16-20. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 5-0 • 5. CITY OF CUPERTINO: PUBLIC HEARING to consider a comprehensive amendment to the Trailer Ordinance regulating parking and storage of recreation vehicles, trailers, mobile homes and similar vehicles in all zoning districts. First Hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date - September 16, 1985. 111 Assistant PlanningDirector Piasecki presented the Staff Report, giving the history of the proposed revision. He described a "Hybrid" approach by Staff to attempt to accomplish the Commission' s request to update and clarify the Ordinance using the minimum of restrictions and regula- tions. He asked that a further month be allowed for Staff to finalize the revision, should the Commission be in agreement with Staff' s approach. He especially noted the allowances made for loading and unloading; the disallowance of parking a vehicle on a vacant lot; and an oversight in that there should probably be a maximum number of non-personal passenger vehicles allowed in rear or side yards or garages. Chr. Claudy felt the maximum number should be related to the square footage of the lot . He asked the City' s position in the matter of on-street parking enforcement; whether parking of certain 'types of vehicles could be regulated. City Attorney Kilian advised that the Vehicle Code contained restricted authorizations for the City to regulate parking, but that truck-trailers 'could be so regulated. Chr. Claudy established there were no regulations in the Vehicle Code of the private setback areas. . 410 Com. Szabo determined with Assistant Planning Director Piasecki that although there was no Ordinance to prohibit certain types of vehicles from being parked within the set- back arPPs . the limn 11m4t rnln 'an111r1 -1•rp onrn r,,"f"ni , PC-473, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 26, 1985 Page 6 The Assistant Planning Director 'added that only one non- passenger vehicle per lot was 'allowed, parked in a manner to give clear site to the sidewalk; however, this stipulation 411 did not extend to personal passenger vehicles, and maybe •it should be added, he suggested. There was some discussion on they matter of the City' s regula- tion of the public street, since complaints had been received on public street parking. The City Attorney advised that regulation could be accomplished by posting, but that this was impractical, since the whole of the City would have to be posted. • It was determined that there was; only one known storage lot for recreational vehicles and such within the.. City. Com. Mackenzie objected to vehicles being defined in terms of use rather than size, since views could be blocked anyway in some cases. He suggested using a curb line slope formula, which would address such probl"ems. Chr. Claudy, pollingthe Commissioners found theywere mainly i,i � concerned with safety. However,ihe was concerned with aesthetics also, and particularly that front yards might be cluttered with four trailers or recreational vehicles, with the cars parked out on the street . Assistant Planning Director Piasecki clarified that the four vehicles allowed within the front yard setback were registered and operating vehicles; also adding that no vehicles were allowed at all on. grass. City Attorney Kilian suggested combining Sections 8 and 10 •, in the draft Ordinance and making the charge an infraction, rather than a misdemeanor, sincethat was easier to enforce and was more likely to be upheld. He also suggested that the following be added to the Enforcement Clause: "This does not preclude the City from filing a civil action toabate any violation of this Ordinance as a nuisance. " The Assistant Planning Director undertook to work on the exception procedure, safety aspects and definitions during the next month. �Chr. Claudy and Com. Mackenzie felt that size definitions would be easier. The Assistant Planning Director commented that size already basically. controlled non-personal versus passenger vehicle definitions-, but that though same definitions could be flushed out, the definition of self-powered versus non self-powered vehicles could present a problem; since Staff wanted to see as many of the latter behind fences or in storage as possible, but did not want to restrict recreational vehicles in daily use by using the size definition. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIiON I • 1 111A I x id:I vS 4� g_+"�FA2't�i�'j`".r'� Tyf�9 '�.K xc ii.F... • r "i` Y tx alk f,: r q T. . a1as�y ri�ha �a 9,`°7 y, • �. 1.4 3 t � � �3 f. F! �4 �� .r ( • PLANNING COM-11SSION MINL,TESS,' AUGUST 26, 19$5 REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR Director of Planning ani. Community Development Cowan reminded the .Commistioners, about the Planning Commis.sionera-' Institute Meeting:. ADJOURNMENT: 9;1:5 P'.'�• # APP LOVED 4TI E STEM-n—' Clem �r airperson City 4'. }''�' r z; pp:J` h 3k: yJ a. 4 3 S: ,c S �'€ �'� Es'm'a a�7f3� .. .r• y � +.ks+• � se '��� 3 t e K �" .. ''i