Loading...
PC 06-23-80 \ .... CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone (408) 252-4505 MINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING COMlIISSION MEETING PC-335 Page 1 CALL TO ORDER/SALUTE TO THE FLAG 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Commissioner Claudy Commissioner Adams Commissioner Blaine Commissioner Johnson Chairman Koenitzer Staff Present: Assistant Planning Director Cowan Associate Planner Piaseeki Planning Direetor Sisk (Arrived late) Publie Works Direetor Viskovieh APPROVAL/MINUTES Regular Planning Commission Meeting June 9, 1980 and Regular Planning Commission Meeting Continued, June II, 1980 Com. Blaine, page 4, last par., line 7, ehange "the expert" to read, "the City's eonsulting geologist. Change next sentenee to read: "...to date she said several things have not been done." Page 5, sentenee 1, ehange to read, "enelosure for the rest of the equip- ment should be one enclosure." Next sentence, change to read, "...but, she also said the tank had to be moved." Typo: in from it. Page 6, pars. 2, 3, & 4, question of how to include the statements in the motion. Page 9, par. 1, line 3, strike wòrd "speetaeularly." Line 5, ehange sen- tenee to read: "He said he would not eonsider cost as a major factor be- cause half of it was coming back to Mr. Huntman.." Com. Adams, line 11 (Page 4. par. I), ehange to read: "..the applieation for approval was not followed by the applieant." Par. 2, line 4, strike "thiekness about 2 psL" Line 7, strike "burst" and insert "endured " in sentence. Line 8, after G-forces, add "resulting from an average earthquake in the area." Chr. Koenitzer, Page 9, add to: MOTION: on Condition 1117, "reloeation be outside the boundary of the side and rear yard setbaek at least seven (7) feet from the rear of the property line. Page 6, line 2, ehange to read, "...permit a two-story home on a lot re- stricted to one-story homes.fI Page 7, line 2, change to read: "...faet that the total height of the pro- posed structure would be 4~ ft. higher than present for a total of 20 ft. Page 9: INSERT MOTION: Com. Blaine, Reeommend Approval 20-Z-80; Seeond: Com. Claudy, PASSED 5-0 ~!OTION: Approval of minutes of June 9, 1980, as eorreeted: Com. and Seeond by Com. Adams. PASSED APPROVAL/MINUTES Regular Planning Commission Meeting June 11, ued from June 9, 1980). Com. Johnson, page 14, par. 6, ehange to read: "...asked how the City woul approach the Water Distriet should the Water District not reach out with open arms." Blaine 5-0 1980 (eontin- PC-335 Page 2 INUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING age 20, par. 5, line 1: delete reference to Com. Claudy and replace with om. Adams. age 3, change Motion for Negative Declaration to show that Com. Claudy ade the motion and Com. Adams seconded the motion. age 5, Motion on denial of 2-V-80, change to read: "...because require- ents III and 113 were not satisfied." age 5, last par. last line, delete "once a day." age 6, above Motion, at bottom of page, insert: Public Hearing Closed: otion: Com. Claudy. Second: Com. Johnson. PASSED 5-0 age 8, insert, under unfinished business: CHR. KOENITZER announced hat he wished to withdraw from consideration on Item #14 because of con- liet of interest. He appointed Commissioner Blaine as chairman pro tern. OTION: Com. Blaine, Approve June 11, 1980 as corrected. Second econd: Com. Adams. PASSED 5-0 OSTPONEMENTS ,RITTEN CO~MUNICATIONS letter received from Betty Moore La Brie, 19987 Twilight Court, upertino, (dated June 23,1980), concerning the Clear lake project. letter received Mr;iMrs. Otis Forge concerning their parcel of land n Homestead Avenue -- part of the l-GPA-80 hearings. RAL COMMUNICATIONS UBLIC HEARINGS T~! Ill, Application l-GPA-80 of CITY OF CUPERTINO: PUBLIC HEARING to onsider various amendments to the City of Cupertino General Plan in- luding, but not limited to 1) land use changes for a number of indi- idual properties located throughout the commÚnity; 2) an evaluation of lternative land use types and development intensities for property 10- ated along Homestead Road, De Anza Boulevard, and Stevens Creek Boule- ard; 3) a refinement of the City's Circulation Plan including a plan o provide long-term financing of major transportation improvements. irst Hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date - uly 21, 1980. ssistant Planning Director Cowan's review of the LAND USE/COMMUNITY I~RACTER element of the General Plan indicated that there were two asic objectives, and he said that the second objective would be the resentation of the traffic report by Director of Public Works, Bert . Viskovich from Staff Report of June 20, 1980 GENERAL PLAN TRANS- ORTATION ELE~ŒNT -- PHASE II. Basically they wished to describe the 990 traffic level expectations and, perhaps more importantly, des- ribe the policy applications that involve traffic in terms of land se and street improvements -- standards on major segments of De Anza oulevard and of Stevens Creek Boulevard. He said there was a different ind of intensity of traffic performance, which they were calling the rossroads Plan (a hypothetical plan). Background information on raffic was presented by Public Works Director Viskovich. ublic Works Director Viskovich called attention to his previous re- ort and reviewed the highlights of that presentation. He said that hereas the first report had dealt mainly with the total area of 'Zone 10," in this second phase development of the City'S traffic odel, he wished to deal with "Zone lOa" and "Zone lOb." The percentage MINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING CO}IMISSION MEETING PC- 335 Page 3 of trips generated from the areas was totaled and reported for actual vs. model - A.M. and P.M. peaks. Comparison of the model prediction with that of actual mix of traffic (in field) as indicated by a license plate survey (described in the previous Staff Report) was explained as being in Categories I through III -- Zip Code distribution: (I) housing (lOb) re- turning from jobs (shoppers and miscellaneous trips in-city generation. (II) De Anza College (students, night shift workers, and commercial). (III) Through traffic and lOa workers returning home to the south. The results: (1) 56.8%. (II) 22.6%. (III) 20.6%. Details of the findings were briefly described and 1990 traffic projected. (Ref. Staff Report, June 20, 1980, submitted to the Planning Commission for study of l-GPA-80 by Public Works Director Bert J. Viskovich.) The Commissioners questioned Mr. Viskovich on the various aspects of the present traffic findings and the projected expectations of 1990. Public Works Director Viskovich turned to the aspects of Area 4 - Cross- roads Plan section of the General Plan LAND USE/CO}lliUNITY CHARACTER ele- ment. The parameters of the De Anza Boulevard Undercrossing was ex- hibited on the board and by transparencies (Figure 3, view looking north on De Anza -- page 6 of Staff Report). The Commissioners joined with Mr. Viskovich in a general discussion for understanding traffic patterns and flow of the exhibited proposed plan. The percentages derived from I, II, and III were applied to the traffic on the Crossroads Plan and were explained. Each exhibit was gone through and explained as to the infor- mation generated for use in the Staff Report. Regarding Agenda Item #1, Application l-GPA-80 of City of Cupertino, the Commissioners discussed the status of the 85 Corridor, the steps for initiating financing for the Crossroads Plan. The request was made that on both issues, a further report be developed for the Planning Commission. It was determined that in projecting traffic generation, all the infor- mation presently available had been factored into the figures of percen- tages. The possibility of approaching De Anza College for a change in class hours (to reduce impact of traffic at peak hours) was suggested. The statement was made that in terms of numbers from the updated 1975 figures, the City had really reached the point of not being able to handle any more traffic. A 20% increase had earlier been suggested as possible to handle (based on 3% increase/year from 1975). CHR. KOENITZER related that in a conversation with a resident he had bee told that it was very frustrating that they seemed to be fighting City Hall in that they were being asked to move from strip commercial on Stevens Creek Boulevard back to or retrenching back from that position to the general policy of strongly emphasizing Town Center. And, too, emphasis had turned to creating housing opportunities within the City. 1<hen applications are reviewed there is public dismay over the density of the projects. So, he said, they were now in the process of reviewing the density and land use concepts. He asked that members of the public speaking to the issues before them be prepared to present new material to apply to the on-going discussions of the General Plan Amendment process. PC-335 Page 4 MINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The disparity of traffic-generated percentages ..as discussed as compared between housing, office, and commercial uses on properties. The public utilities projections of 1964 se..er line construction was brought up with the inquiry as to whether or not it ..as possible to hook into the installation. COM. CLAUDY stated that the line ran uphill, which would have to be considered. The fact that some major land uses might disappear through business moves was dis- cussed as it would influence use of the properties mentioned as pos- sibilities for use changés RECESS: 9:30 p.m. to 9:40 p.m. CHR. KOENITZER announced that apparently because of the time factor and the progress made prior to recess, that it ..as unlikely that Agenda Item #1 would be completed. He asked for a continuation of the meeting to finish the Agenda, and he noted that Item #1 had to be complete before decisions could be made on Agenda Item #2. MOTION: Com. Johnson, Continue Regular Planning Commission Meeting, PC-335 to Thursday evening, June 26, 1980, City Hall Council Chambers, Cupertino, CA. Second: Com. Adams PASSED 5-0 COM. BLAINE said that one of her concerns, that should be added to the Guidelines on Page 5 of the Staff Report, would be noise impacts, and requirements of functional open space -- useful of itself and also useful· in noise buffering for adjacent developments COM. JOHNSON agreed with Com. Blaine, and suggested the addition of another standard, "L" and suggested Staff might work out appropriate language In response to COM. CLAUDYSinquiry as to whether they were to act upon the package, Assistant Planning Director Cowan advised that the immediate purpose of the meeting should be to forward recommendations to the Environmental Review Committee on the completed parts of l-GP A-80. CO~!. CLAUDY asked that attention be given to preventing what appears to be a walled city -- walling off developments from De AnZR and Stevens Creek Boulevards to produce sound attenuation required, and he asked that ways other than walls be considered for residential COM. JOHNSON noted that walling was considered as a Condition for Stevens Creek and further suggested that the practice could be limited to Stevens Creek with other design devices used elsewhere. CQ!.\' ADMIS asked if they should not suggest specific types of entry gates for underground or depressed parking. COM. JOHNSON said that maybe they should not focus on security in that (and COM. CLAUDY agreed) once you have got the area, you can solve the problems encountered. They agreed, too, that guest parking for developments having depressed parking should be restricted from using public streets. MINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-335 Page 5 Mr. G. D. Gibson, Koll Company, Palo Alto, CA, said they had 44 acres fronting Rodriques, across from City Hall. He stated that Koll Company was one of the first supporters of the Comprehensive Plan and Town Center; and, he added, they, along with City Staff, were surprised with the information on generation of traffic (origins presently and the projections for the next decade). It felt like a tail wagging a dog; however, he said, they were ready to wag. Having been involved in the project since 1973 (including the 1976 and 1977 plans), he said that he'd like to make the point that they have been discussing the theory an philosophy of trying to perfect the character of the proposed Town Cente project, the utilization of To'~ Center, the direction of types of use. He advised that the May Investments, the Cali family interests and the Koll Company had gotten together and worked out allignment of Torres Avenue, general density of different types of uses on the residential, commercial and office uses, and general placement of where the activitie can occur. He urged that all due consideration be given to moving the hearings along so that they could cooperate with Planning Department and Public Works in working out feasible economic solutions for the em- ployment of traffic signals, undercrossings, and whatever obligations needed consideration. He complimented the solutions presented by Pub- lic Works Director Viskovich and felt consultation, on his part, with traffic engineers with experience in the undercrossing mode would be helpful to him. Because it was unique, he said he felt that possibly a lot of general Town Center feeling could be encouraged by this type of traffic solution. He urged the Commissioners to move the issues along and promised to do everything possible, as property owners, to work with the City. He asked that they not continue to pass by the use on Town Center for another three or four years. Mr. Stan Siron, 10575 \~itney Lane, Cupertino, said that one of the times he had addressed the Commission he had mentioned his concern for lack of open space and park area. He called attention to Page 4 of Assistant Planning Director Cowan's Staff Report, where he mentions the need for parks due to the new residential areas that would come into the Town Center area. He said the point he wished to make was that even without new residential areas, there was need of open space and parks for the present population of Cupertino, especially around De Anza, Route 280, and Bollinger Road. There was a shortage in meeting the 1979 General Plan requirements (3 to 34 acres/thousand people) Even projected to 1990, with not much increase in population, there was a shortage. Financial problems had caused the dropping of requirements. Now that the financial hurdle had been jumped, he asked for reinstate- ment of the parks and open space requirements of the General Plan. A Civic Mall (for the use of children's soccer teams) was recommended and asked for in the Town Center area, with landscaping and upkeep on the area provided by the City. CRR. KOENITZER stated that he thought there had always been a 34-acre open space-recreational-park plan for Town Center. Assistant Planning Director Cowan mentioned that Eadon school was to be available and Staff would prefer that area in addition to Town Center. COM. CLAUDY noted the shortage of open space in every area of the City and suggested that this was the last area out of which acerage could be taken. PC-335 Page 6 MINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING CO}ft1ISSION }!EETING }Ir. John Callahan, 19954 Wheaton Drive, Cupertino, said that again they had been treated to a traffic study that had everything figured out in 1964. He described a circuitous route he'd had to follow in going across town in order to avoid stacking lanes of traffic. He said they had been talking about alternatives, and one of the most interesting to him was the area across from Penney's (mentioned by Chr. Koenitzer at one point). He said that was an area ideal for high density by virtue of being removed from single-family houses. It had room and two exits. The residents would not be locked in as happened on Stevens Creek. He didn't disagree, he said, with the statement that Stevens Creek Boule- vard was already 90% full at the present time, and getting across or making turns across traffic was impossible. Commercial development would limit the hazards of traffic and inhalation of carbon monoxide. He supported the plea for more parks. Mentioning the schools available in the area, he asked how it could be proposed that a whole bunch of high-rise units might keep the schools open. He asked what kind of planning that was. He said they had talked about schools, crime, noise, traffic; and, he said, nothing happens. The area over by Randy Lane was recommended for the most that could be crammed in -- 42 units ,.ith exit onto Stevens Creek. Noting the figures used in the traffic report, he interpreted that apparently the overpass was not needed at the present time. He asked why it should be built. Mr. Callahan in- formed the members of the planning commission that he was getting tired of spending every other week with them or the city council. Public Works Director Viskovich said he did not wish the 90% cal- culation to get out of context. He said that Stevens Creek or De Anza were not at 90% capacity presently. }!r. William Clark, 20054 Wheaton Drive, Cupertino, said he wished to touch upon something that nobody had touched upon: lfuen you get into high density, the taxes go up. And he used high density communities of San Francisco as an example or San Jose. This was true, he said, be- cause people were consumers of taxes and not land. COM. CLAUDY stated that they were building units in the 150 thousand to 200 thousand dollar range. He said they were not building slums. And, he added, most of the units would be occupied by only two people whereas, single-family homes had an average of 3), to 4 occupants. He said he wished to get it across that they were building houses or units that most of the people in the room could not afford, including members of the Planning Commission. CHR. KOENITZER pointed out that Proposition #13 had set tax rate in- creases at 2%/annum; and, he also stated that Cupertino had a ·small tax base to start with. The tax picture would not chanf,e very much one way or another; it was simple mathemathics. He announced that they wished to continue the Public Hearing, and that they did wish to go on to the areas F, G. H, I, J, K, which needed recommendations to be forwarded to the Environmental Review Committee. MINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING COMHISSION MEETING PC-335 rage 7 CO}!. BLAINE asked if it was possible, before they moved along, for Staff to provide a traffic plan schematic or travel movement plans for the areas under discussion. And, she said she would like to see what impact there was on neighborhoods and people trying to get in and out to Steven Creek. She said there was a lot of concern, which she shared. Public Works Director Viskovich said she must be talking about the acces to De Anza with the grade separation. He said the neighborhoods would become aware that there was a whole new plan in the works, which might relieve some of the concern. There would be public hearings scheduled. COM. CLAUDY noted that depending upon where the grade lowering started they'd have problems with the service stations, the vacant property, and the Steak Pit areas of the Crossroads Center exits -- all kinds of exits that would be blocked off. It would be much more difficult to reach those areas. It was possible at the present time to get through on a side street and get into the areas. That reflected a major con- cern of the property owners. CHR. KOENITZER advised that before action was taken on the Land Use/ Community Character Element and the Traffic-Circulation Element, they would discuss Areas F, G, H, I, & J, taking each one in turn, asking for public input. Then, he said, they would send their conclusions or recommendations to the Councilor to the Environmental Review Committee, whichever was directly concerned. Assistant Planning Director Cowan said that it was a package and the whole package would be returned in July for final action. PLANNING AREA F, 4.5 acres, undeveloped, was exhibited on the board, an described as being on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Blaney and Portal, in two separate ownerships (one with 2.7 acres and the other with 1.8 acres, zoned in a Mix since 1978, and Mix zoning still applying. Staff suggested it be retained as residential as a matter of scale. Ms. Rose Mary Callahan, 19954 \;heaton Drive, Cupertino, said she would like to transmit another copy of the 300-signature petition that had originally been given to the Planning Commission in April of 1980. -- a third time additional copies had been submitted. The petition said that the neighborhood did not want sites F & G in high density, but the did prefer professional office zoning. She said she was really dismaye that the Staff was so completely insensitive about what they kept up saying. She related the various recommendations and progress reports on designation of new zoning; however, she noted, the zoning had stayed the same. She asked that government make every reasonable effort to determine what the majority want and make their decision accordingly. She noted that they were getting the same information as they had been getting for the last few months. She asked if office was considered commercial zoning or did it have its o,'ll zoning. CHR. KOENITZER said that strictly speaking, in the General Plan they di not distinquish between commercial or office; the designation was pre- cise at the time applications were decided upon by the Planning Com- mission. PC-335 Page 8 }!INUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING COlll1ISSION MEETING Mrs. Janet Hammond, 199874 Wheaton Drive, Cupertino, said that her property was adjacent to Site F, directly behind the 1.3 acres. She said they were delighted when they thought they were going to get the one-story office building. She asked that the commissioners not consider each piece separately, but consider the overall scope of the property; otherwise, she concluded, they were going to find them- selves completely surrounded by high density developments. The 10-20 might be medium density, but they considered it extremely high density and the neighborhood was in a uproar over the problem. Some of the plans she had seen for three-story projects were totally unacceptable and certainly not in character with the neighborhood. Mr. Gary Cook, representing the owners of what was labeled the future office complex, said he had not intended to speak because he didn't think that he was involved with Site F. He thought they were talking about ¡!r. Torres property. He was concerned because he was not pre- pared to represent his client's interests. He said he did not be- lieve the realities of the property were being considered from the strictly economic point of view. As his client had proposed, he said he would like to see a redesigning of an office complex. CHR. KOENITZER stated that it had been general City policy, since 1972, that they wanted to try to get Town Center developed. And, he said they were concerned about the overall development of the small parcels and small office and commercial as to whether or not it was de- sirable for the overall cityscape and for the purpose of getting a better and bigger development on some of the other parcels Mr. Herman , 19875 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, one of the owners of the furniture store located next to Site F, said he was attending a meeting for a second time and recalled that it was approximately two years previously he had attended a meeting about the office complex for the commercial use of part óf Site F. He had thought there was no worry about any changes as long as there was a permit to construct on the site. He said the permit is still valid; although, he said, Hare, Brewer & Kelley presently wished to develop would like to develop it. He said he'd like to support their effort to accommodate a combination of what he had and what they planned. Mr. William Clark. returned to the podium to remark that there was a great discussion going on about properties F & G and they were talking about 6 acres, which he could not see as destroying the planned develop- ment for Town Center. He said he didn't understand why the property was not developed the way the citizens wished it to be. All of the citizens were explaining what they wanted and were joined by the representative of an adjacent site supporting the citizens; and, far from repre- senting the citizens, the Planning Commission was trying to do something different. Mr. John Carlson, 10203 Portal Avenue, Cupertino, said he had attended meetings a number of times, being interested in Area E, and he was par- ticularly interested that the Planning Commission, after all of the discussion and petitions with signatures indicating preference for office or commercial, found that the newest member of the Planning Commission made a recommendation that the zoning be 10-20 for resi- dential -- complete disregard of all the statements made by all the people actually involved in the neighborhood. He said he didn't understand that kind of action. MINUTES JUNE B, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-335 Page 9 (Mr. John Carlson returned to the podium to explain that his comments as to the newest member of the Planning Commission being Com. Johnson, was àn error. He said he had meant to refer to Com. Blaine.) COM. BLAINE corrected Mr. Carlson and explained that her motion for the zoning density had been for 10-15 units/acre on Area E. She continued by explaining that it was an interesting history that the Planning Com- mission did not set zoning -- the Planning Commission recommends zoning to the City Council. The City Council had wanted 20-30 units/acre. Then the City Council wished the density lowered after the Planning Commission approved a project that the Council turned down. She ex- plained that the issue had come back to the Planning Commission for con- sideration of the lowering of the density and not the change of zoning. She said they did listen to the citizens and appreciated their frus- tration. She said they never really quite understood why it was coming back or what was required of the commissioners. The Planning Commission s role was to recommend for approval of City Council what is felt to be th best overall use of land in the city. -- not just one particular neigh- borhood. Although she felt they represented all of the people of the city, she stated that it was impossible to represent all the diverse opinions of the citizenry. COM. CLADDY said he understood that they were accused ~f playing God and occasionally it might seem as though they did. However, it must be remembered that the Planning Commission was charged with making planning decisions and not political decisions. No doubt, in the same circum- stances, from the same vantage point, he felt he would be saying the sam thing he was hearing the residents saying; and he worried that he voted against majority opinion. Mr. Maurice O'Shea, 20367 Clay Street, Cupertino, said the impact that got across to him was that after months of residents coming in to the meetings with faithful diligence the town hasn't seen in 8-9 years, and with almost 100% of the res1dents testifying to the Council and to the Planning Commission that they wished lower density and wanted no taste, part, tone, color of high density, that they are still not lis- tened to. Use of the word representative was very interesting. He sai he was losing faith that the Councilor the Commission was representati He said he agreed with Mr. Callahan that the entire plan for the Core Area represents a giant olympic effort against the interests of the citizens of the town. He said he had to leave the meeting not knowing what to do. Possibly getting Melvin Belli to engage the town. He said he couldn't support any part of the plan. He stated that the thing was dead in Cupertino. It wasn't going to fly, he said. COM. CLADDY stated that somebody had to bite the bullet. He referred to the information generated earlier in the meeting about traffic from residential and traffic by office. He said they were not making a firm decision, but only a recommendation to the Environmental Review Com- mittee. And, he said he felt it was important to protect their interes in Town Center. Housing goals were pertinent, and he said it struck hi that housing was not going to add a lot of traffic problems. He felt 10-20 units/acre to be too high for the sites. Residential could be done in two stories, and he recommended 8-12 units/acre. PC-335 Page lO I HINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLA.'lliING COM1-IISSION HEETING COHo JOHNSON asked if when talking about Site F, complex, which had fallen through, it sounded as come back with alternate plans. He asked if the Com. Claudy made allowance for that or if he was parcel with the 8-l2 density designation. the future office though they wished to proposal made by covering the entire CO~l. CLAUDY said that if they had taken out building permits, then they could come in. If they did not have building permits the n that indi- cated to him that they were not interested in building. \~at he was talking about, he explained, was approved by the Environmental Review, recommended by the Planning Commission, and approved by the City Council and it would preclude anything but residential development on that site. Although they might have an investment, it had to be recognized that one did not always win on investments. CO~[. JOHNSON remarked that it was a rather dram~tic turn of events for that particular area and piece of land, which had been discussed for a long period of time. CO~!. BLAINE said that although she might not agree, she did listen to what was being said and what was wanted. And she said that everyone on the Commission listened and thought about it. She said ffie had been involved in planning in the City for a long time and from the citizens point of view and she felt that was why she had not changed very much over the years. She said her concern was for the housing in the com- munity and had nothing to do with the jobs/housing balance or imbalance. She wished provision of a community with people of all ages, and with people from a variety of economic backgrounds and educational back- grounds in order to have a full community. With what had happened to housing in the area, the only way in which they were going to be able to keep citizens in the community was to provide all the types of housing attractive to people. She said one of the things the town had to do was to protect the area that was the center of the town. A small develop- ment would not make that much difference in To,'ll Center, but she said she felt the projects added up. COHo ADAHS said he had to go along with residential, but he'd like to suggest the modification of either or residential/office, whichever came in first. For residential he suggested and supported the lO-15 density and on office space, nothing over 50,000 sq. ft. at the most. The 50,000 sq. ft., he felt, might slightly impact Town Center, which had the 250,000 sq. ft. total. It had the effect of keeping the jobs in the City and shortening the trips. Most of Cupertino trips already being in the City, he thought the mixture of housing and jobs in the office complex could be a trade-off. CHR. KOENITZER said he had started out working in '72, on the General Plan. If those present felt they had been to a few meetings, he said he had been to more meetings at Honta Vista High School alone. A lot of time had been spent trying to get a look at the City for the next l5-20 years. At the time he had .started, it was a 20-year projection to 1990. He related that when attending meetings of organizations of California planners, they get the information from the people looking at the future that says that whether it is liked or not, the automobile is on the way out. And, public transportation is going to be put in for corridors of various types. Life styles are going to change and MINUTES JUNE 23, 19BO REGULAR PLANNING CO}~\ISSION MEETING PC-335 Page 11 jobs and housing are going to be planned together requiring higher densi y along transportation corridors, where public service was available. The best crystal balling of the futuTe, admittedly, might not be very good, but i '. was the best available. In 1972, the City, in looking at the future, had reached agreement on th location of the big shopping center and also agreement on the smaller de ve10pment for the TOIm Center site. He said there had been competition as to which developer would get the City's blessing. Although he had been in disagreement~ Com. Koenitzer said he still supported interest in maintaining a second center -- Town Center. And, economic consultants had indicated that to preserve the possibilities for that, Town Center, would require that a lot of little complexes not be allowed. The small "bite" developments created curb cuts and driveways, and small isolated businesses. Although the City was interested, but not with much suc- cess, in getting o~vners to combine properties for developers to produce larger projects, they were still being asked to provide more housing as part of the trend to balance jobs and housing. Many of the people were already eliminated from the market by high prices and he felt he'd not b able to afford housing in Cupertino at today's prices. He said that the City could feel reasonably confidant that residential development would always he in demand. CHR. KOENITZER called attention to the fact that when density is reduced the developers simply produce fewer but larger units on the same amount of land. Very little was gained. One of the forecasts for the future, he reported, was that the City coul expect to find more and more unrelated people (or families) living in Rl areas. Some of the rental property in town was already having more than one family per home. He predicted that it would be a continuing problem CHR. KOENITZER said he supported lower density on smaller parcels. The 8-12 or 8-15 units/acre would be viable to him for backing up to Rl area With a combination of parcels, then he felt 10-15 units/acre would fit. And, he added, the difference between 8-12 and 10-15 was not that signi- ficant. CO~¡. BLAINE brought up residential parking, street parking, and the underground o~ depressed-garage parking. She did prefer the underneath parking rather than use of the ground level open space for spreading a layer of cars for tenants or guests. Only with more units was it pos- sible to place the parking underneath. Chr. Koenitzer and Com. Blaine agreed that underneath parking was expensive hecause of fire department requirements for accowmodating their large equipment. CO~\. JOHNSON asked if they were trying to build the underground parking into the zoning codes. Com. Blaine responded that the concern was for the density and intensity use of property. COl.\. CLADDY asked if it ,¡as not true that they were not forced to accept the recommendations of the fire department as a requirement. Planning Director Sisk stated that it was a matter of trying to cooper- ate with the Fire Department PC-335 Page 12 MINUTES JUNE 23, 1980 REGULAR PLANNING CO~fMISSION MEETING CHR. KOENITZER reminded the Commissioners that their goal for the meeting was to determine a consensus and send the recommendation to the Environmental Review Committee for study. lIe said he would like to report the consensus as being: CONSENSUS: PARCEL F Density of 10-l5 units/acre. Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner JHa ine , Adams Koenitzer Density of 8-12 units/acre. Commissioner Claudy Commissioner Johnson HOTION: Com. Claudy to continue Areas H, I, & J for discussion at the Thursday evening Regular Planning Commission Meeting Continued from June 23, 1980 Second: Com. Blaine PASSED 5-0 PLANNING AREA G, 4 acres on Stevens Creek between Blaney and Randy. Mr. Richard Dulleck, 19680 Junipero Way, Saratoga, real estate con- sultant, retained by Clearlake Development, read into the record a 4- page letter dated June 20, 1980, addressed to Cupertino Planning Com- mission. Copies of the letter were provided to Commission members and a copy is in the file. Mr. William Irvine, 10560, Castine, Cupertino, architect on the pro- posal, said that the project was designed for 20 units/acre incorporating an underground garage. If they were required to reduce the number of units/acre, then they'd have to come up with an entirely new design to build. The present plan had about 60% landscaping on the site and less than 40% in condos. He said that the atrium area was included in the 60%. Reduction of density would probably mean they'd have to go to townhouses or similar design with a network of driveways and the normal low landscaping of the neighborhood at about 25%. He said he believed that intensity is as important as density. Mr. Medford Snyder, developer, said he had purchased the property under the General Plan. He said they had their Negative Declaration, but now he said he understood it was going to come up on Thursday and the whole thing had to be resubmitted for environmental impact. MEETING CONTINUED to June 26, 1980, 7:30 p.m., Council Chambers, City Hall, Cupertino 1:00 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: f¿¡g~}-