PC 09-27-79
CI~Y OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
Telephone (408) 252-4505
MINUTES-SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION, CONFERENCE ROOM #105
PC-31B
Page 1
CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 p.m.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
Present:
Chairman Gatto
Commissioner Blaine
Commissioner Adams
Commissioner Koenitzer - Arrived at 7:30 p.m.
Commissioner Claudy
Absent:
Staff Present:
Planning Director Sisk
Assistant Planning Director Cowan
Asso~iate Planner Piasecki
Public Works Director Viskovic6
Assistant City Attorney Kilian
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
ITEM #1, Application 4-U-78 of SOBRATO DEVELOPMENT
PROPERTIES: Request for extension of Use Permit and dis-
cussion of maximum building height, southeast corner of
Mariani Drive & De Anza Boulevard.
CHR. GATTO asked Assistant Planning Director Cowan whether
he wished to explain the item or have the applicant make a
statement.
!
I
I
Assistant Planning Director Cowan that the letter (included I
in the Packet for the Agenda, PC-318) had been received too'
late Friday afternoon for them to schedule a Staff Report.
The approval was for a four-story building of &0 ft. heigh~
and refaring the Commissioners to a map on the back of the
packet, he explained that ConditIon #23 determined the 60
ft. height from the natural grade. Therefore, it was the
contention of Sobrato developers that the height should be
based on the 229 benchmark. Since the Condition #23 Cailed
to be specific it would mean a great deal in terms or cubic
yards that could be exported from the sIte. Staff was of
the opinion that the 2 ft. height on the pad for the build-
ing was not significant. It reflected a change from 225 to
227 with 229 as a ceiling.
PC-318
Page 2
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
A general discussion covered the pad level in relation to
De Anza Boulevard, the various elevations of the natural
and unnatural lay of the land, drainage of the property, and
height of the building.
COM. ADAMS reminded the Commissioners that the 50 ft. buffer
zone would be effective, and he suggested protecting solar
rights.
CHR. GATTO noted that natural grade depends on what is
there and avèrage of the four points of the building.
COM. BLAINE questioned impact on residents. Assistant
Planning Director Cowan pointed out Condition #26, Reso-
lution 1837, which called for mature box trees, and Jands-
Heaping to J}rovide immediate privacy screen for the family
residences -- limited privacy only possible because of a
four-story building. The 2 ft. change under discussion
would be insignificant in respect to privacy.
The applicant, in response to the problem of the location
of the trash area, advised that the building had plans for
an internal compacter; and, being an office building, de-
liver~es·to the dock area would not be unduly disturbing.
CHR. GATTO suggested giving H-Control the worry about the
mechanics and location of the trash' area (relocating it to
the eastside or souths ide of the building having merit). By
* CONSENSUS, the Commissioners approved recommendation to
H-Control, and appended a request for an Accoustical Report.
MOTION:
Com. Adams,
(one) year,
289.
Com. Blaine
UNANIMOUSLY
Com. Claudy
Approval of Extension 14-u-78 for 1
and Approval of height of building to
¿
.
SECOND:
PASSED:
ABSENT:
4-0
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM #2, Application 24-Z-77 of CITY OF CUPERTINO (TOWN
CENTER): REZONING approximately 50 gross acres from P
(Planned Development) to P (Planned Development with resi-
dential, commercial and office use intent) zone or whatever
zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee
recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said
property is located on the southeast corner of Stevens Creek
Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard. First hearing continued.
*
RESOLUTION to H-Control.
PC-31~
páge 3
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Planning Director Sisk referred to the exhibits on the board
and summarized the evolution of the Town Center Conceptual
Plan, concluding with Exhibit Alternate C-l, which repre-
sented an agreed upon configuration as appropriate for the
planning and zoning of the property. Problems of residenti 1
density, necessary contribution of BMH (Below Market Housin ),
parks ide location, character of the use of the park (public,
private), landscape areas, core-area density, building
heights, street locations, were mentioned as being the last
steps to determining guidelines for the developers and
development of the areas.
CHR. GATTO said he felt the purpose of the meeting wag con-
sideration of the park, uses of the park, view corridors,
etc. He continued that he felt there was a consensus be-
tween the interested parties as to land uses, dengity of
land uses, range of land uses permitted and general config-
uration of the road. There was no response to his request
that anyone having chang~ their ideas on those basic items
address the Commissioners at that time.
CHR. GATTO suggested the night's discussion should be re-
stricted to 1) nature of park, 2) locatlon or the park,
3) controls -- whether policy statements or guidelines per-
tinent to the development of those parcels. J
Planning Director Sisk advised that considering the denslty
of the residential area and the income from the area meant
they were basically talking about 1 1/2 acres publicly owne
land, proposed to be located on the eagterly gide Torre
Avenue as it came through the property with the remainder
of the Town Center Plaza area ariti6ipated to be as part of
the commercial development in the future.
CRR. GATTO asked about the mechanics of acquisition and the
time-frame of the acquisition.
Public Works Director Viskovich reported some funds in the
Capital Improvement Funds currently with general intention
that at the time of development the contribution of dollars
based on the subdivision map, and the number of persons
or population of a project. The roadway would be provided
through dedication -- each property owner contributing a
share as their development came up for review.
CHR. GATTO inquired into the possibility of the area to the
west of the road not developing commercially and wished
to know what arrangement could guarantee acquisition for th
roadway.
Public Works Director Viskovich advised that a residential
development would be required to provide Open Space in
addition to the roadway dedication. The cost would be
pc-:n 8
Page 4
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF TUE
PLANNING COMMISSION
borne by eRch property owner financing the installation of
their section of the road -- the roadway to be developed as
property is utilizud for development. Initial roadway with
signal would go in through the May property with completion
through the Cali property. Purchase of the park and improve-
ment of the park site would not necessarily coincide.
COM. KOENITZER asked if immediate purchase of. the park site
would obligate the City for immediate installation of that
section of the road. Public Works Director Viskovich quipped
that he hoped the City could work it to avoid it -- that
obligation.
Mr. G. D. Gibson, Koll Company, recalled discussing the
overall Town Center many times, with City Staff and others,
I and he felt strongly that a statement of City requirements and
wishes for the area (particularly considering the uncertainty
surrounding the Cali property), but restricted to extremely
general guidelines, would be in the best interests of the Clty.
Statement of intent through the General Master Plan, then a
wait and see attitude vis a vis the developers cooperati.on
and assistance ill rcac!\lng goals seemed to be more realLstic
in as much as development of different projects in different
ways than presently exµected could establish a different set
of parameters or guidelineH to be decided upon. He said he
realized delay would incur loss in the value of funds and the
improved value of property. Buy now; swap later -- ode alter-
native to fund's loss. Personally, ho stated it would be
ot value to him to know how the Commissioners and the Staff
envisioJ1Cd use of the park site, plaza, Town Center Area.
He favored the S-Curve, promenade, focal point, and the City
anticipating blocking the throughfare [or public use at timcs.
Mr. Tom O'Donnell, representing Cali interests, agreed with
Mr. Gibson, and he complimented the concept; except, fIe said,
referring the the Report of September 19, he noted that although
it seemed that details were being laid down,· actùally, he felt,
th.at the wording was vague by definition. The plaIl called
for o~ners to anti up property -- all of the owners. But,
he advised, it happened that only one of the Calis owned the
property [rom which the land could bc acquired. The prom-
enade -- leading nowhere -- happened to beon Cali property.
Then he pointed out that the Cali property, which was talked
about as one unit, was actually owned by several members of
the Cali family, which indicated inhibiting or preventing the
development of the land from which the public property was
to be acquired; thus penalizing one member of the Cali family.
Three or four separate entitics held title to Cali land, and
he spoke for them but could not commit them. As an examplc of
equivocation iG the yisual corridor, entryway concept, it
reads that one has M entryway that will not be used because
traffic is using the other side on the roadway; and, entry-
way for looking having landscaping oDstructing seeing into the
corridor. As for the view to the foothills, he pointed out
that the foothills would not be seen. Of the three schemes,
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
PC-318
Page 5
he had reservations as to whether anyone of them would
really work. Then, as for the plaza, assuming someone
would eventually use it, there seemed to be no provision
for parking, or, at least what parking was scheduled was
far away enough that parking would be loaded onto the com- j
mercial areas for users of the park. Mr. O'Donnell men-
tioned several more examples of the letter being quoted
indicating conflict and contradiction in goals and purposes
He concluded by advancing the feeling, on his part, that th
plan was being detailed by people who would have no respon-!
sibility for the actual development of the property. And,
he appended the idea that the 250,000 sq. ft. would fluc-
uate or di~linish to the advantage or disadvantage of variou.
developers depending upon the sequence of their activity in
developing the properties -- a circumstance which he stronl.
recommended be addressed by the Commissioners. The detail
of the proposed pLan was unsound and unfair. He appealed
to the Planning Commission to provide solutions to some of
the requests of tIle potential developers, and to advise
them what they, the Commission, wanted.
Absent:
4-0
Com. Claudy
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
CHR. GATTO said he felt it was important to delineate what
tbey could and avoid delineating guidelines in other areas;
providing advice to the City Council for thejr consideratio
at such time as specific modes of development were presented.
He recommended discussion of use of land to reduce traffic I
impact, consilierati,on of use of the park or plaza -- active!
or passive park, parking to accomodatè the specific park usd
envisioned, and some input as to acquisition of the land. I
I
COM. BLAINE said she envisioned something patterned some- I
what after El Pasco with passageway for workers and shopperd
within the complex, area for art shows, somewhat expandable I
area (into adjacent space) for staging city-sponsored act- I
ivity (with closlng 0[[ the street), urban rather than
county fair activlty. As for residential, her expectations
included gr~enery for esthetics, a semi-active park within
the residential, a buffer zone between residenrlal and com-
mercial. After listening to Mr. O'Donnell's opinions, she
questioned why the plaza could not be moved down toward
Rodriques.
Planning Director Sisk advised that a turfed area would
separate the plaza from the park but still maintain
continuity of tile operi area as one public use combination
tor large scale activities.
COM. KOENITZER said the City was, of course, interested in
more unified development, wllich, if impossible beCa\lSe of
multiple property interests, would make it more dirficult t
develop, both for the city and for the developers. to come
PC-3l8
Page 6
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETINC; OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
up with something less than the stand-alone, single commercial
development. Two or three developers coordinating projects
would eliminate many of the problems suggested by Mr. O'Donnell.
Planning Director Sisk reminded the Commissioners that the
original concept was advanced for one, two, or so large de-
velopers, but with multiple-interest separate developments,
the traditional roadway dedication would still prevail with
the owners of the property. He said that the. concept was de-
veloped, and still was being advanced to avoid the backing of
buildings on the street -- the commercial promenade accom-
plishing that. .
Public Works Director Viskovich explained that dating back to
the General Plan, the Planning Commission and the City CouncIl
adopted the Plan by giving bonus trips only if It developed as
an integral part. Any discussion of separate and individual
development would necessitate applying the usual 16 trips/acre
as currently applied to developers along Stevens Creek and
De Anza. Greater intensity of traffic was encouraged to
permIt overall cooperative development. If there was to be
further .split-up of elements, new rulcH and criteria would have
to be established for overall development.
COM. ADAMS recognized the merIt embodied within the public
comment on -the issue, and even granting inconsistencies and
contradlctions in the Staff Reports, memoranda, he stated
he felt the Town Center concept should be maintained, the
park concept should be retained with flexibility for exploring
variations, encouragement should be provided by the Planning
Commission to bring about cooperation and integration of an
overall plan (despite headaches between owners) -- incentives
of trip ends being one, higher density, lowering of ~ommercial
limits, increasing residential, etc.. Looking downstream
20 to 25 yeaés, it was impossible to predict whether or not
theér decisions would be good.
CHR. GATTO advised that right or wrong, the road had to be de-
fined, and defined fairly exactly because it established the
I very boundaries for permitted development. Given the Rodriques
and Vista connections, he said the accepted road pattern was
superior. To him, unity was important and guidelines for
pedestrian movement, whether in commercial or residential,
should flow from one area to another and the pattern should
be set, be in harmony with the i.mmediate use (commercial or
residential), expand to relax pedestrian movement at some
places, and also assure pedBstrian access from one site to
Another. Linkage could begin at about 15 to 20 ft. wide
with softening planned in (landscaping or angulation of path),
park planned to provide relief and buffer between commercial
and residential (careful landscaping density), lighting that
was coordinated from area to area to maintain unity. In his
thinking, he felt the Town Center Plaza would be related to
the scale of the total development.
....".,....,.-
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
PC-3IB
Page 7
Director of Public Works Viskovich advised that purchase of
park space would avoid erosion of the funds by holding them
for future use. The park size was reduced by consideration
of what was affordable with the May Investment funds.
Assistant Planning Director Cowan said May Investment
coming in with about 400 households with a 2.5 factor/
household equaled l,OOO people, generating 3 acres of land;
however, by determining the use of the land for group
activities and use of the residents, there would be a crediq
against the 3 acres, with May Investment's use internally,
and the city would end up with less acerage for the passive
park of sufficient size to accommodate, say, the terminatio
of the Pioneer Day parade. Ten or twelve activities a year
could spillover into the area.
CRR. GATTO advanced the idea of May Investment buying it
back and using the space for relief for people living in
their development -- the integration being superior to a
park located to the side.
Public Works Director Viscovich recognized the possibility
of the City investment in the park land not being ideally
1.()r:ated; yet, he said, in tllat event it would be possible
to swap for another area. In fact, he stated, that event-
uality was not unattractive in view DE ercision of funds
through inflated land prices -- the city possibly bcnefitin
from holding the land against an attractive swap. Or, on
the other hand, downstream, should the Town Center be mainlì'
residential, tile land might be even Moore meaningful in the
search for open space and park lan~. I
I
I
I
I
Assistant City Attorney K~lian advised that the land could ¡
be purchased for public use; however, with unwilling seller,
the only way the crty could acquire it would be through !
eminant domain aetloll, identifying the reason, and speC[fYitg
the tl~'>C at a hearing to pstablish least private damage and
most public good. Having acquired the land the city had
recourse to selling it or swapping it in accordance with a
vote of the people.
CUR. GATTO inquired of Assí.stant City Attorney KilLan if a
condemnation would be essential for acqusitLon o~ land,
CHR. GATTO asked for discussion on the so-called visual
corridors to the foothills.
[t was agreed that some guarantee, more or less, should be f
built into the plan for the benefit of future developers
tha~ they would be inhibited from obstructing the view to
the foothills totally.
PC-318
Page 8
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 RECULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr. Jay Mitchell, Hoover Associates, Architects, commented
that he felt it would he helpful to have guidance as to whe~e
the vistas were important. Inasmuch as pitched-roof style of
Town Center architecture could mean height up to 40 ft.
creating a higher silhouette, wo~ld cut off views,
especially in the office or commerciaL development,
Mr. Tom O'Donnell, representing Cali interests, asked for
clarification as to the direction of the view.
Assistant Planning Director Cowan explained they were talking
about due west to southwest. fringing the apex of existing
buildings and determining that future building will not be
higher. Mr. Piasecki uoted that tremendous views were avail-
able from all existing parks.
COM. BLAINE opted open space areas for relaxing, browse
through the area. She'd llke the buildings broken up and
separated by pedestrian throughways and vistas. The road
could be started from the two ends, following the S curve.
And, the land should be ac:;_j'·.H!. as soon as possible and
held against use or tradeoff. She brought up the removal of
the Cali Mill ~y unbolting and requested some discussion of
that issue.
COM. KOENITZER, recalling a long meeting and discussion of
the issue at a Joint City Council and Planning Commission
Meeting, suggested some effort to design something that would
retain the nostalgia of the Cali Mill towers.
COM. BLAINE said that to finish up, [or her, some specific
statement should be made about acquiring the land and paying
for it, and .ome specific statement should be made as to ac-
quiring the land for a park use, (the 1 1/2 acres to both
sides 0 f the roadway).
COM. KOENITZER said that Com. Blaine had really stated his
point of view. He would add, he said, that statements on
pedestrian walkways should be specified; visual corridors
should be protected from the park to the foothills; allocation
of commercial/office space not to exceed 250,000 sq. ft.
should be mentioned along with some proration of sq. ft. to
each use divided equitably between developers, bu~ manip-
ulated in that small or large, the elements would mesh into
a whole.
Discussion determined that allocation of available square
footage for commercial and industrial use should takè place and that
trades of such could be made between developers as long as it conformed
to the conceptual plan.
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27, 1979 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
PC-318
Page 9
COM. ADAMS said he agreed with Commissioners Blaine, Gatto,
and Koenitzer, except he wished to agre~ with Com;-Claudy
(who was absent) and Chr. Gatto, that monies available for
park acquisition might better be spent enhancing other as-
pects of the Town Center Development. .
COM. BLAINE said she meant that since the funds were avail-j
able and the land could be acquired, she recommended making
the investment and banking the land for future use or futur
decisions as to its disposition. I
COM. ADAMS recommended consideration of acquisition of land
across from City Hall for use as a Town Hall of the future.
COM. GATTO opted for waiting the five years, collecting fun s,
and acquiring land for the city for the purpose dictated by
the development going in.
Mr. Tom O'Donnell, representing the Calis, said it occurred
to him, suddenly and for the first time, that the reason th
blue section was not being dlscussed for acquisition was
because the city couldn't afford it. If that was the ans-
wer, then the situation had been clarified for him and
separated from some planning reason for wanting the park in
the middle. He advanced the idea that the blue section
added to the public land withln the Town Center (pedestrian
walkways, etc.) might be more viable and valuable.
CHR. GATTO suggested that the Staff should go back and,
using the ideas and consensus generated by the meeting,
pull together ~ final draft of a conceptual plan for Tuwn
Center. for final consideration of the Planni.ng CommLssion
and the public. The final plan should include the S curve, I
a statement on maintaining vistas, a statement of height uf
buildings, a statement on pedestrian walkways and flow of :
pedestrian traffic creating patterns oriented toward con- I
tinuity within the area overall, a statement as tu use of I
funds (immediately or eventually), a statement as to the
proration designation for the varions parcels, a statement
for location of residential land IIses.
RECESS:
Condition Ill, stated in preceding paragraph. and as discusse
earlier.
Condition #2, reword as per discussion
Condition #5, include statements to de£ine in detail what
was discussed during the meeting.
Condition #6, delete statements on Cali Mill as set forth. i~
the General Plan. Limit he-igh.t statements to refer only to '
focal eleme.nt for th.e Town Center of w.hate.ver pleasing de-
sign approved.
l'C-3J8
Page 10
MINUTRS SRPTEM8ER 27, ]979 REGULAR ADJOURNRD MERTING OF THE
PLANNINC GOHMISS10N
CÙlldition Ifh, drop Sl':ltl>;nenl (11\ thl' Cal_i Mil
P 1. i1 nn i Ilg
2 - 3 8, r l' !
I)irt>{'l()( Sisk «';Itl 1r(JIII till' C('lll'ré¡1 Plan, 2-·~7.
1 0 C a ! M I I I ~> ( S l' C t j (J 11 ins l' r t l -' d) ^ r l' a 4.
AJll'r di.';{·II~-;~.¡inll, il
t l'[1l:C'S <lnd d rup tile
W;I~-> ;¡grl-'\_'d
rc st.
rL' t a j II
t I1l'
I i r s 1
two
~.¡ t' 11-
COIlÙ it iOIl //7.
Mr. _,J_~~_{~_ ~~_Y~t~_r (phOl1('l it:) brought tip the subj~ect of d major
t .... n .:J 11 t ~.I n J d S k l' d r () r (' I d r i fi (' a t i 0 J) i n Con d i t ion /I 7 Of d II l Y
of major tenallt and/()r dllchor tel1ant.
Condition 117, to he cl,JriJ'il'd tu illstrllct that a major tt'nant
and/or ,1lIchur ten'lllt 111USt illl('gr;jtt',~t() blend into till' overall
t h L' l1! (' () r sty 1. L' 0 r lli L' Tow n C (' n t (~r Ù (~V (' I () pm e n t .
P I. ;1 n n i n g D j r e c t () r S i s k <1 g r (' c J L () ('00 r J i n (j tl~ t It e err 0 r t t 0
rewrite thl' Town C(;~tllt'r Coni.'t'ptudl Plan to reflecl LIIL'
COl1Sl'nsus ot tile fTI(;'cl ¡tlg.
A 1- l t' r d is i.' II S S ion i_ t was J l~ t' ide d 1 0 it t t e III J t lo
Town Ct'lItl"'r Cont:l'ptll<-1 I PI an on the> Agenda for
t i 111 e and p.l ace 0 I 1\1 ('. t' ti n g L u b l' d l' t (,' r m in e d at
('onl i Ilg("'nt on intcrvL'ni ng Agl'nJas.
i ne l,.udc
Oel-tobe r
a latt'r
the
22 --
date
M';E1'INC CONTINUED UNTIL OCTOBER 22,1979.
MOTlON:
Com. Adams to
lilt' e ,- i n g w () \I I d
Com. Hlailll'
UNANIMOUSLY
Com. Clalluy
r¿¡tily Cllr.
h l' (' 011 t ¡ 11 { l'd
C iJ t 1 u r lJ 1 in g L II a t t h ('
rt) ()rt()hl~r 22, 1979.
SECOND:
PASSED:
Ahsc'nl:
4-0
APPROVED:
M-
Gatto
ATTEST:
cf(b-f ~