Loading...
PC 08-27-79 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone (408) 252-4505 PC-3l6 Page 1 MINUTES AUGUST 27, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSIO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m. SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chairman Gatto Commissioner Blaine Commissioner Claudy Absent: Commissioner Koenitze Commissioner Adams Staff Present: Assistant Planner Piasecki Assistant City Eng. Whitten APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 23, 1979, PC-3l4, Regular Meeting Planning Commission, amended as follows: Page 8, par. 6, last sentence, by Com. Claudy, change neighborhoods to read "neighbors." Page 8, par. 7, change last sentence to read..."...stated the case of homeowners working on their homes on weekends being....." Page 5, par. 5, Com. Blaine, change name spelling to Ms. Jo Ann Gholson. Page 9, par. 2, change name spelling to Ms. Dorothy Wright Page 9, par. 6, change to read...."representative of Mr. Yamogomi...." Absent: Com. Adams Com. Blaine Second: Com. Claudy PASSED BY CONSENSUS & Com. Koenitzer 2-0 MOTION TO APPROVE: August 13, PC-3l5, Regular Meeting Planning Commission, amended as as follows: Page 7, par. 2, line 3, Com. Blaine. change to read ... "suggested a change in the policy calling for 20% of resi- dential areas to be done in moderate...." Pages 5 through l3, ITEM #2 of Agenda, change spelling of name of Mr. Jason Chartier (from Charpier). MOTION TO APPROVE: Com. Cla1'1dy Second: Com. Blaine PASSED 3-0 Abstained: None Absent: Com. Adams & Com. Koenitzer PC-3l6 Page 2 MINUTES AUGUST 27, 1979 REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION POSTPONEMENTS ITEM #1, Application 24-Z-77 of CITY OF CUPERTINO (TOWN CENTER) as per Staff request for 2-week continuance. MOTION TO CONTINUE: Com. Blaine Second: Com. Claudy PASSED BY CONSENSUS Absent: Com. Adams & Com. Koenitzer 3-0 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Assistant Planner Piasecki called attention to the letter in the packets from Ms. Anita D. Marsh, 7429 Wildflower Way, per- taining to Item #2 on the Agenda, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM #2, Applications l3-Z-79, l7-TM-79 and l6-U-79 of J.M.T. DEVELOPMENT CO.: REZONING approximately 1.5 gross acres from Rl (Single-family residential to P (Planned Development with residential cluster intent) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide approximately two acres into 15 parcels con- sisting of 13 residential parcels, one common area parcel and one parcel equaling approximately .5 of an acre to accommo- date future development; USE PERMIT to construct 13 single- family cluster homes and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environ- mental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located o~ the north side of Wildflower Way approximately 200 ft. east~rly of Poppy Way. First Hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date September 17, 1979. Assistant Planner Piasecki briefly reviewed the consensus of the Commissioner's recommendations from the previous meeting, PC-3l5, August 13, 1979, and exhibited the appli- cant's response in new plans. He said the Staff was gener- ally pleased with the revisions (two options being proposed); Site Plan I and Site Plan II. Investigation indicated that 124 trips for traffic could be generated by the development, but only 82 would be using Wildflower or Poppy. Calling attention to Ms. Marsh's letter (included in the packets), he summarized her concern for the problems generated by any additional traffic on residential streets. He noted that Wildflower is used by commercial customers wishing to use the Rainbow Drive signal light; however, he said that although it wa~ felt the development would not impact the area, it was felt that it should be followed up for possible installation of signs or lights. MINUTES AUGUST 27, 1979 REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION PC-316 Page 3 Assistant P1anner Piasecki related that the Staff had re- viewed the San Jose plans, felt they were reasonable, and felt that the 5-10 range was agreeable for the area. He noted the changes in the Conditions pertinent to the latest plans. A tentative plan drawing of the Gateway Concept for the development was distributed to the Commissioners and in terested parties, and he advised that the Gateway would be required immediately in some variation of the design with a single tree and river rock. The upkeep would require the developer to install a pipe under the street for watering; although, it was proposed that the city might bave responsi bility for care of the tre~otherwise. (Two trees total.) COM. BLAINE asked Assist. City Engineer Whitten what effect the gateway would have on traffic, and she was told it woul tend to slow traffic in that pattern differences in streets tended to alert drivers to move over and drive more careful Fifteen percent of the drivers would continue being problem , and he doubted that people would select a different route because of the design. CHR. GATTO asked about the car-count on Wildflower Way. Assist. City Engineer Whitten advised that examination of the records from San Jose was just getting underway and a delay could be expected because of the 97 rolls of micro- film to edit, excerpting information pertinent to Cupertino from the information covering the whole City of San Jose. CHR. GATTO recommended working out a program for presentati n to City Council as the plan might be considered precedent setting. Mr. Guy Frazee, 3238 McKinley Drive, Santa Clara, CA, repre senting Dick Finnegan, Inc., the applicant's designer noted that they had responded to previous suggestions of the Planning Commission and felt that further recommendations 0 the Staff and the Planning Commission would be met. Re agreed to reworking the design plans for the units creating visual impact into adjoining neighborhoods and within the developing neighborhood by relocating windows, adding fin walls, etc.; and; he added that they intended to use land- scaping to further attain that goal. In response to CRR. GATTO'S questioning, Mr. Frazee said he preferred Site Plan I as being more adaptable to saving more trees, and being more pleasing as to setbacks. PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED: Com. Claudy Second: Com. Blaine PASSED Absent: Com. Adams & Com. Koenitzer 3-0 CRR. GATTO pointed out the reasons why he preferred Site Plan I for the area: l) less congestion on wildflower, 2) its internal orientation of living spaces, 3) substantial distance from houses to the rear, 3) lack of appearance of congestion, 4) curb cuts better placed,S) although solar MINUTES AUGUST 27, 1979 REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION PC-316 Page 4 energy might be sacrificed, the overall ambiance of the de- velopment was pleasing. COM. CLAUDY asked that landscaping or such other measures as possible, to be used to disguise the jutting fence between the two properties on Wildflower. Asst, Planner Piaseck! amended the Conditions applying to Site Plan I, (Listed under Com. Blaine's motion to approve 16-U-79.) MOTION: VOTE: Absent: MOTION: VOTE: Absent: 110TION: VOTE: Absent: Com. C1audy to grant a Negative Declaration. Second: Com. Blaine PASSED 3-0 Com. Adams & Com. Koenitzer Com. Blaine, recommend approval 13-Z-79, Standard Conditions #1 through #14; Condition 1115 amended to read Exhibit A, 1st Revision. Second: Com. C1audy PASSED 3-0 Com. Adams & Com. ~oenitzer Com. Blaine, recommend approval 16-U-79, Standard Conditions #1 through #14; Condition #15 as amended to read Exhibit A, 1st Revision; Condition #16 - strike; Condition #17, amended to read "...story of the units which adjoin...."... Last sentence to read ..."other units within the project shall be shifted to avoid direct views into rear yards, etc...."; Condition 1118, strike 1st sentence. Condition 112l and Condition #22 - strike; , Conditions #23 through #25 in accordance with Findings and Subconclusions of Staff Report. Second: Com. C1audy PASSED 3-0 Com. Adams & Com. Koenitzer MINUTE ORDER: To Architectural & Site Control Review concerns of fence of two properties facing Wildflower and concern of trees to minimize privacy intrusion along the westerly boundary line between this property and the residences. MINUTE ORDER: To Staff Request priority, as feasible, request as to impact of Rainbow cut-through from San Jose impacting Wildflower.