Loading...
PC 08-13-79 \..1 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone (408) 252-4505 PC-315 Page 1 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA CALL TO ORDER: 7:40 p.m. SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commission~rs Present: Chairman Gatto Commissioner Koenitzer Commissioner Blaine Absent: Commissioner Claudy Commissioner Adams Staff Present: Asst. Planning Director Cowan Asst. Planner Piasecki Asst. City Engineer Whitten Asst. City Attorney Kilian Asst. City Attorney Aiken APP~OVAL OF MINUTES: July 9, 1979, PC-313, Regular Moeting Planning Commission, amended as follows: Page 3, par. 4, strike 1st sentence. Insert: "Commissione Blaine ~sked Staff if possible vacancies in the Town Canter Complex were responsible for the apparent excess parking at said complex, and she asked Staff to check out the vacancy rate at the complex." MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED, Com. Koenitzer Second: Com. Blaine PASSED Absent: 3-0 Com. Claudy and Com. Adams POSTPONEMENTS - NEW AGENDA ITEMS ITEM #3, Applications lO~Z-79 and 12-TM-79 of MAY INVEST- MENT, INC. Request of Applicant for one month's contitlUan 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC HEARING OPENED \ PC-315 Page 2 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION ITEM #1, Application 18-U-78 of MEDEVAC, INCORPORATED: USE PERMIT request for an amendment of the conditions on a previously approved use permit, to expand hours of operation to provide for a twenty-four hour emergency medical service facility and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project was prev- iously assessed hence no action is required. Said property is located at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vista Drive in a P (Planned Development with general com- mercial and office intent) zoning district. First hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - September 4, 1979. Assistant Planning Director Cowan reviewed the conditions of t}l~ request for the operation of Medevac jointly with the emergency medical facility owned and presently operated by Dr. ~Iarc Congress at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vista Drive, and extension of the hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. to include the hours 11:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. (24 hours daily). Dr. Marc Conyress, Use Permit holder explained that calls would be tied into the 911 Emergency system for a paramedi- cal unit located on the premises. He assured the Commissioners that the original Use Permit had been acquired solely for the purpose of his own services; however, he explained, the County wished to locate in his facility because of the con- venience of the showers and the convenience of training the paramedics on the site. The Commissioners questioned Dr. Congress as to how many ambulances would be on the premises, the nature of the calls, the siren problems associated with ambtllance vehicles, the orojected future use of the facility and the expansion, if an~ of services, either by him or by Medevac under the contract with the County. Dr. Con~ress stated that he was disappointed that Medevac had no representative present to explain their proposed plans, and he said he was unfamiliar with their operatíon. Hr. Robert Hess, a resident of Vista Gardens, stated his strong opposition to the expansion of use of the building. He noted the zoning regulations and ordinances, which he said he felt prohibited extension of service to provide 24-hour use. He maintained that the change of Use Permit was the beginning of further and future changes; and, it was his con- tention that, based on available information, the aim was to establish a base hospital and ambulance service tied to the 911 System, which he felt might lead to establishing a drunk tank and drug addict treatment center. Mr. Hess charged that Hedevac had acted deceptively in not admitti~ to having bid on a County Contract in a proposal dated February 9, 1979, to having executed a contract on May 1, and to having received on July 25, 1979 $399,000 on the contract that was begun on July 1, 1979. He said he felt it to be odd that upon receiving the funds on July 25, 1979, they had requested the change in Use Permit to operate on a 24-hour basis that same day. MINUTES AUGUST 13. 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSIO Mr. Iless continued that his concern was that Medevac had solicited the contract, that they were asking permission t operate a service over and beyond the original Use Permit; and, he asked, rhetorically, how much further would HEW be behind this amendment with further requests for additional services. He offered a copy of the contract to the Com- missioners, which was accepted with the option to make a copy and return his copy to him. Mr. Hess further said he opposed the eight ambulances that were covered in the con- tract. PC-3l5 Page 3 Assistant Planning Director Cowan clarified the eight am- bulances mentioned in the contract as being distributed betwean Cupertino and Gilroy -- the condition of the con- tract actually being that only one ambulance would be on the premises under discussion. Ms. Lillian Quirk, 20251 Reinsll Place, right behind the fence from the operation, expressed her oppostion to ex- tending hours because of the noise factor. She suggested a 24-hour service should and could be located elsewhere. Mr. Jerrv Holloway, 20250 Reinell, a resident for about a month at that address, s~ated it was his understanding when he moved in that they were talking about an emergency clinic that did not require hospitalization, and which was to be open during the day. He felt it was extremely devio s of the gentlemen involved not to have shared their know- ledge of the County Contract and the projected use of the premises. Secondly, he said it was his expectation that the extended service could only proliferate into a patient care emergency hospitalization service. De advised that he saw no difficulty with using good county facilities already available and felt the 911 System should be tied into those underused facilities. The disturbance of siren in the neighborhood was particularly of concern to him. Ms. Rushell Parker, 20250 Reinell Place, said she opposed the Use Permit. As a health care professional, a member of the faculty of the medical school at Stanford, and a part-time employee of the County, Ms. Parker cautioned that the facility could be used as a conduit for double charging patients and could develop into an intermediary care situation prior to moving patients into qualified medical facilities. She said she felt the cemptation could be great to establish a drunk tank and drug addict center in that location. Those patients would then be re- leased onto the streets in a residential area where there was lack of adequate transportation available during the middle of the night. Mr. William Blasser, 20253 Cartwright Way, said he was a retired Captain of the San Mateo Sheriff's Office, having served for thirty-one years. He pointed out the proximity of intersections near the site; and, he stated that in or- der for vehicles to be protected under insurance, it would PC-315 Page 4 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION be required for the ambulances to run with sirens and claxons going. His experience with ambulance drivers was that they were not professionally discrete enough to use sirens judiciously until they were old enough to retire or had moved on up the ladder eLsewhere. Referring to the story of the camel asking for permission to put just his head in the Arab's tent to get it out of the wind, and then moving in altogether, he said hetd like to have the Com- missioners think about this group having its head in and knowing where they were going. He said he felt the average citizen should have recourse to the protection of the City against such plans. Ms. Jean Blasser, 20253 Cartwright Way, supported the fine hospital services in the area; and, she said she failed to see any virtue in the Hedevac enterprise. She pointed out that emergency service was available at local hospitals on a 24-hour basis, and the citizens should be encouraged to use those established faciLities. Ms. Barbara Dickson, 20262 Cartwright, reported that a high, blank wall backed up to them, which was contrary to the promises that had been made at the original Use Permit meeting. She felt she had been deceived once, and now she said she felt that she was being deceived further. She questioned the circumstance of the party to the appli- cation for the amended Use Permit for joint use of the property not being informed about substantive facts per- taining to the present and future development of the facility. Dr. Marc Congress spoke up to say that he had nothing to do with Medevac in that his operation was entirely separate. He added that it was not his intention or wish to create anxiety or hostility within the community. Mr. Clayton Scott, 20282 Cartwright, requested that the ~ommissioners rent~irp an Environmental Impact study on the Medevac issue with emphasis on the total noise level of the ~rea. Mr. Edward Cali, 20430 Stevens Creek Boulevard said the only comment he wished to make was to call attention to his having about 110 employees and having had many emergencies through the Sunnyvale Clinic -- three to four miles away. The serious injuries, he said, could have been handled more expeditiously through local facilities. In response to CHR. GATTO, Mr. Cali confirmed that most accidents happened during daytime working hours, the exception being a workman falling about three floors one midnight. PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED 3-0 MOTION: Com. Koenitzer. Second: Com. Blaine Absent: Com. Claudy & Com. Adams COM. KOENITZER said that in response to the sentiments of MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSIO PC-31S Page 5 citizens, and considering _the example of the camel with th head in the door, he'd like to have a presentation in dept from Medevac as to present plans and future plans. He asked if the Public Safety Commission was acquainted with Medevac. (Assistant Plannins Director Cowan did not know.) COM. BLAINE observed that the executed and activated con- tract with the County seemed to be a well-kept secret, and she recommended continuing the consideration of the Use Permit until a Medevac representative appeared before them. Assistant Planning Director Cowan noted that the concern was the noise, and then the long-term growth of the fa- cility. He asserted that the development of the project could be controlled by the City. He suggested a dis- cussion with City Manager Quinlan, who was aware of the project. And, Mr. Cowan informed the Commissioners that the Xedevac unit was presently housed in the Cupertino Cornoration Yards. A suggestion he'd advise toward limiti g siren noise would be a trade-off between the fire depart- ment and Medevac in sharing emergency calls. CRR. GATTO pointed out the statement that the matter had already been assessed; but, he said, the amended Use Permi went to a different set of uses. He recommended a clear definition of Medevac intentions, the number of vehicles involved at any given time, the expected expansion plans for one, three and five-year intervals, and a complete Environmental Review Committee re-evaluation. It seemed to him, he explained, that the concerns of the citizens were well-founded and needed to be heeded. PASSED Absent: Com. Blaine, to continue Application l8-U-78 - MEDEVAC, INC. to the meeting of September 10, 197 pending investigation and information to answer the questions raised during the Public Hearing and the Commissioner's discussion. Second: Com. Koenitzer TO CONTINUE 3-0 Com. Claudy & Com. Adams MOTION: 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 whateve zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Com- mittee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located on the southeast corner of Steven Creek Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard. First hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - September 4, 1979. PC-315 Page 6 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION Assistant Planning Director Cowan informed the Commissioners that the purpose of the discussion of the Town Center for the meeting was to receive input from the Commissioners, from the public, and from the owners of the properties, as to the conceptual plans exhibited as Alternate Plans A, B, and C, which were mounted on the wall. He briefly high- lighted the elements of the plans and explained that the details of the proposed plans could be read on Page 4 of the Staff Report of August 10, 1979. He pointed out that the Staff was suggesting that after discussion the hearing be continued for two weeks in order to provide opportunity for public review of the recommendations. COM. BLAINE asked if traffic projections had been made to determine flow and access of the total property, one section to another, or coming through the extension with access and parking at the park. Assistant Planning Director Cowan explained that the situation might call for gross zoning in order to develop the total area as was done with the Regional Shopping Center. In this instance he said there was some basis for infor- mation -- at least all the factors. Three quarters trips for each unit was a starting point and would change relative to the number of units proposed to be constructed in the areas. Bedroom sizes, income levels, price cielings and mix would relate to traffic generation. COM. BLAINE suggested that perhaps underground types of streets or overpasses might be a solution to busy streets intersecting. Noting 200,000 sq. ft. of commercial and 450 units oE residential, she asked if anything had been done to evaluate what kind of traffic was going to be moving through the area. Mr. Cowan promised to dig up in- formation on that aspect of the traffic problem. COM. BLAINE questioned the number or percentage of moderate to low income housing. She asked if the percentage had been changed to the 10% because of the below market rate housing program initiated. And, she asked, what of the 20% percentage. Assistant Planning Director Cowan reminded her of the 1977 review provided for 20% requirement; then, the General Plan adopted the 10%. He explained that the 10% applied to home ownership, and then there was the 10% applied for rental. He interpreted the plan under review would permit the less restrictive General Plan percentages to prevail. COM. BLAINE recalled that 20% had been decided specifically and exclusively for Town Center because of the nature of the development, and she wished to have it returned to con- sideration. Attachment A (Community Objectives, page 1) #6, in the back -- Resolution 1803, Planning Commission; #4, Attachment A talks about 20% moderate income housing. She reminded the Commissioners that it was adopted by the City Council on February 21, 1978. PC-315 "-Pa~e 7 1 , j ¡MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION Assistant Planning Director Cowan read the pertinent passage from the General Plan and explained that the General PI h d b "I an a een 81 ~nt on the question of percentage. He continued that it was the lntent that an applicant would meet needs through a Section ,VIII pr~gram ~- federal subsidy. Ten percent was equitable for ownershlp"pr~Jects, but the 20% would be restrictive for applicants; and he sald lt was felt that a 10% composite was realistic and reason- able. Com. ~laine suggested a change in the policy calling for 20% or resi- dent all are~s to be done in moderate income rental housing. In this case she sald that the 400 units should be 20% l"n moder t· h '. 0 . a e lllcorne QUS- ~ng ownershlp or rental not being specified, but the specification that lt be s?atter~d ap~l~ing. She said she felt the policy adopted was valid, but thelr seml-offlclal policy that also applied, that was also valid. , I ¡COM. KOENITZER indicated he did not feel altogether com- I' fortabl~ about the manner in which the layout would function for public' use. CRR. GATTO inquired as to the acquisition methods for the land requircd for the park; and, he was told that it was to be acquired through dedication by developers and the General Fund -- the Capital Improvements Program. Since the total of the funds would not be available at one time, it would be necessary to work out arrangements for total funding of acquisitions. Suggested contribution by com- ~ercial devclopers mi~ht be considered. CRR. GATTO turned to the expectation that virtually no commute traffic would be using the route through the Town Center as a dodge around major intersections and thoro fares in the area. [ Assistant City Engineer Whitten advised that the policy was to discourage commute traffic through the use of the loop plan around Town Center. Left turn restriction and alteration of timing of signal lights during peak traffic times would further discourage commute traffic. CHR. GATTO said he was aware of that, but what he wished to know was whether or not there was any new data that indi- cated commute traffic would not benefit from dodging into the area at peak traffic hours. In other words, he asked if there was data to indicate commute traffic volume would require the installation or such a circuitous movement of traffic through Town Center. Assistant City Engineer Whitten mentioned work done for the Eity Council that indicated there would be no problem on the northsidc; however, he added, the large question would be what was going to happen to Route 85. . GATTO asked for some numbers to substantiate the con- clusion. He was assured that given the traffic patterns imagined, going through Town Center would not be a good move. MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION PC-3l5 Page 8 It was agreed that more hard data was needed. CHR. GATTO advised the audience that the meeting was the first of several public hearings to provide information and data for the development of the Town Center. And he asked that speakers keep in mind that they were discussing only a general framework for a basis for definitive plans for the Town Center. Mr. G. D. Gibson, 119 Bryant Street, Palo Alto, representing the Coal Company owners of seven acres adjoining the Northern California Savings and Loan and crossing Torre Avenue, and directly across from City Hall. He reminded the Commissioners that as representatives of the Cali in- terests and his own interests, he had disr.ussed plans for the area with members of the Staff; however, he said that since he had received the plans for this major conceptural change at 3:30 p.m. tl1at afternoon, he was unable to deal with it intelligently until he had time to really read it over. He said that in 1977, the Cali interests, the Coal Company, and the May Investment Company had hired an econ- omic and market analysis for information to be given to th Planning Commission and City Council for revision of the 1963-64 plan for the Town Center. The same major concerns had surfaced as had just been discussed by the Commissione s. In his opinion he said he felt the one-way pattern for the Town Center would create hazards and confusion and would b detrimental in that it would create separation of uses in the Town Center, and could create an island for the type 0 people using a park in that location. His experience in- dicated major turning points in the middle of a develop- ment -- any type of traffic congestion or shopping pattern' would exacerbate any type of problems arising. Referring to Alternate Plans A and B, he said that having had their analysts go over it at the time it was presented to the City in 1977, they had concluded that it was the better traffic flow for the property. He said he'd like a clari- fication of the change from anchor property, and also a clarification of what public offices meant, and clarifi- cation of specific design suggestions for height and lower height buildings. As for the park, Mr. Gibson re- lated the park problems of Palo Alto, where he was a resi- dent, and predicted that the parks are usually a source of grief for nearby residents and law enforcement; and, he added that problems occurred more easily and quickly in non-activity parks. Mr. Gibson concluded by suggesting that more study should be given to tying or integrating commercial and residential areas. Mr. Jason :Chartier , May Investment Company, 20160 Homestead -R;)ad-, Cupe~rtino, stated that he was the owner of fourteen plus acres which were designated as residential. Indicating the exhibits, he said that the yellow area rep- resented his interests, basícally. In processing an application through HUD to build Section VIII units, in 1978, he said he had dropped the plan because of the con- PC-315 _ P ag e 9 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION centration of low income housing, and he felt the mixture proposed was better. However, he advised that 20% on the rentals would work, but that 10% would be a stiff requirp- ment. The 20% would not be really economically feasible in considering giving up 10% on low cost, which translated into giving up 10% plus potential income. Increased density also had to be considered; subterranean parking slabs, and government (HUD) rules and regulations added up to expenses, and 20% subsidy on rentals and 20% on housing would make it impossible. Building minimal, high-density housing would not make it for what the Town Center expectations seemed to be. He said their aim was to build something more than a basic rental so that their project would be compatible with the surrounding Town Center. The suggestion was made that they should get together and talk about a difference bet"een the 20% and 10%. Mr. Chartier predicted that if he got into a bind he'd have to drop this project. The esca- lation of costs was further inequity, which was based on inrlation and the proposed necessity for park dedication based on numbers of units and/or people. COM BLAINE hazarded the guess that she thought this was something new for HUD, and she agreed that it computed to 40 out of 200 units at 20%. John Ottoboni,lOl Park Center Plaza, San Jose, representing the Cali Interests, wished to be brief and concurred with all the remarks of the previous speaker. He indicated the rour areas or concern initially 1) trarric patterns, which seem to be much different than two years ago; 2) the park raising questions or "do you want the park and where do you want it;" 3) reasibility or developing it in the way being discussed in the Starr Report; 4) clarirication or what the Starr is trying to say about open spaces, high and low building locations. He cautioned that in order ror any discussions to be had with interested developers they'd have to have answers to those kinds or questions. Assistant Planning Director Cowan brierly explained that the concept of Point 4 mentioned (by Mr. John Ottoboni ) would provide a visual corridor out to the center or town -- the crossroads. The second visual corridor would encompass a view of the park or plaza. And the third visual corridor was directed toward the mountains as a rocal point. He re- minded the Commissioners or the statement in the beginning or the plan that talked to reasibility and allowed that these were objectives to strive ror in the planning for Town Center. He said the thrust of Staff planning was to provide basic guidelines in many areas for the use or project architectural teams. CHR. GATTO observed that guidelines tend to become specific. Mr. Jason Chartipr . May Investment Company, spoke again and requested resolution of the number or mixture of low income housing units; and, he advised that although another meeting MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION PC-315 Page 10 was scheduled for two week hence, he'd like to have a reply as soon as possible. It was something that had to be settl_d because HUD only gave so much time to him, and he sug- gested a decision on the one proposal only. Mr. Gibson, returned to recommend open space be separated from housing units. Talking with developers was difficult because some case could be made for their negotiating for a park when they reviewed the City plans for the area. In general he approved of the total plan and was pleased with with overall concept, but felt handicapped by some rather restrictive and specific guidelines indicated in the Staff Report. COM. GATTO suggested the Commission address basic policy in order to get Staff working on the plans. He asked if possibilities could be developed to eliminate the one way road patterns. Another decision had to corne as to dis- tribution and numbers for it. Thirdly, he wished the park question and its function to be defined. PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED: Motion: Chr. Gatto. Second: Com. Blaine PASSED 3-0 Absent: Corn. Claudy & Corn. Adams COM. BLAINE hoped they were talking about 200 units of housing, 20% of rental housing for moderate income familie and having families rather than one-bedroom units. ~r. Torn Spencer. Bank of America, responded to Com. Blaine by saying Mr. Chartier's project was family oriented but did * not necessarily preclude elderly; and excluding children would be anti-government policy. Therefore, children would be included in the project. COM. BLAINE commended the 50% rental. And she added that she'd not like to see the whole project go rental. As for 20% on homeowner occupied, she suggested 10% under HUD and 10% under the City BMR program, or picking up 10% on the rental units. But, above all, staying with the 20% across the board. COM. KOENITZER supported 20% as ideal for him, but he could understand the financial problems of the developers and the necessity of having to drop to 10%. He recommende further discussion of financial backing for tllC rental program. COM. GATTO agreed with Com. Koenitzer in that the ownershi units should be consistent with the rest of the city -- 10; and allowing 20% for rental units. COM. GATTO asked for discussion of the park. COM. BLAINE opted for a plaza rather than a park and asked for a place to provide activities and games in the neighborhood. PC-315 lage 11 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION COM. KOENITZER noted the isolation of the park or plaza being surrounded by streets and uncertainty of traffic volume and flow. He noted that City Hall was not on the main street, and he was having difficulty locating a plaza off a major street and not even located near City lIall for identification as a civic center. He recommended moving the light blue area across from City Hall and he failed to see a problem with it next to residential. He questioned the adequacy of the functioning of the area as a park or a plaza. CHR. GATTO agreed with moving the blue area over and referred to the Rodriquez-Torre intersection as a major one and he suggested putting the opening at that location, thus unifying all four sections of the quadrant. He was concerned by the traffic pattern in Alternate A and recommended possible use of grade separations; although, he said that more than two lanes might make crossing difficult. The 50 acres -- not a hugh amount of land -- might be blown out of proportion. He re-emphasized the importance of traffic studies. He felt a "walkway-like" setting from City Hall to the intersection of Stevens Creek would help unify the various sections and uses of the area, would create a pleasantness for pedestrians, and be safe as well, even as it maintained idenity for Town Center. Com. Blaines suggestion that a road surrounding the area for traffic and maintenance did not appeal to him. Assistant Planning Director Cowan advanced the idea that a private road integrated into the development might be feasible. cna GATTO explained that he felt the plan should be kept flexible enough that it would lend itself to multi-uses as required. The plaza in the center of a private area would iso- late it from public use, and also would create parking problems within and outside the private area. The more the areas are organized the more the success of uses would be, he predicted; and, he added that although they were calling it park space, he felt it would be more reasonably con- sidered visual relief for local residents. A~eaker from the audience suggested a meandering road. CHR. GATTO agreed with COM. KOENITZER regarding splitting the area and favored relocating the blue area. ¡CRR. GATTO asked for comments on limiting the yellow area exclusively to residential. COM. KOENITZER reminded the Commissioners that from 1963, but most certainly since 1977, the eastern part might be residential, but the western part might be residential or commercial; and he stated he'd feel comfortable with the eastern part in residential. COM. BLAINE brought up the "toe of the yellow boot" and COM. GATTO suggested forgetting the "toe" in order to decide whether or not they'd want to see less than fourteen acres to the area. It was agreed that more was good and less was not to be considered. MINUTES AUGUST l3, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSI01 PC-315 Page 12 COM. BLAINE suggested developers should keep in mind inte- grating new development with old developments. She agreed with CRR. GATTO that making Rodriquez a mall or walkway would locate the park at the foot of that area, across fro City Hall, and would also serve to integrate areas. Mr. Jason 'Chartier asked for guidance as to how the split on rental and ownership ratio should go. COM. BLAINE ad- vised him to consult with Sue Hastings of the Staff. He then asked whether or not, in a trade-off, the Commission would discuss more or less of one type of unit than the other -- rental vs. ownership units, HUD or HEW, etc. CHR. GATTO requested specific plans from owner-developers, based upon what had been discussed during the meeting bein used as guidelines and parameters. At that point he said it would be possible to review plans and firm-up trade- of£s. Mr. G. D. Gib90n, or the Coal Company, prefaced his remark with labeling himself ". possible owner of a park," and went on to refer to the Alternate Plan of 1977, page 2, par. 2 & 3, which represented a plan he had funded, and which also represented an escrow he had closed on the basi of the plan. He quoted from the plan, specifically pointi g out the methods for funding of public lands or parks by dedication or by taxes on commercial developments. He asked what would be the process if he submitted plans for putting offices on the blue area. CllR. GATTO stated the usual process was a conceptual plan and a Planning Department review; however, he advised that at the present there is no conceptual plan. A Use Permit and conceptual plan would require consideration of the project. If the City, based on a decision as to whether 0 not the area was to b~ public or private, decided it was t be public, then the onus would be on the City to devise means for effectuating that result; funding and inclusion of the landowner in the decision. Mr. Edward Cali, represent Cali Interests, said he took the liberty of showing the latest plan to two or three developers, who had been amazed at the one-way street pattern and the extensive changes from the 1977 plan. They had verified his worst fears about the expense of the plan but had been unable to guess as to the feasibility of the plan. He asked if it was possible to delay planning on the 26 acres under Cali Interests' control and work with the city as to what the city wished at that time. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: Absent: Com. Claudy & Com. Koenitzer Second: Com. Blaine PASSED Com. Adams 3-0 PC-315 ..!'age 13 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION Assistant Planning Director Cowan clarified the following directions from the Commissioners. They wanted expected traffic generation, excluding the information not available as to Route 85 plans, in about two week's time; housing percentages at 10% for ownership and 20% for rental; park interest would be in exploring acquisition of space for the park; and a conceptual plan for the yellow section of Alternate A going ahead in any variation of development. De asked if that meant still going ahead with the other side of the road with the object of getting guidelines -- the road and park being the main guidelines spoken to. Absent: Com. Koenitzer, to Continue 24-Z-77 to August 27, 1979, Item #1 on the Agenda. Second: Corn. Blaine PASSED 3-0 Com. Claudy & Corn. Adams NOTION: RECESS: 10:25 p.m. RECONVENED: 10:35 p.m, ITEM #4, Application 13-2-79, l7-TM-79 and l6-U-79 of J.M.T. DEVELOPMENT CO.: REZONING approximately 1.5 gross acres from R-l (Single-family residential) to P (Planned Develop- ment 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 consisting of 13 residential parcels, one common area parcel and one parcel equaling approximately .5 of an acr acre to accomodate future development; USE PERMIT to con- struct 13 single-family cluster homes and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The said property is located on the north side of Wildflower Way approximately 200 ft. easterly of Poppy Way. First hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - September 4, 1979. Assistant Planner Piasecki digested the content of the Staff Report and illustrated on the board some of the character- istics of the development. He added that another concern would be the access from Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road and whether a left-turn in or right-turn out situation would happen. He said the answer was not available from the State. For interpretation on the policy on the property, he referred the Commissioners to Planning Commission Meeting PC-314, Item #6 on the Agenda. The Tentative Map was exhibited and pertinent characteristiœwere reviewed. The layout of the subdivision was shown, and it was recommended that design changes should be made, and the Architectural Committee do a detail study on the design changes. Traffic impacts had been done in anticipation of neighborhood reservations, and using a ratio 9.5 trips for a single-family home, the development would generate 82 additional trips/day on Poppy Way and Wildflower, the segment going up to Rainbow or 50% of all the trips generated by all of the project. The Commission members discussed setbacks, building heights, redesign on units to change impacts. PC-315 Page 14 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION PC-315 Page 14 Mr. Bonn Mills, with Dick Finigan, 3238 McKinley Drive, Santa Clara, representing the Applicant, said that they wer willing to go along with the continuation; however, he aske that instead of a month they'd like to limit it to two weeks. It was his opinion that all the concerns could be resolved within that period of time. He noted the grade difference on the site along the back side and said he ex- pscted to be able to havs 20 ft. driveways, saving two trees, (Losing two pines), and flip the units around. Mr. Thurlow Scott, 1320 Flower Court, a neighbor, questione traffic impacts, and described the nature of impediments to traffic flow in the area. The density of the housing bothered him, and he opposed the rezoning. Mr. Tim Kierodino (phonetic), 7411 Wildflower Way, felt the traffic flow would be hazardous to the many children in the area. He noted the locations of Jack in the Box and a Woolworth's Garden Center, both of which created traffic; and he concluded by saying that the density of the new development would add to the volume of traffic and it would be through the residential area because of the traffic flow patterns in the area. Narrowing streets and three or four bad turns should be considered carefully as accident areas. Blocking off the commercial from the residential was one of his suggestions for solving some part of the traffic problem. A Petition copy, original of which had been sub- mitted to San Jose, was transmitted to the Commissioners. Mr. John Woodridge, 1322 Flower Court, referring to the map, pointed out that he lived behind units that were to be located right on top of the fence, the building height towering above his property. He said the children used Poppy Way for going to school and did not need further traffic problems. The incompatibility of the proposed landscaping bothered him. He was opposed to the density and the traffic. Mr. Toro Yamokomi (phonetic), one of the owners in the property, advised that units were sold to single people and older people working at the nursery or closeby. He promise to attempt to redesign the development to make it more com- patible with the neighborhood. COM. BLAINE and COM. KOENITZER agreed on turning properties to front on Wildflower, limiting driveways by combining use, lowering buildings to reduce impacts, and providing ade- quate turn-arounds for fire equipment. COM. BLAINE suggested that the Commission discuss the neigh borhood gateway, which was to be financed by a bond and street improvement agreement for precise location and in- stallation at a later date. The off-site improvements would also be required. PC-315 -Page 15 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION Assistant Planner Piasecki explained that the Gateway would be in the public right-of-way, the developer financing the arrangement for a traffic kick-out, raised planter bed, etc. 7he Architectural Committee should review it. In response to CHR. GATTO, Mr. Piasecki said the gateway concept was part of the recently adopted General Plan. COM. BLAINE inquired as to whether the median was in on Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road. Assistant City Engineer Whitten said a State program from the City of Saratoga to Sevens Creek Boulevard showed a double left turn at that point. He added that information was unavailable from the State because of their vacation schedules. At some point he expected medians all the way down the area. CRR. GATTO hoped that the density would be modified with redesign of the Sit~ Plan. Two concerns to him would be landscaping similar to the existing design on Wildflower, and fewer curb cuts -- no more than two to represent two 80 ft. frontages. In addition, he recommended the units abutting the westerly side be setback further or other con- figuration in locating buildings relieve impacts on other existing housing. Absent: Com. Blaine, for Continuance until August 27, 1979. Second: Com. Koenitzer PASSED 3-0 Com. C1audy & Com. Adams MOTION: ITEM #5, Application l5-U-79 of EDWARD YAMAOKA: USE PERMIT to operate a 3,000 sq. ft. cocktail lounge within the ex- isting Portal Plaza Shopping Center and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located on the northeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Portal Avenue in a CG (General Commercial) zoning district. First hearing. Assistant Planning Director Cowan exhibited a map showing the location of the proposed cocktail lounge and said the Staff recommended approval with specific conditions that live entertainment and recorded music would not go beyond the property line to residents property on Wheaton Drive. The Sheriff's Office had no concern for problems being created for the community. Mr. George Yamaoka, 781 Wolfe Road, Sunnyvale, representing his brother, the Applicant, Edward Yamaoka, said he'd be willing to answer questions. COM. BLAINE noted that lot would be repaired. and that it was in the a requirement was that the parking Mr. Yamaoka said that was no problem, process of being taken care of. MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSIO PC-3l5 Page 16 Assistant City Engineer Whitten explained that the shoppin center was rather old and was like many older developments in that repair was needed with time. He advised there was no problem with the repair. Mr. Donald Wri~ht, 19698 Wheaten Drive, directly behind th proposed lounge. Having taken a survey of his own, he had noted that between Wolfe & Stevens Creek and Bandley & Stevens Creek at Highway #9, he'd found eight establish- ments and another coming in. The places in the Vall co Fashion Plaza added up to eleven. Extending the survey to Route #280, along Stevens Creek, there was a total of seventeen places. He opposed another place. Increased deliveries bothered him along with increased traffic. Tras from the liquor store was thrown into his yard sometimes; and, further he said that debris from a bicycle shop also ended up in his yard. The fence in back was at a height that permitted direct view into his house. He asked if it was possible to build a higher fence. Assistant Planning Director Cowan, in response to Mr. Wright, outlined various problems that could be considered prohibitive from a noise incursion point of view, and said that although the police had no problems, Mr. Wright would have to tell them what seemed to him to be intolerable. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: MOTION: Second: Com. Koenitzer Com. Blaine PASSED Absent: 3-0 Com. Claudy & Corn. Adams COM. BLAINE expressed the opinion that it was a legitimate use for the area and if a nuisance situation arose, it could be handled appropriately. She suggested an agreemen of shop owners for keeping debris out of residential yards. CON. KOENITZER noted that the proposed lounge was next doo to an existing restaurant and was replacing a liquor store. Even though he did not care for the use, he did not feel that he could object. Mr. George Yamaoka, representing the applicant, explained that the driveway in the back was blocked by 3 inch pipes with chains, which chains could be cÎipped for pass-throug Mr. Donald Wright, resident, asked permission to build up his fence -- actually concrete block. CON. GATTO advised that he could put the fence or wall up to 8 ft. with per- mission from the parties concerned, and he advised Mr~ Wright to check with Staff for details. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: Absent: Com. Claudy Motion: Second: PASSED and Com. Adams Corn. Com. Koenítzer Blaine 3-0 PC-315 P ag e 17 MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION: VOTE: Absent: MOTION: VOTE: Absent: Com~ Koenitzer to approve the Negative Declaration of the Environmenta Review Committee Second: Com. Blaine PASSED 3-0 Com. Claudy & Com. Adams Com. Koenitzer, to approve l5-U-79 with the standard #1 through #14 conditions, #15 through #18 as per Staff Memo of August 7th (Assistant Planning Director Cowan asked for changed of Condition #16 to read ..."...other live entertainment...") Second: Com. Blaine PASSED 3-0 Com. Claudy & Com. Adams * MINUTE ORDER TO CODE ENFORCEMENT by consensus of Commission. inspect fence or concrete block wall at the rear of the residences located on Wheatèn Drive, advise the resident at 19698 Wheaton Drive of his options, and report the results to Staff for the Planning Commission. ITEM #6, Applications l4-Z-79 and 14-U-79 of THORNWOOD A ASSOCIATES: REZONING request for the amendment of the con- ditions on the previously approved Planned Development zoning district to expand the permitted range of commercial activities; USE PERMIT to operate a retail bath and kitchen shop consistin~ of approximately 2,500 sq. ft. and ENVIRON- MENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located in the Homestead Lanes Cneter on the southeast corner of Homestead Road and Stelling Road in a P (Planned Development with Recreational Entertainment and limited commercial intent) zoning district. First hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - September 4, 1979. Assistant Planner Piasecki reviewed the circumstances for amendment of Condition #16, noting that the difficulty with renting facilities because of restrictions had triggered the request before the Commissioners. COM. KOENITZER and COM. BLAINE agreed that the use cer- tainly fit well within a number of agreeable uses. And COM. BLAINE was informed, in response to her inquiry, that there would be another building put on the site. Mr. Ron Smithson, partner in Thornwood Associates, volunteered to answer any questions. He advised the business would be basically a kitchen-bath boutique, which would have small quantities of component parts for specific uses as opposed to hardware stock. COM. BLAINE asked Mr. Smithson about the 25% and whether 25% would be asked for additional buildings. MINUTES AUGUST l3, 1979 REGULAR MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSIO PC-315 Page 18 Assistant Planner Piasecki explained that the request of 25% commercial had to be in partnership with the owners of the intended new building. CHR. GATTO stating that although he knew why the re- strictions had been placed on the project, he felt they were, in his opinion, unduly severe. The demand for the space for recreational facilities was not so great, he fel that the restrictions should continue to create demand. Mr. Ron Smithson, returned to the podium to advise that pronerty upkeep was a problem and was presently of City concern. Relaxing restrictions under Condition #16 would tend to aid in renting the property and curtail unattracti e uses of the property in the area. COM. BLAINE recommended expanded uses for the building at the time the request from the new building owner came be- fore the Commission for approval. MOTION: VOTE: Absent: MOTION: VOTE: Absent: MOTION: VOTE: Absent: Com. Blaine, approve Negative Declaration on Environmental Review Second: Com. Koenitzer PASSED 3-0 Com. Claudy & Com. Adams Com. Blaine, approval l4-Z-79, amending Condition #16 A. & B. as per Staff Report, with Findings and Sub conclusions as recommended by Staff. Second: Com. Koenitzer PASSED 3-0 Com. Claudy & Com. Adams Com. Blaine, approval l4-U-79, no Conditions. Second: Com. Koenitzer PASSED 3-0 Com. Claudy & Com. Adams UNFINISHED BUSINESS ITEM #7, Applications l4-TM-79 and ll-U-79 of MARTIN-HAYES, INC.: TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide one parcel consisting of approximately one acre into five parcels and one lot to be held in common ownership and USE PERMIT to construct five single-family cluster homes. Said property is located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and McClellan Road. (REFERRED BY CITY COUNCIL FOR REPORT ON REVISED PLAN) Assistant Planner Piasecki advised that the Council had agreed with the externally oriented plan and the relocated driveways. Conditions relating to privacy impacts had bee added, and Condition #20, which was given to the Com- missioners, was added to the request. C-315 age 19 , . . 1979 REGULAR-MEETING-PLANNING COMMISSION .j MINUTES AUGUS T 13, Mr. Russ Hayes, of Martin-Hayes, Inc., advised the Com- m~ss~oners, in response to the question, that there was a 25 ft. driveway between the questioned property and the Barr pr"perty. CHR. GATTO, COM. KOENITZER and COM. BLAINE, in a general discussion, agreed tha~ the plan was a great improvement over the previous plan. They agreed that the driveway on Foothill should be moved to McClellan, and Mr. Rayes agreed that it was possible to make the switch. Com. Blaine, recommendation to Report to City Council the Planning Commission approval of 14-TM-79 with Standard Conditions #1 through H14; HIS as modified, and #16 as per Finding and Sub- conclusions of the Staff. Second: Com. Koenitzer PASSED 3-0 Com. C1audy & Com. Adams MOTION: VOTE: Absent: Com. Blaine, approv&l of ll-U-79 with the Standard Conditioris '1 thrdugh '14, #15 through U18 as per Findings and Subconclusìons of Staff; Ul9, change line 3 to read ...features and land- scaping.... U20, as per suggested additional condition of August 13, 1979 by Staff. Each 6f the above as per Findings and Subcon- elusions of Staff. Second: Com. Koenitzer PASSED 3-0 Com. Claudy & Com. Adams HOTION: VOTE: .:~. Absent: CRR. GATTO advised Mr. Rayes that the Application would go back to the City Council on August 20, ,1979. NEW BUSINESS REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ADJOURNMENT <TI(2 . ~/'::J!LLo City Clerk . APPROVED: IdA '2.-- ,... :, . , -. ? c