Loading...
PC 04-09-79 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 MINurES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON APRIL 9, 1979 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CALIF0RNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Ch. Blaine called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Comm. present: Comm. absent: Adams, Claudy, Koenitzer, Gatto, Ch. Blaine None Staff present: Assistant Planning Director Cowan Associate Planner Piasecki Assistant City Attorney Kilian Deputy Assistant City Attorney Aikens ELECTION OF CHAI~~~ AND VICE-CHAIR¥~ Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Adams to nominate Comm. Gatto to the Office of Chairman. Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Claudy to close the nomina- tions. Motion carried, 5-0 AYES: Comm. Adams, Claudy, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine ¡~OES : None ABSTAINED: Comm. Gatto Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Claudy to nominate Comm. Koenitzer to the Office of Vice-Chairman. Moved by Comm. Claudy, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the nomina- t ions. Motion carried, 5-0 AYES: Comm. Adams, Claudy; Gatto, Ch. Blaine NOES: None ABSTAINED: Comm. Koenitzer PC-303 Page 1 PC-303 Page 2 3-TM-79 cont'd to 5/14/79 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Minutes of Regular Meeting of March 26, 1979: Page 2, Item 4 under BMR Housing Program: Add "over GP maximum" at the end of the sentence. Page 3, paragraph ll, line 3, change "working" to "wording". Page 3, last paragraph, last line should read: "family homes. He was interested in a way of distributing impacts more evenly throughout the development." Page 5, paragraph 3, change "Comm. Claudy" to "Comm. Koenitzer" on the first line. Page 7, second paragraph should read: It was moved and seconded for continuance of these applications." Page 7, fourth paragraph from the bottom, next to the last sentence should read: "Housing activity should be designed to remain structurally standing but not necessarily functional in a maximum probable earthquake." Page 8, the two motions were made by Comm. Claudy, not Ch. Blaine. Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Claudy, to approve the Minutes of March 26, 1979, as corrected. POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS Per staff recommendation, it was moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Claudy to continue application 3-TM-79 to May 14, 1979. Motion carried, 5-0 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. MINurES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-303 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Applications 3-Z-79 and 4-U-79 of STATE MUTUAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION: REZONING approximately two acres from CG (General Commercial) to P (Planned Development with resi- dential and commercial intent) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; USE PERMIT to allow construction of a 10,000 sq. ft. commercial/office building and 24 residential townhouse/condominium units and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located on the southwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Finch Avenue. First Hearing continued. The Assistant Planning Director stated the City Council had adopted the BMR Housing Program at their last meeting. They have asked the Legal staff to research the priority portion of it and this may be coming back to the Planning Commission in the near future. Associate Planner Piasecki reviewed the details of the April 6, 1979 staff memo on this application. The pool has been relocated and will be required to have a fence. Some additional parking has been incorporated in the commercial area. State Mutual has stated they are not interested in tying in the commercial and residential. Comm. Claudy noted that it appears on this plan that the residents will have to walk on the public sidewalk in order to get to the pool. Mr. Brown, 960 Battery Street, San Francisco, representing the applicant, said he would like to hear more discussion of the project by the Planning Commissioners and he would then make his comments. He answered Comm. Adams they increased the parking from 40 to 50 spaces; therefore, the pool had to be moved. Ch. Blaine asked if there was some way to let the people walk between the carports to the pool area. Mr. Brown answered that this is 50' long and it would be a maintenance problem. With the pool elevated, there woúld have been a noise problem. Comm. Koenitzer suggested switching the pool and the parking areas. Mr. Brown said the Santa Clara County Water District has stated that having a pool there would weaken the bank. Mr. Brown did not object to Ch. Blaine's suggestion of moving the buildings forward within the 50' setback along Stevens Creek Blvd. PC-303 Page 4 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Comm. Gatto asked the staff to review the numbers once again. The Associate Planner said there will be 1.4 acres residential with 12 units per acre -- which comes to almost 17 units. The 20% increase allows 20 units and they are asking for 19. One unit will be at 100% and one unit at 120%. All B units have been eliminated. Ch. Blaine asked for comments from the audience. Mr. J. Mariani wanted to know what the setback was from the creek. He was told it is 10' from the top of the bank and perhaps another lO-15' from the centerline of the creek. The Associate Planner said the Water District has reviewed the plans and they feel there is adequate setback. Mr. Mariani stressed the fact that there is already a parking problem in that area and he is concerned this proposal will compound the problem. Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 The Commissioners discussed the proposal. It was suggested the pool and parking areas be reversed, if possible. Comm. Koenitzer was somewhat concerned about the parking at the entranceway. Ch. Blaine commented that the number of units on the site fits better now, which solves some of the problems. Comm. Gatto would like H-Control to look at: 1) Reversing the pool and parking areas, if possible. 2) Some kind of on-site pedestrian walkway. 3) H-Control should be allowed flexibility to pull the savings & loan building forward toward Stevens Creek Blvd. to allow more landscaping of the project. 4) H-Control should look at cyclone fencing along the creek. 5) Parking next to the driveway should be reviewed. 6) One of the singular, strong points of this project is the textured pavement rather than asphalt along the parking corridor. It was decided the above should be in the form of a memo to ASAC. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to support the ERC and grant a negative declaration. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to recommend to the approval of application 3-Z-79 with the 14 standard conditions, conditions 15 and 16 in the February 12, 1979 staff report and April 15, 1979, based on Exhibit A modified. AYES: NOES: Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine None Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to approve application 4-U-79 with the l4 standard conditions and conditions l5 - 20 and the findings and sub conclusions in the April 6, 1979 staff report. AYES: NOES: Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine !lone Motion carried, 5-0 The above will be heard by the City Council May 7, 1979. MINUTE ORDER: send a Minute at the bottom Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Order to the ASAC reflecting Comm. of Page 4 of these Minutes. Comm. Adams to Gatto's comments Motion carried, 5-0 2. Application 3-TM-79 of STATE MUTt:AL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOC. Continued to May 14, 1979. 3. Application 2-TM-79 of J. CYRIL & LAPRELE JOHNSON: TENTATIVE MAP to resubdivide eight existing parcels consisting of approximately 9.8 acres into 3 parcels. Parcels 1 & 2 which equal a total of approximately 3 acres are located within the City of Cupertino; Parcel 3 equaling approximately 6 acre are located within the City of Los Altos, and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located on the south side of Homestead Road approximately 300' easter ly of the intersection of Foothill Expressway. First Hearing PC-3D3 Page 5 3-Z-79 approved 4-U-79 approved Minute Order to ASAC PC-3D3 Page 6 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The Associate Planner reviewed the exhibit on the bulletin board and the April 6, 1979 staff report. He answered Comm. Claudy that Paree1 2 will not have any building. Ch. Blaine wanted to reconfirm what portion is in Cupertino and what portion is in Los Altos and what if, in the future, someone wanted to convert to eondominiums. The Assoeiate Planner said this could occur on Parcel 3 only, which is in the City of Los Altos. Comm. Claudy was eoneerned about the fire safety .of one of the older buildings on pareel 1 would have to be brought up to code. Ch. Blaine asked for eomments from the audienee. Mr. Jack Madison, Palo Alto, said he represented the managing owners of this proposal. He said Los Altos has almost zero rental housing. There is some old eommereial on the property now. A year ago he reviewed a proposal but refused to partieipate in the project beeause he did not like what was happening. If they are not able to purchase the old building and tear it down, they are prepared to fix it up so that it will fit in with the proposed new development. There can be no eonversion. Unless this is changed by the City of Los Altos, the units will always be rental housing. Secondly, l/3 of the units will be for persons 55 years and older. That is the only reason the density is 30 units per acre. He said they are developing only Parcels 2 and 3. Pareel 1 is only involved because of the resetting of the property line. Ch. Blaine pointed out how it shows on the map that the buildings on Parcell are to be removed. Mr. Madison said those buildings will not be removed as a part of this applieation for 216 housing units. The Assoeiate Planner answered Comm. C1audy that the applieant will have to show that the building ean handle the fire restriction. That will be required before the final map is approved by the City. Mr. Madison said he will take eare of this if he beeomes involved with Pareel l. The Assistant City Attorney advised this should be a separate item. Unless this is germane to the application, it should be removed from the tentative map. Ch. Blaine asked for eomments from the audienee. Mr. Phil Waxman, 22162 Bitter Oaks, G1enoaks Subdivision (whieh adjoins this projeet) said he was representing the homeowners. They have been looking forward to this development of this property. They are aware of the proposal and have a few coneerns whieh he had pointed out in a letter to the City Council of Cupertino. These concerns are: 1) Tremendous traffic and noise will be generated by this project. The developer has agreed to build a baffle along the common line. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-303 Page 7 2) Traffic problems on Homestead have never been resolved in the area between #85 and Stelling Road. If this complex is approved, certainly some resolution of the traffic is indicated. 3) There is a possibility of sound reverberation from #280 against the 2-story and 3-story buildings here that will affect the Glenoaks residents. 4) The drainage problem. age ditch to carry off Some of their homes. They have had to build a second drain- water because of the damage caused to 5) They have a master TV antenna. They are dependent upon it. The placement of the buildings on this property will have Some effect on this master antenna. It could be taken care of, but they feel the cost should be assumed by this developer Ch. Blaine said that according to the Height Ordinance, it can be raised to 50', Mr. Waxman said one problem is that their property is at a lower elevation. The Associate Planner was answered that these same points were called to the attention of the Los Altos City Council, Mr. Madison said they have addressed these problems and are in the process of preparing a very elaborate drainage system. As to the noise problem, they have retained a sound consultant to examine this problem. who analyzed it and came up with a $l5,OOO double baffle fence to be located the entire length of the property along the east. Mr. Madison said they are going to have to put $35,000 in cash to set there for several years while they decide whether or not there must be a traffic signal. He would prefer to put up a bond rather than cash. Ch. Blaine said she shops in this area and felt a traffic signal is definite1ywarrånted. Mr. Doug Anderson, 10933 Sweet Oak, Glenoak Subdivision, said he is very concerned about a density of 30 units per acre. The parking was reduced to l.5 per unit in Los Altos. which he felt was unrealistic. Also, he wanted to make certain the sound wall is put in. Mr. Edmond Bachman, resident of Glenoaks Subdivision, said they generally are heartily in accord with Mr. Madison's proposal. They look forward to this development. Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Comm. Kaenitzer, seconded by Comm. Claudy, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 PC-303 Page 8 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The Commissioners said they wanted the' condition to the'Tentative Map that the fence line would be continued and that the buildings on Parcel 1 should be deleted. The Assistant City Attorney advised that coordination is needed between the two cities as to appropriate conditions. Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Gatto, to support the findings of the ERC and grant a negative declaration. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Claudy to recommend to the City Council approval of application 2-TM-79 with the 14 standard conditions, condition 15 modified so that we have Exhibit A-l as modified at this meeting, condition 16, condition l7 requiring the sound barrior being constructed on the Los Altos portion be continued along the easterly boundary to Homestead Road, condition 18 which will either establish a setback, àn-ëasemerit or building near westerly boundary line of parcel 2 and to take proper steps to conform with the Uniform Building Code, and subject to the findings and subconclusions of the April 6, 1979 staff memo. AYES: NOES: Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine None Motion carried, 5-0 It was noted this would be on the April 16th Council agenda. 4. Application 4-TM-79 of DUNBAR, }:IADDIGAN & COWARD (CIVIC CENTER PROFESSIONAL GROUP): TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide approximately 1.45 acres into two parcels equaling approximately 1 acre and 0.45 acre each, and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located within the Cupertino Town Center Office complex on the west side of Torre Avenue approximately 250 feet northerly of Pacifica Drive in a P (Planned Development) zoning district. First Hearing. The Assistant Planning Director reviewed details of the April 6, 1979 staff memo and the map on the bulletin board. Parcel H2 is undeveloped. He said the staff had no comment other than the importance of a condition for joint parking and co-access to make the entire Town Center function. This is an ongoing project with a slight difference in building plans from the original use permit. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING . Mr. John Coward, representing Torre Professional Center, said they are doing this primarily for financing purposes. The morgage company has reconveyed and would like the first Deed of Trust. Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Claudy to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Claudy to grant a Negative Declaration. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Claudy to approve application 4-TM-79 subject to the 14 standard conditions and conditions l5 and l6 in the April 6, 1979 staff report, and subject to the findings and subconclusions in said staff report. AYES: NOES: Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine None Motion carried, 5-0 This will be on the April 16th City Council agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS 5. Request for extension of Tentative Map - application 24-TM-76 - E. Alvarez & Son Construction. The Assistant Planning Director referred to details in the April 6, 1979 staff report. He said no EIR action is required this. Also, this would not have to go to the City Council. on After some discussion, it was moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to approve the 6-month extension on 24-TM-76. AYES: NOES: Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine None Motion carried, 5-0 PC-3D3 Page 9 4-TM-79 approved 24-TM-76 granted 6-mo. extension PC-303 Page 10 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1979 PLilliNING COMMISSION MEETING REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR: None. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION It was noted there is a safety hazard with the dumpster in the street on Pacifica. Comm. Claudy said that if it is necessary to have it there, then they should at least put reflector lights on it. Ch. Blaine said perhaps the Sheriff should ticket it. The staff will check on it. Comm. Claudy brought up the fact that the tennis courts at Monta Vista Park are locked on weekends. It was his opinion that these parks are for the use of the people. He asked that they be unlocked. ADJOURNMENT Ch. Blaine adjourned this meeting at 9:10 PM. APPROVED: ~A~~ Chairwoman ATTEST: