Loading...
PC 06-14-76 CITY OF CUPERrINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA l0300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JUNE 14, 1976 IN THE COUNCn. CHAMBER, CITY R.ALI. CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Chairman Adams called the meeting to order at 7 :33 PM with the Salute to the Flag. BOLL CALL Comm. present.: Comm. absent: Cooper, Gatto. Woodward, Chairman Adams Koenitzer Staff present: Director of Planning and Development Sisk Assistant Planning Director Cowan Assistant City Attorney Kilian Assistant. City Engineer Whitten POSTPONEMENT: None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. APPBOVAL OF MINCTES Minutes of Adjourned Regular meeting of May 13, 1976: These Minutes were approved at. the May 24, 1976, meeting. Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 24, 1976: Page 4; third paragraph from the bott.om: Add to the end of the paragraph "However, she would approve of the Planning C01!DIIis- sian amendment to Section 3.04.2." Page 7, last paragraph, lines 3 and 4 shall read: ",. .plot plan he was told . . . . tb,e, g¡1rage. A dual curb cut is proposed." On the first line, add the word "when" after the word "he". PC-229 Page 1 PC-229 Page 2 MINUTES OF THE JUNE 14, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm, Cooper to approve the Minutes of May 24, 1976, as amended. Motion carried, 4-0 PUBLIC HEARINGS L. CITY OF CUPERTINO: Public Hearing to review proposed Tree Ordinance providing regulations for care and removal of trees on private property, providing for a system of granting permits for removal of specimen trees, and providing for protection of all trees during construction operations. First Hearing continued. The Assistant Planning Director stated that the Planning Commission indicated they were in favor of the concept of controlling the cutting of trees on private lots. Section 6.1,nf the draft ordinance contains a series of exemptions. The staff researched the pros and cons of retaining orchard trees on residential lots and learned that for the most part, the new homeowners do not have the knowledge nor the inclina- tion to give them the proper Care. It waS decided Section l.l should be reworded to reflect the true philosophy of this ordinance. Comm. Gatto suggested that this ordinance, in its present form, will infringe on private rights. He suggested instead that there could be guidelines or policies given to a developer along with his permit. Comm. Woodward questioned whether commercial and industrial properties can be differentiated from residential properties in the case of preservation of trees. He noted that trees shown on a tentative map must be saved, but six months or a year later, when the property is developed. they can be removed. The Assistant Planning Director noted that the Architectural and Site Approval Committee recommends trees On single family lots be ex.emptèd from this ordinance. Chairman Adams questioned whether there was an urgent need for this ordinance. It WaS pointed out that the City Council had asked the Planning Commission to prepare a tree ordinance. The Assistant Planning Director suggested the Planning Commission could consider another approach -- preservation of specific groups of trees with significance. Mrs. Nancy Hertert; San Juan Road. said the trees in this community are a resource that should be of the same importance as other things that add to the character of this area. We do not allow the filling in of creeks nor grading of our hills. MINUTES OF THE JUNE l4, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Mrs. Hertert suggested some modifications to the draft ordinance: Section 2.1 (h) Preserve an important cultural resource". Add "public entities" to Section 3 .2(2). Delete Section 6.1(2). Section 7 ,l should include the words: "and what alternatives have been considered. It and add: "and evaluate environmental effects," to the end of the paragraph. On page 5, add: "A tree may be removed if one or more alternatives have been met and environmental impacts have been evaluated," Mrs. Hertert said Saratoga recently denied a property owner per- mission to remove some pine trees on his lot in order to put in a swimming pool. One other thought she suggested for page 5 would be that perhaps removal of one or two trees would help the health of the remaining trees or be of some aesthetic value to the neighborhood. Chairman Adams asked for further comments from the audience. Mr. Rod Castor, Scenic Blvd., said he endorsed Mrs. Hertert's statements. He said it is very difficult to spell out all the conditions under which trees can be removed. Comm. Gatto suggested a better definition of "specimen trees" would be helpful. Societal v.alu~ must be weighed. He posed the question of who should pay tlie~,mainteñance costs if a tree is of benefit to the community. He would like additional guidelines from the City Council before passing on this ordinance. Comm. Woodward would like to ask the City Council why there is no consideration of trees on public property as well as private property. MINUTE ORDER: Moved by Comm, Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward. to ask the City Council for clarification of their intent with the tree ordinance. Motion carried, 4-0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to continue the Tree Ordinance to June 28, 1976. Motion carried, 4-0 PC-229 Page 3 Clarification 0: intent of Tree Ord. requested of Council. Tree Ord. cont'd to 6/28/76 . PC-229 Page 4 MINUTES OF THE JUNE 14, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2. Applications l2-Z-76 and l4-TM-76 of KENNETH P'. ELVIN: REZONING approximately 0.75 acre from CG (General Commercial) to P (Planned Development with residential, duplex use intended) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide 0.75 acre into three duplex lots. Said property is located at Foothill Blvd. and Silver Oak Way at the southerly terminus of Silver Oak Way. First Hearing. The Director of Planning and Development located the property on the overhead map and reviewed the proposal as outlined in the June lO, 1976 staff report. Chairman Adams asked for comments from the audience. Mr. J. Hammond, Civil Engineer, said he was representing the applicant, and he offered to answer any questions. The changes in the building envelopes were pointed out on the tentative map. The Planning Director said a use permit will be required since this is a planned development. Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodwárd to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Comm. Woodward is concerned about whether this proposal was in harmony with the general plan. He questioned the wisdom of allowing residential to go out to a major thoroughfare and with commercial (and the masonry property line walls) on either side. Comm. Cooper noted that in this particular instance, there is a difference in elevation, which softens the effect. Comm. Gatto felt this proposal was consistent with the general plan. The Planning Director answered Comm. Gatto that the property owner on the corner was notified of this proposal. Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Gatto, to approve application l2-Z-76 with the 14 standard 'conditions~and conditions 15 through 23 in the staff report with condition 19 as modified at this meeting: addition of '~he third oak tree shall be reviewed at the use permit stage to examine a possible alternative to preservation. It AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comm. Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Comm. Koenitzer Motion carried, 4-0 PC-229 Pagé 5 MINUTES OF THE JUNE 14, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Gatto to approve application 14-TM-76 with the 14 standard conditions and conditions 15 through 26 in the staff report with condition 17 modified as was condition 19 in 12-Z-76 regarding the third oak tree; and including the findings as noted on page 4 of the June 10, 1976 staff report. AYES: NOTES: ABSENT : Comm. Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman Mams NONE Comm. Koenitzer Motion carried, 4-0 3. Applications l3-Z-76 and lS-TM-76 of LOHR-TURGEON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: REZONING approximately ll.6 acres from RlC-6 (Residential, single- family, cluster, 6,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) to Rl-7.5 (Resi- dential, single, family, 7,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide ll.6 acres into 27 lots. Said property is located at the southerly terminus of Scenic Blvd. adjacent to Stevens Creek (stream bed). First Hearing. The Assistant Planning Director described the proposal and the property involved. This property is in the Stevens Creek environment and 5 acres are within the flood plain as determined by the Santa Clara Valley Water Conservation District, and 6.5 acres are planned for development. No units can be built within the flood plain, but credit can be given at the rate of 1 unit per acre within the flood plain, This proposal is consistent with the general plan. Due to its topography, this property is somewhat isolated from the neighboring developments. The trees and the'creek channel will be protected. The lots will all be 7500 sq. ft. or larger and all streets are dedicated. When the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed this application it was the consensus that the 5 acres in the flood plain would be a welcome addition to the park property. One problem is that the park users will be using these streets for parking. The Assistant City Engineer described the new street standards. He said the City anticipates no problems with the formula of traffic. The staff feels there should be a sidewalk along at least one side of the street. Parks and Recreation Commission Chairperson Lonnie Toenfeldt said they are very interested in the environment of this area and are very interested in the inclusion of this property with the park property. They are not enthused about a fence along Scenic Blvd. She is concerned about police protection of the more isolated area. PC-229 Page 6 MINUTES OF THE JUNE l4, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Chairperson Toenfeldt said the Commission is ~oncerned about having several crossings of the ~reek. They would like to see one, specifi~ ~reek ~rossing. The Commission suggests limiting ac~ess to this property to discourage motorcy~les and horses because they would destroy the kind of habitat they are trying to ~reate. She would like to discourage parking along Scenic Cir~le, on the park side. She would like to see the bridge crossing taken ~are of at the time of develop- ment of this property. Mr. Jerry Root, 1036 Scenic Blvd., was answered by the Assistant City Engineer that Palm Drive would be abandoned, due to the ~hange in elevation and the improvement of Riviera Road. Mr. Joseph Bolero, Sceni~ Blvd., said all the traffi~ will be ~hannelled onto one street which will be reduced from 40' to 32'. He is concerned about who will absorb the cost of maintenance of the slope. The Assistant City Engineer said this bank will not be involved on his side of the street. Mr. Root asked for a definition of the flood plain. The Assistant Planning Director showed on the preliminary grading plan where the flood plain lies in this area. Mr. Root said Blackberry F-arm will need a more secure fence along Palm Avenue. Ms. Nancy Hertert, San Juan Road, said the olive trees on Scenic Drive are very old and the people in the area have considerable concern for them. She would like to see a safer way for the school children to get to Kennedy and Monta Vista schools from Palm Terrace than across the pipe. Mr. Don Ferguson, Scenic Blvd., is concerned about the trees and the general environment here. He said the healthy olive trees are about 75 years old. Developer Jerry Lohr said the Flood Control people are very anxious to have access to the creek. They want to be able to reach the flood plain from Scenic Blvd. If the bridge must go in, they would like to keep it as low profile and as "natural" as possible. He said they would like to discourage public parking along this street with some type of fences. Mr. Paul Nowack, engineer for this project, said the staff recommends 32' for this street. There is an existing 36' graded. He recommended 24' curb-to-curb with no parking because of the difference in elevation and restricted vision. He feels this would keep the speed down. He noted thiS is in front of the existing homes along Scenic Blvd. The sidewalk could, go on the side where the existing homes are. There would be quite a bit, of driveway'parking available for the existing homes. The olive trees are on the up-slope and Mr. Lohr said they would be protected. MINUTES OF THE JUNE 14, 1976 PUNNING COMMISSION MEETING COIIIIII.. Woodward asked how the owners of the existing homes would feel if the street parking were prohibited. They indicated they would have no objections to this. Mr. Nowack offered the compromise of parking along one side of the street and 28' width. The Assistant City Engineer strongly recOllll1ended 32' to maintain safety standards. Moved by Comm. Gatto. seconded by Comm. Woodward to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Comm. Gatto said he would like to see a 32' width for Scenic Blvd. and Scenic Circle. Comm. Woodward agreed. The sidewalk along one side of the street made sense to Comm. Gatto. He would be in favor of the City acquiring dedication of the open space and the Parks and Recreation Department and Commission decide upon the use of it. He would like to discourage fencing, He noted the City Council might want to talk with the developer abou sharing in the cost of some type crossing of the creek. Comm. Cooper said she would be in favor of some minor, stepping stone type crossing of the creek. (;01IIII1. Gatto commented that, of all the proposals presented for this property, he likes this one tha best. Chairman Adams agreed. Parks and Recreation Chaiq>erson Toenfeldt said Naturalist Karen Koby would have a reco1lll1endation of just where the creek crossing should be. Comm. Gatto recommended the developer contribute to the ''1.ohr-Turgeon Memorial Footpath". Comm. Cooper would like Condition 19 modified to add the words "and public right-of-way" on the second line after "creek". Comm. Gatto would like to add Condition 22: "Developer shall contribute the sum of $2000 toward the cost of access across Stevens Creek." Mr. Lohy said they would like a hold harmless liability clause. They do not object to the contribution to the crossing. PC-229 Page 7 PC-229 Page 8 13-Z-76 approved l5-TM-76 approved MINUTES OF THE JUNE l4, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Carom. Cooper to recommend to the City Council approval of application 13-Z-76 for the developable area (6.6 acres) to Rl-7.5 and the remaining area to be dedicated to the City of Cupertino to be zoned PRo AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comm. Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Comm. Koenitzer Motion carried, 4-0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to recommend to the City Council approval of application lS-TM-76 per the findings listed on page 5 of the 6/10/76 staff report, and per the 14 standard conditions, conditions 15 through 21 in the said staff report with the modification to condition 19 and the addition of condition 22 as noted on page 7 of these Minutes, AYES: SOES: ABSENT : Comm. Cooper, Gatto. Woodward, Chairman Adams None Comm. Koenitzer Motion carried, 4-0 ,Chairman Adams called a recess at lO :20 PM. The meeting reconvened at 1.0 :37 PM. 4. Application l4-Z-76 of CITY OF CUPERTINO: REZONING 4.8 acres from Rl-lO (Residential, single family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) to A (Agricultural) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Said property is located adjacent to and southerly of Stevens Creek Blvd., and westerly of Stevens Creek (stream bed). First Hearing. . The Assistant Planning Director identified the property on the informa- tional exhibit. The application was initiated because of the inconsistency of the present zoning with the general plan. He cautioned that this should be considered as an interim zone. Comm. Gatto asked if either of the existing units on the property could be remodeled or rebuilt on this basis. The Assistant City Attorney said the Ordinance allows certain dwelling units on agricultural land. However, the flood plain supersedes these zoning ordinances with respect to agricultural uses. Chairman Adams asked for comments from the audience. There were none. MINUTES OF THE .rom: 14, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING It was noted. the staff has been in consultation with Mr. Stocklmei on several occasions regarding this action. Since there were no comments from the applicant nor the audience, it was moved. by Comm. Woodward, seconded by C01IIII1. Gatto to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried., 4-0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to recommend to the City Council approval of application l4-Z-76 per the June 10, 1976 staff report. AYES: NOES: ABSENT : Comm. Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman Adams None C01IIII1. Koenitzer Motion carried, 4-0 5. Application 16-TM-76 of TOWN CENTER INVESTORS n: TENTATIVE MAP to legally divide lO. 5 acres into four parcels. Said property is located within the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rodrigues Avenue and Torre Avenue. The Planning Director reviewed the map and the proposal. He said this concerns our maintenance agreements and cross circulation. Chairman Adams asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Moved. by Comm. Gatto, seconded by COUlD.. Woodward to recommend to the City Council approval of application 16-TM-76 per the finding listed in the staff report, per the 14 standard conditions and conditions 15 through 20 in the staff report, with the last sentence in condition 18 deleted and the addition of the zoning application number 'to be added to the first line of condition 19. AYES: NOES: ABSENT : Comm. Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Comm. Koenitzer Motion carried, 4-0 PC-229 Page 9 14-Z-76 approved 16-TM-76 approved. PC-229 Page 10 SCB plan line study taken off calendar I I I MINUTES OF THE JUNE 14, 1976 PLANNING CO~MISSION MEETING UNFINISHED BUSINESS 6. Status report regarding Stevens Creek Blvd. plan line study. Per the request of the staff, it was moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Gatto to take the Stevens Creek Blvd. plan line study off calendar to allow time for additional engineering studies. Interested property owners are to be notified in writing. Motion carried, 4-0 NEW BUSINESS 7. Discussion of joint meetings: a) Hillside General Plan with City Council - June 22; 1976, 7:30 PM. b) ~lidpeninsula Regional Park District Master Plan with City Council, District Board, Parks and Recreation Commission - June 30, 1976, 7:30 PM. The Commission agreed to these dates. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION Comm. Cooper would like the staff to check on the reason for the lack of maintenance of the landscaping of the percolation pond at Bubb Road. REPORT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR: None. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Adams adjourned this meeting at 10:55 PM to 7:30 PM on June 22, 1976. ATTEST :' APPROVED : ~ wm. E. Ry r, City Clerk s, Jr., Chairman