Loading...
PC 06-12-89 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Ave. Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 252-4642 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JUNE 12, 1989 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Vice Chairman Claudy Commissioner Mackenzie Commissioner Sorensen Commissioner Szabo Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Planning and Development Mark Caughey, Associate Planner Travice Whitten, City Engineer Leslie Lopez, Deputy City Attorney CONTINUED ITEMS: \.... í MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to Continue Item 12, Application 1O-U-89, - Mariani Development, to Thursday, June 15, 1989. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Vice Chr. Claudy stated that Chr. Adams asked that the text of the Letter Re: Agenda Item No.8, from Ms. Lopez, Deputy City Attorney, dated May 19, 1989. MOTION: Com. Szabo moved to approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 22, 1989, as amended. SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 4-0 POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: ITEM 6 ~~:~~:t~~~ ~t~9: ~~ F. K~is Requested Continuance to June ~6, 1989. ITEM II __n__t__ _ - _ - _9. 7- _ -89~nald g. Hansen Requested a Contmuance to June 26, 1989. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com.Mackenzie moved to Continue Application 8-U-89 and Application 5-Z- 89, 7-TM-89 to the Meeting of June 26, 1989. Com. Sorensen Passed 4-0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 2 PC - 572 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS/ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: - None. CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM I: Application 24-U-87: Westfield. Inc. - Requesting extension of expiration date for use permit authorizing construction of two level parking garage at the north- ern end of Vallco Fashion Park adjacent to Perimeter Road. ITEM 2: Use Permit 5-U-76: United Auto Parts - Requesting interpretation of an existing use permit to allow operation of window tinting sublease at 20301 Stevens Creek Blvd. ITEM 3: Use Permit 2-U-88 ~evised): Good Samaritan Church - Requesting approval of a minor modification to the exterior elevations of the approved second story addition to an existing church building located on the southeast corner of Home- stead Rd. and Linnet Ln. Com. Sorensen requested removal of Consent Calendar Item 3. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve Consent Calendar Items 1 and 2. Com. Szabo Passed 4-0 ITEM 3: Use Permit 2-U-88 ~evised): Good Samaritan Church - Requesting approval of a minor modification to the exterior elevations of the approved second story addition to an existing church building located on the southeast corner of Home- stead Rd. and Linnet Ln. Com. Sorensen wished to clarify for the record the Applicant's proposal to demolish the existing building and rebuild the structure with a new common foundation, as outlined in their letter of May 1, 1989. Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey reviewed the Item and presented the Elevation Plans. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Sorensen moved to approve Consent Calendar Item 3. Com. Mackenzie Passed 4-0 PUBLIC HEARINGS: Com. Mackenzie stated he would abstain on the following Item since he and his family attended this Church and he wished to avoid a possible conflict of interest. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 3 PC - 572 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued ITEM 4: Application No(s): Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Acres: 4-U-89 and 5-EA-89 Peninsula Bible Church Peninsula Bible Church West side of Blaney Ave.. north of Cedar Ln. 2.l3. USE PERMIT for a 4,700 sq. ft. second story addition to an existing church classroom building. CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 10, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended Staffs Presentation: Mr. Caughey reviewed the Application and discussed Staff Report Use Permit Issues: he presented the Applicant's diagram entitled SU¡¡llested Parkinll. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Tim Verschuyl, Architect, commented as follows: - Reviewed the Application and discussions held at the previous hearing - Noted that adequate parking existed as determined by the parking ratios; however, Ap- plicants recognized that a practical problem existed for the surrounding neighborhood - Presented and discussed The Overflow Parkin~ Solution, diagram titled Sl\llllested Park- in¡ and PBC (Peninsula Bible Churcl¡) Parkinll Solution - Peninsula Bible Church felt the solution proposed would solve the parking overflow problem and added that these solutions were based on good communications between the Church members - With respect to Staff Report Use Permit Issues :;:) Satellite Parkinll Location. Portal Elementa~y School Applicants were confident that if the School did not renew the current one-year agreement, they could find other satellite parking locations Presented a diagram of alternative parking configuration entitled Parkin~ by Lanes which showed ten lanes providing tandem parking Mr. Paul Winslow, Pastor of Peninsula Bible Church, added that the Church was con- cerned about the neighbor's situation; however, they intended to operate a full sanctuary. He cited the young families who wished to have their children attend Church activities; the classroom addition was essential to accommodate their needs. The two-month continuance of the Application demonstrated their ability to find solutions to the parking overflow. In response to Vice Chr. Claudy's question, he stated that one shuttle bus was in operation at this time; a second van was available and they were seeking a third van; the Church was serious about solving this problem and had volunteers to facilitate the proposed solution. In response to Com. Sorensen's inquiry, Mr. Winslow stated there were two Services sep- arated by a Sunday School Hour; parishioners attended various combinations of services. Com. Sorensen responsed that at some times, up to 900 people could be attending Church; Mr. Winslow noted that practically speaking, such did not occur. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 4 PC - 572 PUBUC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Verschayl concluded his remarks, stating that they considered Staffs recommendation that they "enter into a formal recorded agreement running with the land" (Letter of June 2, 1989) unreasonable; Applicants suggested a letter be required from the property owner or lease holder stating the conditions under which the property was being used for a satellite parking facility, with an added stipulation that the property owner or lease holder notify the City of Cupertino, ninety days in advance of terminating the arrangement. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Prasad Vepa, 10575 Orange Tree Ln., Cupertino, commented as follows: - Thanked the Commission for their past and present consideration of this item - Noted that while the Church was in use only 2% of the week, as stated by the Applicant, the use was 25% of the weekend waking hours - Fundamental problem had not changed despite the Applicant's sincerity; cited an exam- ple of a hazard created by a Church member who was asked to park in a designated area - Disagreed with the Applicant's characterization of the classroom addition as an incidental or ancillary use; people attending the Church would be influenced by such facilities - Asked that the use be reduced to the level of parking that could be provided on-site; the suggestions being considered were only a band-aid, not a solution Suggested the Church find a third site to expand their operation which served the people Mr. GeoffPaulsen, and daughter Amy, 10775 10534 Orange Tree Ln., Cupertino, stated that the classroom addition for the children was needed;.while he agreed overflow parking had been an irritant to the neighbors, the long term benefit of the Church was to promote harmony with the neighbors, which was immeasurable. Mr. Curt Nichols, 10534 Orange Tree Ln., Cupertino, attested to the fact that saturated parking had existed on Orange Tree Ln. and Cedar Tree Ln.; however, the Church cleared these streets and demonstrated they could solve the parking problem. The shuttle bus service was effective. Secondly, he noted the value of the Church to those raising families; the classroom addition for the children would serve a need. Ms. Mary Andrews was glad to see the growth of the Church; the classroom for the children should be allowed; she did not object to Church members parking in front of her home. Mr. Earle Conty, 21906 Hyannisport Dr., Cupertino, noted that Peninsula Bible Church provided a Christian education for the children. There was not a problem encouraging people to utilize a satellite parking facility; he was confident that if the arrangement with Portal School site fell through, an alternative satellite location would be found. Mr. William Hyatt, 21967 Oakleaf Ct., Cupertino, supported the Application; his teenagers benefited from the ministry at Peninsula Bible Church. Their family utilized the shuttle bus. Mr. Jim Murphy, 20045 Cedar Tree Ln., Cupertino, agreed the parking overflow problem had been greatly mitigated in his area; however, the solution relied upon the good will of Church members. He asked that a systemic solution for the parking problems be found. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 5 PC - 572 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Ms. Jenny Barnett, 20200 Lucille Ave., Cupertino, appreciated the services provided by the Church; parking by lanes was effectively used at another Church she had attended. Mr. Roger Costa, 10407 Armstead Ct., Cupertino, stated his children attended Peninsula Bible Church and asked that the additional classroom facility be approved. He felt the good will of the Church members could be trusted to make the parking solution work. Ms. Mary Kay Sherman, 10595 Orange Tree Ln., Cupertino, concurred the parking over- flow had been mitigated during the last two months; however, without the volunteers to monitor the parking, the streets were completely filled again. While the neighbors were fa- vorable to Churches; they wished to have some recourse if the parking problem reoccurred. Ms. Thelma Moore, 10573 Cedar Tree Ln., Cupertino, agreed with the above comments. Mr. Phil Plymale, 1034 Colorado Ave., Cupertino, stated he was responsible for schedul- ing the shuttle bus; the June 4th incident of parking overflow during an evening event, referred to by the neighbors, was an oversight on his part. Mr. Mike Tracy, Facilities Manager for Peninsula Bible Church, make himself available to residents of the neighborhood if problems occurred. Mr. Verschuyl concluded his remarks, reviewing the architectural plans and presented a diagram entitled South Side Setback: he asked that the design proposed be accepted. Mr. Jim Murphy questioned the scale of the diagram presented; Mr. Verschuyl confirmed that such was drawn to scale. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Szabo moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Sorensen Passed, Com. Mackenzie abstaining 3-0-1 Com. Szabo stated that the Church had demonstrated they could monitor off-site parking; he noted the absence of testimony of those who felt the parking solution was not working. However, he had concerns whether the solution implemented would continue and sug- gested a Condition requiring the Use be subject to review by the Commission if problems arose and/or the guidelines in place at the time of approval were not being observed. He was not concerned that the current agreement for satellite parking was only for one year; it was the responsibility of the Church to resolved this situation. Com. Sorensen agreed with the above remarks. While she had confidence in the Church's good will at this time, she wished to ensure the parking solution was retained in the future; the added Condition would address this concern. She advised the Church to provide park- ing monitors whenever Church events were being held and encouraged them to continue to be attentive to the neighbor's concerns. She was favorable to a trial of the Parking by Lanes alternative proposed by the Applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 6 PC - 572 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Cowan advised the Commission and the public that if a satellite parking facility were approved as part of the Use Permit, Notification would have to be given for those living adjacent to the staellite facility; secondly, if the Parking by Lanes alternative were ap- proved, the plan would have to be submitted to the Central Fire District for review. Vice Chr. Claudy had no objection to the architectural design proposed. It appeared the Applicant had been effective influencing the parking situation; however, the monitoring would continue to be required. He did not wish to require the implementation of a Parking by Lanes alternative; such could be reserved if the satellite parking was not workable. Requiring a formal recorded agreement for the satellite parking was unnecessary. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Sorensen moved to approve Application 5-EA-89. Com. Szabo Passed, Com. Mackenzie abstaining 3-0-1 MOTION: Com. Szabo moved to approve Application 4-U-89 subject to conclusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution, Conditions 1-8; Condition 9 amended to add, "The Church officials shall as- sume the responsibility to control off-site parkil1~ impacts to the adjoinin~ resi- dential nei¡¡hborhood in addition to the four strate~ies outlined in the document labeled "Parkin~ Solution". Church officials shall take other reasonable steps to miti¡¡ate the intrusive effects of parkin~ overspill durin~ peak use hours. Church officials are encoura~ed to investi¡¡ate options to íncrease off-street parkin~ available which may included the use of lane strippin~ or satellite park- il1~ facilities. If complaints are received. the Plannin~ Director has the discre- tion to review the Use Permit." Condition 10; Condition 11 deleted. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed, Com. Mackenzie abstaining 3-0-1 Consensus reached by the Commission to hear Items 5 and 7; Item 6 Continued to June 26th. MOTION: Com. Sorensen moved to Continue Items 8 (Application 12-U-89, 12-EA-89 - Coit Comm), 9 (Application ll-U-89, IO-EA-89 - Valley Church), 10 (Appli- cation 9-U-89, 17-EA-89 - University of San Francisco) and 12 (Apphcat~on 10-U-89, 18-EA-89 - Mariani Development) to the Regular Adjourned Meetmg of Thursday, June 15, 1989. Com. Mackenzie Passed SECOND: VOTE: 4-0 Break: 9:31-9:40 P.M. ITEMS: Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area: 4-TM-89. l-Z-89 and 4-EA-89 Barbara Colley Enrique Alvarez . Southside of McClellan Rd.. 300 ft. west of KIm St. 30.500 sQ. ft.. .70 Acres PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting ofJune 12, 1989 Page 7 PC - 572 PUBliC HEARINGS Continued TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide an existing parcel into two lots of 11,000 +- sq. ft. and 19,500 +- sq. ft. respectively. REZONING of an existing.7 acre parcel from RI-lO (Residential, Single-family, min- imum lot area of 10,000 sq. ft.) to RI-6 (Residential, Single-family, minimum lot area of 6,000 sq. ft.) or such other zone as deemed appropriate by the Planning Commis- sion or City Council. CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 22, 1989. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended (I-Z-89) Categorically Exempt (4-TM-89) TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: July 5, 1989, (I-Z-89) Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and answered questions; Staff recommended deletion of Conditions 16-19 which were inadvertently included. Applicant's Presentation: Ms. Barbara Colley was available to respond to any questions. The Public Hearing was then opened. There were no speakers. MOTION: SECOND: VarE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Szabo moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Sorensen Passed 4-0 Com. Szabo moved to approve Application 4-EA-89. Com. Mackenzie Passed 4-0 MOTION: Com. Szabo moved to recommend approval of Application l-Z-89 subject to conclusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 MOTION: Com. Szabo moved to approve Application 4-TM-89 subject to conclusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Reso- lution, Conditions 1-15; Conditions 16-19 deleted. SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 4-0 ITEM 6: Application 8-U-89 and 9-EA-89 Mary F. Kunis - Continued to June 26, 1989. Com. Szabo stated he would be abstaining on the following Item since he owned property within a 2500 ft. radius of the subject site; he suggested an arbitration process be used to reach an agreement between the City and the Applicant regarding the purchase of this site. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 8 PC - 572 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued ITEM 7: Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner; Location: Parcel Area (Acres): 32-U-88. ll-Z-88. and 43-EA-88 De Anza Residential Suites De Anza Residential Suites Northwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd.lStelliQ f Rd. 6.4 Acres REZONING Rezoning from P (Planned Development) with residential/recreational and incidental commercial activities intent as defined in Section 1 of Ordinance No. 677 referring to Condition 16 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 1403, to P (Planned Development) with commercial recreational intent, or such other zone as deemed ap- propriate by the Planning Commission or City Council. USE PERMIT to construct and operate an 87 space recreation vehicle park with related recreational activities. CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING OF MAY 22, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: July 5,1989. Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and discussed Staff Report II Back¡¡round/ZoniQ f - General Plan Considerations and Use Permit Issues. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. John Vidovich commented as follows: - Agreed with the Commission that the General Plan issues should be addressed first - Noted the difficulty of finding a suitable use for this particular property; some economic use would have to be derived from the site - Proposed a R-V Park for site zoned "Private Outdoor Recreational Use"; a number of on- site amenities, i.e., tennis courts, swimming pool, recreational building were included Proposal was compatible with the current zoning and was in demand - If the City wished, additional recreational space/open space could be provided on-site to prevent excessive use of the adjacent Memorial Park - The number of units proposed was a low density use of the site - Applicants felt this was the best use of the site as zoned The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Bob Goldflau, 21133 Patriot Way, Cupertino, thought this location for an R-V Park was inappropriate and would be incompatible with the existing uses in the immediate area. Mr. Ralph Quails, 21013 Patriot Way, Cupertino, noted the beauty of Cupertino Commons and stated he agreed with Staff that the use proposed was inappropriate. He asked that the Commission carefully consider this Application. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 9 PC - 572 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Ms. Dorothy Levitan, 21035 United PI., Cupertino, thought the proposed use was totally inappropriate; she noted the Applicant's statements at a Homeowner Association Meeting that he wished to find a use for this site which was compatible with the existing uses. Ms. Grace Mulcay, 10011 United PI., Cupertino, noted the view and noise impacts from an R-V Park; in addition, Memorial Park would be negatively impacted for residents. Mr. Richard Biehr, 10080 United PI., Cupertino, agreed regarding the noise impacts from R-V generators; this was not a suitable property for the location of an R·V Park. Mr. Tommy Logorio, Attorney for the Applicant, commented as follows: - Comments made clearly showed the dilemma of the property owner - The only viable use under the current Zoning Ordinances and General Plan was a tennis court; the General Plan site designation was inappropriate and left the property owner with only one alternative, namely, to sell the property on the City's terms and conditions . Contended the Applicant was not allowed to develop the property because the General Plan designation of the property as "Private Recreational" on one of the busiest intersections in the City, was so limited as to make the site virtually unusable - The Applicant had submitted applications in an attempt to find some use for the site under the existing Zoning Ordinances and General Plan Urged that the Commission review the General Plan designation for the site and make an appropriate recommendation to the City Council Vice Chr. Claudy noted that current zoning had been placed on the property at the request of the previous owner; the Applicant purchased the site with its current designation. Mr. Chuck Jacobson, Cupertino, agreed with Vice Chr. Claudy's comment ; he felt a tennis club was a viable use for the site and disagreed with statements to the contrary. Com. Mackenzie agreed with Staff that the use proposed was a rather intense residential use rather than a recreational one; in addition, there was insufficient recreation use pro- posed. In his opinion, the City should not purchase the property; however, he felt that areas in the City designated for Private Recreation Use should be preserved. Com. Sorensen agreed with Staff Recommendation that the Use proposed did not appear to be consistent with the General Plan intent for an outdoor recreational use on this site; this use was primarily a lodging facility. Vice Chr. Claudy stated that the concept of an R-V Park in a city was not unknown. How- ever, the proposed R-V Park, even with the amenities included, was not a recreational use; it was primarily a parking lot for R-Y's. Such was not the intent of the City for this site. In response to questions, Mr. Cowan clarified the zoning designation and use for the site. Vice Chr. Claudy responded that he did not realize the property was zoned to prohibit greater residential use; however, the Commission could recommend a zoning designation that would broaden the recreational uses currently allowed on-site. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of June 12, 1989 Page 10 PC - 572 PUBUC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Vidovich stated he had read the Ordinance as the Vice Chr.had, i.e., that residential use was allowed on-site; with this understanding, he had purchased the property. Mr. Cowan offered to provide the documents cited and confirmed that the designated zoning referred directly to the tennis club use; the intent of the General Plan was very clear. Mr. Vidovich stated that until the City decided whether or not the site would be purchased, he wished some reasonable use of the property. In filing an Application, he wished to make a point that the Ordinance interpretation stated above was not practical; while residential use was not the best of this site, it would be adequate. Vice Chr. Claudy suggested the current Zoning be amended to allow a broader range of recreational uses than just the tennis club allowed under the current Zoning; in addition, a Minute Order could be sent to City Council recommending a General Plan Hearing be initiated unless negotiations with the Applicant were successful and the site was purchased. Mr. Cowan noted the upcoming Joint Meeting of the Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission, June 21,1989, during which the latter issues could be discussed. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Sorensen Passed, Com. Szabo abstaining Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend approval of 43-EA-88. Com. Sorensen Passed, Com. Szabo abstaining 3-0-1 3-0-1 Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend denial of Application ll-Z-88 and adopting a recommendation that the subject property be rezoned FP (Private Recreational). Com. Sorensen Passed, Com. Szabo abstaining 3-0-1 Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend denial of Application 32- U -88 making the Finding that the proposed use is incompatible with the recommended zon- ing and inconsistent with the current General Plan. Com. Sorensen Passed, Com. Szabo abstaining 3-0-1 ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 10:55 P.M. to the Regular Adjourned Meeting of June 15, 1989 at 7:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted,