Loading...
PC 02-27-89 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 FEBRUARY 27, 1989 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Chairman Adams Vice Chairman CIaudy Commissioner Mackenzie Commissioner Sorensen Commissioner Szabo Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Planning and Development Mark Caughey, Associate Planner Glen Grigg, Traffic Engineer Charles Kilian, City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: Com. Claudy moved to approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 13, 1989, as presented. SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VarE: Passed 5-0 POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS/ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ITEM 1: Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: 33-U-88.44-EA-88 Dee'p Cliff Golf Course Clark Glasson South side of McClellan Rd.. at Clubhouse Ln. Use Permit to demolish a 2,342 square foot clubhouse building and construct a new 4,432 square foot clubhouse for an existing golf course. FIRST HEARING ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration TENTATIVE CITY COUNClLHEARING DATE: March 6,1989 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 27, 1989 Page 2 PC - 565 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and presented the Site Map and an aerial photograph; revised Conditions of Approval were submitted for consideration. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Mike Glasson stated that the existing clubhouse was too small and was functionally obsolete; he noted the unattractiveness of the present facility which did not blend in with the surrounding neighborhood. In response to Chairperson Adams' questions, he stated that it would be approximately three months to initiate construction and another three months to project completion. He confmned that there would be no intensification of use by offering restaurant/bar service to the general public; advertising of such amenities would not be done. The Public Hearings was opened. Ms. Barbara Shaw, 10655 Clubhouse Ln., Cupertino, reviewed their complaints regarding stray golf balls, the propeny damage and the hazard to individuals. Her husband had made several suggestions to the owner/manager of the Golf Course to rectify this situation; she asked that the expansion not be approved until current problems were resolved. Mr. John Nowicki, 10665 Clubhouse Ln., Cupertino, elaborated on the above comments; he stated that the Golf Club management took the attitude that they were not responsible for problems. Pictures were presented to show propeny damage and the number of golf balls collected; Furthermore, motorists swerved to avoid the golf balls causing additional traffic hazards and spill over traffic from special events held during the year impacted the area. Ms. Anne Di Mono, 10675 Clubhouse Ln., Cupertino, concurred with the above concerns; she added that traffic impacted her home more than other residents since her sons used the public street for parking their cars. She asked that the Club's parking area be increased. Mr. Glasson responded that they tried to work with neighbors and in some cases, replaced damaged property; in addition, they relocated the first tee, planted trees and considered the use of a screen although they had concerns about the appearance and height of such. Mr. Cowan suggested that the Commission authorize him to meet with the Applicant and neighbors to work out an agreeable solution on screening; in addition, the parking area could be restripped to accommodate ten to twelve additional cars. Com. Claudy noted that use of the golf course was self limiting; the only intensification of use may come from an enlarged and more attractive cafeteria and snack shop area which encouraged patrons to sit around before and after golfing. Mr. Kilian, responding to Chr. Adams' inquiry, stated that there was no legal responsibil- ity for the City to protect the home owners; it could be argued that the citizens who moved next to a golf course knew there would be some problems however, the Commission had the ability to Condition future development on resolution of some of the existing problems. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 27, 1989 Page 3 PC - 565 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued In response to Com. Szabo's question, Mr. Kilian stated that with respect to liability, the golf club had limited exposure as long as they were not negligent in any fashion; it appeared to him that any negligence on the Club's part was the result of omission. The primary liability was the golfers; in addition, property owners assumed some of the risk. Mr. Nowicki cited California court cases which would be submitted to the City Attorney. Ms. Shaw reiterated the property damage and the bodily threats made by the golfers. MOTION: SECOND: VarE: Com. Szabo moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 Com. Sorensen was favorable to approval of the Application with revised Conditions; in addition, she wished to see increased parking and consideration of screening, if such did not detract from the area. Com. Claudy favored landscaping; he noted that the Commission did not want a wa1l. He added that the Applicant was proposing to increase the value and longevity of a private recreational facility in the City; such was a benefit to the City and the neighborhood. Com. Szabo suggested a screen be used with the proposed additional landscaping until the latter was sufficiently high to function effectively. Com. Mackenzie agreed that parking should be increased; however, he had reservations about the City becoming involved with residents and the Applicant to resolve problems. If a screen were to be used, a 20 ft. high net would be required in order to be effective. Mr. Cowan reviewed the dimensions of a screen needed to stop the golf balls; in addition, landscaping could be added and the first tee could be shifted slightly. MOTION: SECOND: VarE: MOTION: SECOND: VarE: Com. Sorensen moved approval of 44-EA-88. Com.Claudy Passed 5-0 Com. Szabo moved to approve 33-U-88 subject to conclusions and sub- conclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution with revised Conditions 1-6; and adding a Condition 7 to require the addition of a minimum of ten parking spaces and authorizing the Planning Director to work with the Applicant and neighbors to prevent the golf ba1ls from landing on adjacent properties. Com. Claudy Passed 5-0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 27, 1989 Page 4 PC - 565 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued ITEM 2: Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: 34-U-88.45-EA-88 Abdul Ali Surani Albert Armanini 20916 Homestead Rd. Use Permit to a1low a separate bar area and initiate full liquor service in an existing restaurant. FIRST HEARING ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: March 6, 1989 Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey reviewed the Application and presented the Floor Plan and aerial photograph of the site. Com. Sorensen questioned Staff Report, Table 1, Parkin!! Reauirement: Mr. Caughey agreed that under Costandi, Video, the "Restaurant Parking Demand" figure was incorreCt. Com. Claudy asked whether the number of seats in the restaurant could be verified. Mr. Caughey responded that Condition 2, Authorized Use, limited the total number of seats to 58; in addition, Condition 5, Hours of Qperation prohibited the use after 11:00 P.M. Chr. Adams asked that Condition 2 be amended to clearly indicate a total of 58 seats. ADplicant's Presentation: Mr. Abdul Surani stated that the restaurant had 80 seats when he purchased the operation; currently, they served 25-30 dinners on weeknights and up to 70 dinners on week ends. The restaurant closed at 9:30 P.M; some employees lived across the street and did not drive to work and two family members car pooled. In response to Chr. Adams' question, he confirmed that he understood and had no objection to a limitation of 85 restaurant seats. The Public Hearing was opened. Mr. Alben Arrnanini, Property Owner, stated that parking problems were a1leviated by the drive up window installed at an adjacent McDonalds; furthermore, parking was shared at this Center. MOTION: SECOND: VarE: MOTION: SECOND: VarE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 Com. Claudy moved approval of 45-EA-88. Com.Mackenzie Passed 5-0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 27, 1989 Page 5 PC - 565 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued MOTION: SECOND: VarE: ITEM 3: Com. Claudy moved to recommend approval of 34-U-88 subject to conclu- sions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution, Condition I; Condition 2 modified to read, "The subject Use Permit authorizes operation of a restaurant with separate bar area with a maximum of 58 seats..." Conditions 3-5. Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area Acres: IO-Z-88.46-EA-88 D. J. Randall D. 1. Randall Lots 11-14. Northwest terminus of Reman Rd. 540.000 SQ. ft. .lU Rezoning from City RI-80 (Single-family Residential) to City RHS (Hillside Residential) FIRST HEARING ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMlNA TION: Negative Declaration TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: March 20,1989 Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and presented a Zoning Map. Aoplicant's Presentation: None. The Public Hearing was opened. There were no speakers. MOTION: SECOND: VarE: MOTION: SECOND: VarE: MOTION: SECOND: VarE: Com. Sorensen moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Mackenzie Passed Com. Sorensen moved to approve 46-EA-88. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 5-0 Com. Sorensen moved to recommend approval of IO-Z-88 subject to con- clusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution. Com. Passed 5-0 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 27, 1989 Page 6 PC - 565 NEW BUSINESS: ITEM 4: ADI'lication I-M-89 - Mary Kunis: Requesting interpretation of a change of use for an existing structure on the north side of Peninsula Avenue, northerly of Stevens Creek Blvd. Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey reviewed the Application and the Staff Report. ADDlicant's Presentation: Ms. Kunis stated she intended to use the building for storage of tax records; clients would only come to the site when they wished to access these records. There was only herself, a phone answering person and an associate on-site; she reviewed the use and layout of the building. Com. Claudy stated that the layout of the floor area appeared to have a more intensive use than currently being proposed; he noted the lack of anyon-site parking for this building. Ms. Kunis responded that she would not be intensifying the use at this time; however, within the coming year she wished to do so. Com. Mackenzie confirmed that the Commission would like to see the three property owners work jointly to improve this site; he advised the Applicant to apply for a Condi- tional Use Permit. Com. Szabo noted that if the building was to be used for storage, no walls would be built; the partitions suggested private meeting rooms for clients. He stated that the parking deficiency would have to be resolved to warrant an intensity of use. The Commission agreed to allow six (6) month use as a storage facility; any plans to expand would require an application for a Conditional Use Permit The City Attorney noted for the record that the a1lowance of this six month temporary use did not in any way, prohibit the City from abating the uses, in the future. Mr. Caughey questioned whether the necessary building permits to make the building habitable, would be issued; consensus reached that such permits could be issued. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve I-M-89 a Minute Order interpreteting a proposed change of use activity as an office use rather than an extension of the former record storage/management use at 10022 Peninsula Avenue, adding a paragraph on the entitlement to any permit necessary to make the building habitable and safe and a fmal paragraph to permit use not to exceed a six (6) month temporary use of the building for storage of records and was contingent upon the diligent pursuit of a Conditional Use Permit which did not serve as precedence for continued right of use in the future. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VarE: Passed 5-0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 27, 1989 Page 7 PC - 565 NEW BUSINESS Continued ITEM 5: Application 2-M-89 - Larry and Diane Wall: Requesting interpretation of the definition of a structure as applied to location of a basketball backstop in a front setback area. The property is located at 1104 November Drive. Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey reviewed the Application. Com. Claudy noted for the record that this action, if adopted, was to set a general policy direction, and was not directed at this Application per se; he did not object to this request Com. Mackenzie added that for homes with a minimum 5 ft. minimum sideyard setback, the expected action in such a situation would be to install a basketba1l backstop to the side of the driveway. Applicant's Presentation: Applicants were present but did not address the Commission. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve 2-M-89, a Minute Order interpreting the non-applicability of the definition of a structure to certain types of non- habitable play and utility devices. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VarE: Passed 5-0 OLD BUSINESS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Com. Sorensen noted the rental sign on the Postal Office site; Mr. Cowan provided information available on this issue. Com. Szabo requested information on the Vidovich appeal. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR: Mr. Cowan reported on recent actions of City Council of interest to the Commission. DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: None ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 9:27 P.M. to the next Regular Meeting of March 13, 1989 at 7:30 P.M.