Loading...
PC 02-13-89 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 13, 1989 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Chairman Adams Vice Chairman Claudy Commissioner Mackenzie Commissioner Sorensen Commissioner Szabo Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Planning and Development Mark Caughey, Associate Planner Glen Grigg, Traffic Engineer Leslie Lopez, Deputy City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Com. Sorensen asked that Page 3 be amended to read, "Ms. Dianne Golden..." MOTION: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve Minutes of Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989, as amended. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 5-0 POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: - Letter from Larry and Diane Wall, Re: Neighborhood compliant against basketball pole at 1104 November Dr., Cupertino, dated January 30, 1989. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ITEM 1: Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area: 8-Z-88. 28-U-88. 14-TM-88 and 36-EA-88 Landmark Development Lawrence Guy Gardenside Ln.. north of Rainbow Dr. 2.6 + (Phase n PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 13, 1989 Page 2 PC - 564 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued REZONING (8-Z-88) From P(R-3) Planned Development with residential multiple family intent to P Planned Development with single-family residential 10-20 dwelling units per acre intent or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. USE PERMIT (28-U-88) To construct 36 single-family residential dwellings as the first phase of a possible two-phase project. TENTATIVE MAP (14-TM-88) To subdivide five separate parcels into 36 parcels with one additional lot to be held in common ownership. CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 28, 1988. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration (Phase I) TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL DATE: Unknown Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey reviewed the Application, discussing the project revisions. Com. Mackenzie noted a discrepancy in Staff Report II. Proiect Data Proposed: 122 spaces (3.4 spaceslD.U.) and IV. Use Permit Issues, E., Parking which was listed at 3.5 SPlUnit; Mr. Caughey responded that the discrepancy was due to rounding the numbers. Mr. Caughey stated that there was a minor technical flaw in the Tentative Map; Lots 27-35 had the guest parking spaces shown between the residential units; these spaces actually extended to the south property line; there was private open space in a portion of the area adjoining the south property line. A revised Tentative Map had been presented to Staff. Finally, Condition 18 of the Model Resolution could be stricken, per direction of the Public Works Department which had determined that while extraordinary off-site improvements would be done, such would not addressed in the standard development Conditions. Com. Szabo questioned where overflow parking could be accommodated; Mr. Grigg responded that there would be space available on both Rainbow Dr. and Gardenside Ln. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Larry Guy stated that a 3.4 parking ratio had been achieved; 3 spaces per unit were provided with additional parking located adjacent to the pool area and to the rear of the site. With respect to the elevations facing Gardenside Ln., architec- tural trim had been added to the structures; height of the units throughout the development had been varied. In response to Com. Sorensen, he confirmed that parking on the east side would remain. In response to Com. Mackenzie, Mr. Caughey confirmed that the palette and materials were subject to further review by the Architectural and Site Review Committee. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 13. 1989 Page 3 PC - 564 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued The Public Hearing was opened. Ms. Trish Hopkins, 20719 Garden Manor Ct., Cupertino, commented as follows: - Asked that construction equipment enter and exit off of Rainbow Dr. so that Gardenside Ln. would not be damaged by the equipment. Asked that in Phase II of the project, Rainbow Dr. be used to prevent all the traffic from ingress/egress on Gardenside Ln. Mr. Cowan responded that such a requirement was not usually be placed on a project of this scale which did not require extraordinary equipment; to do so would set a precedent. With respect to the second request, such would be addressed when the Phase II application had been received. However, the Commission and/or the Council could make such a determination, if they so wished. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Claudy moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 Com. Mackenzie stated that he was concerned about the parking; in addition, he asked that Architectural and Site Review Committee reviewed this Application. Consensus reached by the Commission that Condition 26, Parkin¡ ;. of 28-U-88, be amended to read, "A minimum of 122 off-street parking spaces to be provided with a mini- mum of two enclosed spaces per unit." Final sentence amended to read, "Said CC&R's shall also provide that outdoor parking spaces not be occupied by R.Y.'s, boats, inoperable vehicles or be used for long-term storage of vehicles. (Long term storage to be defined as 72 hours). MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Sorensen moved to approve 36-EA-88. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Com. Claudy moved to recommend approval of 8-Z-88 subject to conclusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution. Com. Szabo Passed 5-0 Com. Mackenzie moved to to recommend approval of 14-TM-88 subject to conslusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution, Conditions 1-17; Condition 18 stricken with the following Conditions renumbered; Condition 19 (18); Condition 20 (19) amended to label Exhibit A-8, "February 13, 1988". Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 13, 1989 Page 4 PC - 564 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: ITEM 2: Com. Sorensen moved to recommend approval of 28-U-88 subject to con- clusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution; Conditions 1-25; Condition 26 amended to read in part, "A minimum of 122 off-street parking spaces to be provided with a minimum of two enclosed spaces per unit." Final sentence to read, "Said CC&R's shall also provide that outdoor parking spaces not be occupied by R. v.'s, boats, inoperable vehicles or be used for long-term storage of vehicles. (Long term storage to be defined as 72 hours). Com. Claudy Passed 5-0 File 81.004.130 - Ailricultural/Recreational (A-ua Zone) - Requesting Planning Commission review of an amendment of the existing A-ua Zone or establishment of a new private recreation zone incorporating definitions, allowed uses and zoning standards for private outdoor recreation uses. CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 12, 1988. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration Recommended TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL DATE: February 20, 1989 Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey presented the revised Ordinance. The Public Hearing was opened. There were no speakers. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Claudy moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Com. Sorensen suggested that ice rinks be listed as an indoor recreational use in California. Com. Mackenzie stated that in Section 3: Purpose. the first sentence of the second para- graph could be deleted; cost was not the only reason public agencies did not sponsor some recreational activities. Mr. Caughey responded that the statement was taken directly from the 1979 General Plan; however, it could be deleted if the Commission so wished. Consensus reached that the second paragraph of Section 3 read, "The FP zoning ordinance is intended to encourage a diverse range of recreational development by private interests. At the same time, the use intensity of any site in the FP zone is determined by application of performance standards which ensure a compatible fit with the site's geographIc and environmental setting." MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Claudy moved to grant a Negative Declaration. Com. Szabo Passed 5-0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 13. 1989 Page 5 PC - 564 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Claudy moved to recommend approval of Application 81.004.130 per the Model Resolution, Section 3 amended to delete the first sentence of the second paragraph. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 NEW BUSINESS: ITEM 3: Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area (Acres): 19-U-88 (Revised) Kinst Company William Kinst Northeast corner of Pasadena and Lomita Ave. .34 j¡ross USE PERMTI; MINOR AMENDMENT: Requesting approval of architectural modifi- cations, and addition of a dormer window to one of two residential structures comprising a four unity townhouse development. Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Item and presented a Site and Plot Plans. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. William Kinst responded to the Commission's inquiry that there was no balcony on Unit 4; he had no objection to the recommended Conditions. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: ITEM 4: Com. Mackenzie moved to approve architectural modifications to 19-U-88 (Revised).per the Model Resolution. Com. Sorensen ~~~ 5~ Application: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area (Acres) 8-U-88 (Revised) and 15-EA-88 Cali Land Same Southwest Quadrant of Blaney Ave. and Stevens Creek Blvd. 2..l USE PERMIT: Requesting approval of the first phase development plan for a multi- building retail complex. Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and presented an Exhibit showing the Conceptual Site Plan. Applicant was asked to addre~ the Commissioner's questions. Com. Mackenzie stated he did not object to the architecture proposed; however, he wished to see three separate phases in this project. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 13, 1989 Page 6 PC - 564 NEW BUSINESS Continued Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Gary Schmidt, Partner, commented as follows: - Reviewed efforts to upgrade the front building and confirmed that Hamasushi Restaurant had bought out the Nite Cap Lounge and would consolidate the two operations - Stated it would take several years to complete the project; Applicants were attempting to buyout and/or negotiate the current leases. He noted the hardship of relocating tenants during the remodeling; every attempt was being made to work out a solution - With respect to the beauty parlor operation, the lease was for a beauty salon with the standard provisions; a cease and desist order for any illegal activities had been issued - Was unfamiliar with the R.Y. parked on-site; however, this property had always attracted such vehicles; the remodeling was expected to help rectify the situation Mr. Cowan noted two minor amendments to Condition 1, Phasin¡¡: - Add a reference to the drawing presented at the hearing Final paragraph amended to read in part, "The 'exterior' remodeling of the Hamasushi Restaurant building.... MOTION: Com. Claudy moved approval of a modification to the Use Permit Application 8-U-88 (Revised) subject to conclusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution, Condition 1 amended to add a reference to the drawing submitted at the hearing; final paragraph to read in part, "The 'exterior' remodeling of the Hamasushi Restaurant building.... Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 SECOND: VOTE: OLD BUSINESS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: None. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR: Written Report submitted. DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: None ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 8:35 P.M. to the next Regular Meeting of February 27, 1989 at 7:30 P.M.