Loading...
PC 01-23-89 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 JANUARY 23, 1989 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Chairwoman Sorensen Vice Chairman Adams Commissioner CIaudy Commissioner Mackenzie 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: MOTION: Com. Adams moved to approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 9, 1989, as presented. SECOND: Com. Claudy VarE: Passed 5-0 " WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS/ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: MOTION: SECOND: MOTION: SECOND: VarE: Com. Claudy nominated Com. Adams for Chairperson of the Commission. Com. Mackenzie Com. Mackenzie moved to close the nominations. Com. Claudy Passed, Com. Adams abstaining 4-0-1 4-0-1 The Chair ca1led for the Vote: Passed, Com. Adams abstaining MOTION: Com. Mackenzie nominated Com. Claudy for Vice Chairperson. SECOND: Com. Adams MOTION: SECOND: VarE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the nominations. Com. Adams Passed, Com. Claudy abstaining 4-0-1 4-0-1 The Chair ca1led for the Vote: Passed, Com. Claudy abstaining PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 2 PC -563 PUBLIC HEARINGS: ITEM I: Application No(s) Applicant; Property Owner; Location; Parcel Area (Acres): 31-U-88 Donald Lucas Matrix Properties Southwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Finch Ave. .84 Acres USE PERMIT: (31-U-88) To convert an existing savings and loan building to general administrative office usage and to allow outdoor display of automobiles for advertising purposes. FIRST HEARING ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt. Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and presented a Site Plan. In response to Com. Claudy's question whether the property to the west, the Santa Clara Water District property, would be improved to the Stevens Creek Blvd. standards, he responded that such was possible in the future. In response to Chr. Adams' question about the Display Patio Access, he suggested that the Applicant be asked to address this item. Com. Claudy suggested consideration of alternative measures stated in F) SecuritY. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Hollis Logue, Architect, presented photographs and stated that renderings submitted earlier unduly>emphasized the display of cars which was not intended. He commented as follows on the Staff Report, Iv. Discussion: - B. Stora~e/Gara~e; the 3 ft. wide planter on the north property line would not be able to be seen off-site. He felt it would be advantageous to allow the Applicants to build as close to the property line as possible; such would not encroach on other's sight line. - C. 1) Applicants would agree that an enlarged wheel chair ramp would be a logical solution rather than the temporary ramps proposed by them. - E. Fronta~e Landscapin~: Applicants were amenable to the minimum ten foot park- way with a five foot wide sidewalk in accordance with the Stevens Creek Blvd. Side- walk Plan when the remaining people on the block also installed the landscaping and sidewalk. He noted the difficulties of installing such at this time. In response the questions of the Commission, Mr. Logue stated that the Applicants prefer- red to keep the existing planters in their present location which prevented display cars from being removed; however, they wished to remove the trellis and monument sign. Mr. Don Lucas, Applicant, agreed that the artist's renderings featured the cars more promi- nently than they intended. The original request was for 6-8 display cars; however assuming that there would be opposition to such a request, the request was sc~led down to 4 display cars. This was the absolute minimum in order to achieve theIr obJecttves. Applicants were agreeable to consideration of alternative security measures. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 3 PC -563 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued In response to Chr. Adams' question, Mr. Lucas stated that it was their intent to have 2-3 cars inside the building in addition to the display vehicles; if the display cars had to be removed from the front of the building area, they would be parked in the rear area. He confirmed that the building would be modified to install garage doors in the rear. Applicants represented seven franchises and intended to have a model or two of each of these cars; the business would be the administration of the leasing operation. Com. Claudy commented that the community was not favorable to a sales type operation. Mr. Lucas reviewed the storage of cars on-site and the administrative/office operation that would take place; in the majority of instances, the client would have already chosen their car and would be coming the the Cupertino facility to sign the paper work. He stated that there would be absolutely no test driving of the vehicles at this site. The Public Hearing was then opened. Mr. Mark Wong, President, Villa Calabazas Homeowners Association, read into the record a statement objecting to the use of the building for display of automobiles, potential traffic, noise and visual impacts; he questioned the hours of operation and noted the chronic park- ing problems. In the past, the residential site had been used as a shortcut to the property in question. He asked that restrictions be placed on this Application to address their concerns. Ms. Linda Kelly, Secretary, Villa Calabazas Homeowners Association, concurred with the above statement. Mr. Arnold Bakaler, 10075 Craft Dr., Cllpertino, asked that character of this residential complex be maintained; he noted the proximity of the commercial and residential properties. He called attention to the attractiveness of the industrial parkway, with the exception of this site, and asked that this attractiveness be maintained. Ms Dianne Golden, 10067 Craft Dr., Cupertino, was concerned regarding the change in appearance of this entry way into the City; she objected to the display of cars at this site and was unfavorable to the "space canopy" proposed, which was incongruent with the area. Mr. Bob Golden, 10067 Craft Dr., Cupertino, noted that cars were not displayed at the corporate headquarters in San Jose and questioned why such was requested for this site; he objected to allowing this type of crass commercialism in the City of Cupertino. Mr. Ron Lan, 10081 Craft Dr., Cupertino, reiterated the concerns expressed above and objected to the potential use of the residential site as a short cut by high school students going to see the display cars after regular hours of business. Mr. Cowan suggested that a compromise be considered. This was a mixed use develop- ment; the usual barriers between residential and commercial uses would not exist. Mr. Logue stated that the letter from Mr. Lucas outlined the hours of operation; he reiter- ated that this was to be a corporate headquarters not a dealership. He felt that traffic would decrease since there would be less employees on-site. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 4 PC -563 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Mr. Lucas stated that his letter accurately defined the hours of operation. The proposed leasing operation was reviewed and defined; in response to Com. Sorensen's question, he stated that he could not give a specific answer whether customers would be picking up their newly leased cars or notnpossibly 50% of the time, they would be picking up the car. In response to Com. Szabo and Mackenzie's questions about hours of operation wherein customers would be coming to the office, he noted that appointments would be scheduled on Saturdays; he could nO( promise that appointments would not be set for the evening hours. He felt it would be a real problem to restrict the appointment schedule; however, he was confident that there would not be complaints from neighbors after a year of operation. Com. Mackenzie suggested that the Use Permit be Conditioned to state that that the Com- mission reserved the right to review this Application upon receipt of a complaint. He was favorable to the proposed use; however, he had concerns to be addressed, namely: - No test drives allowed - Limit the number of parked, unlicensed cars on-site to 4-5 Replacement of the commercial-type garage roll up doors to a roll up door commonly seen in residential use; such would provide a better transition with the adjacent use - Proposed "space canopy" to be reduced by half - Any parked cars in the front area are to be kept toward the building, nO( the street Use of silent burglar alarms; no loud speaker system to be allowed Com. Sorensen felt that if the space canopy were allowed, the tree cages were incompatible; she wished the Conditions to address the question of security and favored the landscaping required by the Stevens Creek Blvd. Sidewalk Plan. Mr. Lucas commented as follows: They were not opposed to resiting the garage if such were beneficial to adjacent residents With respect to the question of security, a protective device could be installed to address this concern; alternatives were discussed - Would commit to a prohibition on test drives at the site Hours of operation could start at 8:00 A.M. Cars in the rear could be limited to 5 Relocation of the garage Would accept the reduction of the space canopy proposed Cars would be displayed close to the building, not adjacent to the street Favored the planter area to remain which was in itself a protection measure Had no plans to install additional outdoor lighting Use of specified (silent) alarms could be addressed Mr. Lucas stated that his option on this property extended to February 7th, with the Council hearing scheduled for February 6th; he asked that the Item not be Continued. Com. Claudy commented that the space canopy was appropriate to the design of this large, contemporary building; however, he was concerned about landscaping in the fron~ of the site. He would accept a deferred agreement regarding the Stevens Creek Blvd. SIdewalk Plan; however, significant landscaping would have to be installed in the planter area. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 5 PC -563 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Chr. Adams noted that the Applicant requested a decision on this Application. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Claudy Passed 5-0 Com. Mackenzie stated that he was prepared to make a Motion; the Commission was polled to determine the Conditions to be imposed. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: ITEM 2: Com. Mackenzie moved to recommend approval of 31-U-88 subject to con- clusions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution; Conditions 1-13; Condition 14 add a paragraph to limit the hours of customer contact to 8:00 AM.to 8:00 P.M. Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM. to 4:00 P.M. Saturday; hours of operation not allowed Sunday. In addition, the Commission reserves the right to hold a Public Hearing and to further restrict the hours of operation upon receipt of a complaint within the year. Condition 15 modified to add a paragraph stating that no more than five (5) parking spaces can be used for unregistered/unlicensed cars in the rear. Conditions 16-17; Condition 18 modified to state, "A maximum of three (3) vehicles may be displayed adjacent to the north side of the building..." Condition 19 modified to require that Architectural and Site Committee shall review the security plan and requiring that a silent burglar alarm system be used. Condition 20 modified to require a deed restriction and state an alternate location for the Car Storage Building. In addition, residential type garage roll-up doors are to be required in place of the industrial roll-up doors shown on the plans. Condition 21; Condition 22 add a paragraph to Section A) stating that the Stevens Creek Sidewalk Plan can be deferred. Improvement of the Mercury Savings site and/or the Santa Clara Valley Water District area would trigger a City Council review of this site for similar im- provements. In Section B) the landscaping and tree plan to be reviewed by Architectural and Site Review Committee. Trellises and the existing monu- ment sign are to be removed. A new application for signage is to be sub- mitted for approval.. In Section C) delete, "two" and replace with "three (3) outdoor vehicle display spaces." Add a Condition 23 prohibiting test drives. Add a Condition 24 prohibiting external loud speaker or other sound systems. Add a Condition 25 to require the space canopy to be reduced by half. Com. Sza.bo Passed 5-0 Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area: 20-TM-88 Crai~ CJark Dzidra Silver North side of Dolores Ave.. 200 ft. west of Oran le Ave. .45 Gross PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 6 PC -563 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued TENTATIVE MAP (20-TM-88) To subdivide one lot into two parcels measuring 7,855 sq. ft. and 9,550 sq. ft. respectively. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt. Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application A,¡¡plicant's Presentation: None. The Public Hearing was opened. There were no speakers. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Szabo Passed 5-0 Com. Szabo moved approval of 20-TM-88 subject to conclusions and sub- conclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution. Com. Mackenzie Passed 5-0 Break: 9:15 - 9:30 P.M. ITEM 3 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 1) 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 PLANNING COMMISSION MlNUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 7 PC ·563 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Staff Presentation: Mr. Caughey reviewed the application and presented a rendering pre- pared by the Applicant; Staff requested direction on design issues from the Commission. He summarized a letter presented by a member of the public who was no longer present. Com. Claudy questioned the social mechanics of the assumption being made, that locating the living areas of the house would facilitate the interaction between adjacent residents. Mr. Caughey responded that relationships with neighbors were initially based on visual contact; such was facilitated by locating living, dining and kitchen areas on the first floor. Com. Claudy had reservations regarding the benefits to be gained from such a redesign. Com. Sorensen stated that her main concern was the use of landscaping on this site. Com. Mackenzie suggested the addition of windows and architectural treatment to break up . the mass of the side walls and integrate this development with the existing neighborhood. Chr. Adams noted the improvement of revised plans over previous plans submitted. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Larry Guy, Applicant, commented as follows: - Reviewed the architectural changes and the amenities provided in this project - They had addressed the concerns raised by the Commission at the previous hearing: parking was increased and screened by landscaping, driveway aprons were eliminated While the plan could be reversed to place the living area on the ground floor, their experience showed that people kept their drapes drawn to prevent privacy intrusion The plan presented had a kitchen and family room that looked out onto the street - Noted the size of the rear yard area and patio area Requested approval of this Application' Mr. Guy suggested modifications that could be made in response to Com. Mackenzie's comment; he stated that additional detail would be provided for the Commission. The Public Hearing. was opened. There were no speakers. The Public Hearing remained open. . MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: ITEM 4: Com. Sorensen moved to Continue 8-Z-88, 28-U-88 and 36-EA-88 to February 13, 1989. Com. Claudy Passed 5-0 Application No(s) Applicant: Property Owner: Location: Parcel Area: I-V-89 Pen:}' and Jones Development Perry and Jones Development North side of future Villa Maria Ct. westerly of Rainbow Dr. ..2l VARIANCE (I-V-89) Variance from Section 10.3 of Ordinance 1450 to allow a front setback depth of 14.8 ft. in lieu of 20 ft. required. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 8 PC -563 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued FIRST HEARING ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL DATE: February 6, 1989 Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan reviewed the Application and presented the Site Plan showing the constraints of the lot; Staff recommended the granting of a Variance. Com. Claudy stated that even he could see the need for a Variance. Applicant's Presentation: None. The Public Hearing was opened. There were no speakers. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to close the Public Hearing. Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 MOTION: Com. Claudy moved to recommend approval of I-V-SS subject to conclu- sions and subconclusions of the Staff Report and this Hearing per the Model Resolution. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 5-0 NEW BUSINESS: ITEM 5: " File 81.004.130 - A~ricultural/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 zonmg 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 reviewed the Application. He noted a change in the Recommendation; there was an opportunity to solicit the comments of the Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff wished to pursue this option. Final draft of the Ordinance would be presented February 13, 1989. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 Page 9 PC -563 NEW BUSINESS Continued Chr. Adams cited Section 3: Purpose of creating a Private Recreation (FP) Zone was for the "cultural and recreational needs of the community..." In Section 6: Permitted Uses. he questioned whether 3) Recreational vehicle park, except those offering permanent space rental option and 8) Camp grounds were appropriate in this category; these uses would seem to serve the visitor/tourist rather than the community. Com. Claudy questioned whether the proposed three Characterizations of Rural, Semi-rural and Urban should be retained; in addition, consideration could be given to the addition of an Outdoor, Indoor Characterization. Com. Mackenzie questioned whether the Suffix in Permitted Uses needed to be retained. Mr. Caughey thanked the Commission for their consideration; Final draft would be pre- sented for review at the February 13th Meeting. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Mackenzie moved to Continue File 81.004.130 - A(lriculturallRecre- ational (A-ua Zone) to February 13, 1989. Com. Sorensen Passed 5-0 OTHER BUSINESS: Chr. Adams and Com. Claudy congratulated Com. Mackenzie, Sorensen and Szabo on their appointment to a second term on the Planning Commission. OLD BUSINESS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Com. Claudy asked that recycling bins at the old Alpha Beta be cleaned up. He noted the condition of awning on Mulligaos; Staff confirmed that an application was being made for removal of the awnings and a new sign program. He cited the trash and garbage at the Meryvns and Pay less Shopping Centers. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR: Written Report submitted. DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: None ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 10:28 P.M. to the next Regular Meeting of February 13, 1989 at 7:30 P.M.