Loading...
PC 05-10-82 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON MAY 10, 1982 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Adams, Binneweg, Blaine, Koenitzer, Chairperson Claudy Staff Present: Director of Planning and Development Sisk (8:00 p.m.) Assistant Planning Director Cowan Associate Planner Piasecki City Attorney Kilian Assistant City Engineer Whitten APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 12, 1982 - It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to approve as submitted. Minutes of Regular Adjourned Meeting of April 22, 1982 - It was moved by Corn. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to refer to staff for revision. Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 26, 1982 - It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unanimously to refer to the City Clerk to expand the Commission's discussion of the condi- tions on page 2, paragraph 2. POSTPONEMENT OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com Adams and passed unanimously to continue Item No.4, Application 9-TM-82 of Gerry Federspiel, to the meeting of June 14, 1982 to allow the applicant to modify the application. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Two communications were received relating to Item No.1 under Public Hearings. Mr. John Vidovich, De Anza Properties, submitted a communication con- cerning Item No.3. The other communication was a letter from Top Fashion Showcase relating to the General Plan. ORAL COMMUNICATION - None PC-383 Page 1 April 12 min- utes approved April 22 min- utes referred for revision April 26 min- utes referred to Clerk 9-TM-82 post- poned PCc:]83 p, 2 MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Application 3-U-82 of Michael & Valerie McElroy: Use Permit to sell beer and wine in an existing service station and Environ- mental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located on the southeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard in a P (Planned Development with General Commercial Intent) zoning district. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - May 17, 1982. Associate Planner Piasecki reviewed the application, exhibits and staff position with the Commission. Valerie McElroy, applicant, stated that the main objective of the station will continue to be the sale of gasoline and automotive repairs. She said it has been shown that the sale of cigarettes and beer increases the sale of gasoline. She assured the Commission that steps would be taken to prevent loitering at the station. Mr. John Plagge, Vice President, Westridge Country Club Association, spoke in opposition to the sale of wine and beer at the gas station. He presented a petition from residents in the area expressing strong opposition to the issuing of a use permit as the residents feel the sale of wine and beer is not compatible with the sale of gasoline. He also expressed displeasure with the general appearance of the traffic congestion at the intersection and asked if the McElroys or the Mobil Oil Company were presenting the application. (The applicant is the McElroys; the owner's signature on the application is Mobil Oil Co. The application was signed by both parties.) Mr. Alf Modine, 10385 Prune Tree Lane, also opposed the application and said he has seen problems such as tailgate parties develop when beer and wine are sold. Dale Stockstill, resident of Westridge and station lessor, felt the McElroys should be commended for their keeping the service station well signed and in good appearance. However, he opposed the selling of alcohol at a service station. He stated he had been involved in the pilot program (about 3~ years ago) but feels this location is not good for this purpose, nor is sale of alcohol compatible with sale of gasoline. He felt there were enough places to buy alcohol. He also expressed concern regarding law enforcement in the area and the impact of bikers at the station. Sally Jacklin, 22444 Ramona Court, stated that the McElroys have done a good job at the station and have cleaned it up. She stated she understands the neighborhood gas station may be a thing of the past but was concerned about bikers gathering. She said the present liquor store is already creating problems. Also, tailgate parties occur after the station closes. She expressed concern for neighborhood children who go to the station and buy candy if alcohol were sold. There is also a problem with litter. She stated she calls the polic several times a week with problems. Frenec Marki, 22383 Ramona Court, informed the Commission he was awaken about 1:30 a.m. by a policeman chasing a young man. He expressed be- lief that the easement between the station and the homes should be better cared for. He also stated that liquor and oil don't mix. PC-383 Page 3 d MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Discussion followed regarding the easement and the wall around it. The easement is owned by Mobil Oil. It is walled but is accessible via Foothill Boulevard. The houses in the immediate vicinity were constructed after the service station wall was built. Tom Perkins, 22434 Ramona Court, stated that there is a break in the wall around the easement that small children can slide through. There is a hedge covering the gap but it can be jumped over or walked through Mr. Perkins stated that there is already a problem with alcohol in the area because of the store across the street and expressed opposition to the sale of beer and wine at the service station. He felt enforce- ment of the condition prohibiting drinking of the alcohol on the prem- ises would be impossible unless the station were constantly policed. He also felt that this is not conducive to a family neighborhood. Assistant City Engineer Whitten stated that the easement under question is old Bellevue Avenue on the 1917 subdivision map and belongs to Mobil Oil but was abandoned when Montebello West was built. Ann Cabral, 10132 S. Foothill, stated that she had been hit and her car demolished by a drunk driver. She asked if the Commission were going to encourage people to fill up and booze up at the same time. She stated that drunk driving has got to be stopped. John Molner, 22425 Ramona Court, stated that he felt one liquor store on the corner was enough. The Mobil station opens early in the morning and noise abatement is needed early in the morning and after 11:00 p.m. He stated that he felt the area as not being policed very well. Rebecca Cabral, 10132 S. Foothill, informed the Commission that she own the house next to the Mobil station. She has a concern as she has called the police several times regarding problems with gangs and drinking parties at the liquor store. She has received good response from law enforcement agency. She stated that people park at the gas station and throw beer cans over the fence into her yard. She said that if the gas station sells liquor, the Sheriff's Department would probably hear from her regularly. A citizen spoke regarding the property between the homes and the gas station. This citizen believed it was part of Mobil's use permit allowing the station to be built that they were required to maintain the easement property. He felt that the City should pursue this and have them clean it up. He stated that one morning about 1:00 a.m. he heard a noise at the station. He walked to the end of the wall, peaked around and a law officer with a gun was there. The officer was chasing a person from the store with liquor. He requested that either the wall be built higher to stop accessibility or just tear the wall down. P~ 183 I "4 MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Glen Cabral, 10132 S. Foothill, resident next door to the station, said that right now the wall is coming down, it has been hit by cars coming from the liquor store. He stated that he felt one could not force the customer to leave the station to drink. He requested that no wine and beer be sold at the station. Commission questioned staff regarding the use permit and was told that there was the sale of some convenience items at the station now - some retailing not directly related to the sale of gas. The City requires use permit approval for "significant" increases in retail activity. This is obviously a subjective decision. The question is how much retail sales can occur and still be defined as a service station. The use permit was granted in 1967 by the County. The area was annexed by the City in 1968 and the use permit inherited. Chairperson Claudy stated that this sounded like a nuisance abatement situation. He suggested that perhaps the present wall could be removed incorporating the "no man's land" into the station's property with a new wall being built right next to the neighboring house. Com. Blaine suggested that the wall be discussed at another time as the use permit for beer and wine sales was a separate issue. Chair- person Claudy concurred. Mr. McElroy stated that he was not aware of whom owns the wall, but he would look into it. In regard to Condition No. 21, he requested that the Commission allow them to try the sale of beer and wine. He stated that there is only a 3' x 4' cooler which will allow for only a small amount of alcohol. He stated that his family lives in the neighborhood, that people have not contacted them regarding problems. A citizen inquired why if this business represents only a small amount of the income this was so important to the McElroys. He also stated that if they were a neighborhood station servicing the neighbors the applicants would not see an increase in revenues. He expressed the opinion that the point is to prevent the serving of transients. Mr. McElroy stated that he was in the business to sell gas. He was told if cigarettes were sold more gasoline would be sold. The volume did increase over 24% over previous months. Studies also show if a station offers beer in small amounts sales increase. The profits are not on the beer but on the auto associated sales. Glen Cabral stated that he could not understand how Mr. McElroy could own the station and not see what is going on. He expressed the opinion that the entire intersection has problems. P,,..L '.ic hearing C ,ed It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unanimously to close the public hearing. MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING City Attorney Kilian informed the Commission that State law prohibits public drunkenness, driving with open containers of alcohol and dis- t)lrbing the peace. He was not aware of any ordinances and they would probably be preempted by State law if there were any. Chairperson Claudy asked the City Attorney if the law would consider walking to the car in the lot drinking on premises or off premises. The City Attorney responded"on premises." Associate Beverage to revoke Planner Piasecki informed the Commission that the Alcoholic Control has rules on licensing and they can hold hearings any license. Discussion followed regarding Silver Oaks West planned development and potential for commercial uses there, particularly delicatessen and 7-11 type stores selling liquor. Doubt was expressed that this would occur. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unanimously to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unanimously to recommend denial of Application 3-U-82 as the service station is close to residential dwellings, it is a route to recreation areas, there are existing problems as documented by testimony and the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office has expressed concerns. Chairperson Claudy announced that discussion of the wall and easement would take place under new business. 2. Applications 2-Z-82 and 4-U-82 of William K. Kelley: Rezoning approximately .7 gross acre from General Commercial to P (Planned Development with General Commercial intent) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; Use Permit to construct a three story office building consisting of approxi- mately 28,000 sq. ft. and Environmental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and North De Anza Boulevard. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - June 7, 1982. Assistant Planning Director Cowan reviewed the applications and stated that they were examples of a trend to redevelop older sites to more intensive uses. He also showed aerial photos of the site. He stated that in the staff's opinion the key iS3ue is the inte'!::ls::.ty of the proposed development. He stated that staff feels thó.t this higher level warrants a General Plan review and that the use permit applica- tion should be continued for one month. He also stated that the full underground parking facility is unique in Cupertino and that eventu- ally this project would be linked to surrounding development. The staf recommends that the rezoning be approved and that Ü.e use permit be continued for one month. PC-383 Page 5 Negative Dec. recommended for 3-U-82 3-U-82 recom- mended for denial P~ 383 .L ~2 6 MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Robert Bernstein, architect, Palo Alto, informed the Commission that he had met with staff before any designing of the project. He felt the City was looking for something special at this intersec- tion that would be urban and pedestrian oriented. He stated that the design of the building provides for open vistas at the corner and pedestrian space. He read a letter regarding the architectural concept of the proposed building - open space at ground level, a sophisticated building, twentieth century building materials. He felt the design invited pedestrian activity in the plaza area. The building will be sheathed in dark glass which is non-reflective and non-transparent during the day. Mr. William K. Kelley, applicant, 305 Lytton St., Palo Alto, stated that he was proud of the building. He had noticed that the inter- section does have a high level of traffic and felt that the building was good architecturally for the area. He also stated that he was somewhat flexible regarding timing on the applications. Discussion followed regarding the color of the glass to be used. It is a Greylite #14 which appears black. During the day there is a hint of some light. However, the building does appear as one material and does not give a ribbon effect. Bronze glass is transparent, and a ribbon effect occurs as the structure of the building can be seen. Chairperson Claudy inquired why the architect wanted to achieve a I1monolithicll appearance rather than a Four Phase type of appearance. He was informed that this is a smaller building than Four Phase and the applicant did not wish to emulate Four Phase. This is an urban design, almost a sculpture, and the color proposed would not fight with other colors already in the area. Discussion followed regarding glare (the proposed glass is not mirror glass) and street furniture that might be provided for pedestrians. Mr. Bernstein stated that they were striving for an inviting, friendly and open atmosphere. Assistant Planning Director Cowan stated that at the Crossroads area the intent was for an urban feel. This is the present policy of the City. Concern was expressed by the Commission regarding the massiveness of the buildings and the angle of view. Mr. Kelley stated that visually the building is neither close to the street nor oppressive. On either end of De Anza Boulevard what will be seen is the second floor balcony. The only vertical wall directly on De Anza is not seen - the balcony is seen. Public hearing closed It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unanimously to close the public hearing on Application 2-Z-82. MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING It was moved by Com. Koenitzer~ seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to recommend granting of a Negative Declaration for Applica tion 2-Z-82. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed unanimously to recommend approval of Application 2-Z-82 with the stan- dard conditions and Conditions 15-19 as contained in Planning Commissio Resolution No. 2305 per findings and sub conclusions in the staff report. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unan- imously to continue the hearing on Application 4-U-82 to the regular meeting of June 14, 1982. 3. Application 3-TM-82 of John Vidovich: Tentative Map to subdivide approximately 7.4 acres into 96 residential condominium parcels and five common area parcels and Environmental Review: The project was previously assessed, hence, no action is required. The subject property is located in the southwesterly quadrant of Homestead Road and De Anza Boulevard just north of Highway 280 (behind Home- stead Square Shopping Center and De Anza Lumber) in a P (Planned Development with residential 10-20 dwelling units per gross acre and mini-storage intent) zoning district. First Hearing. Tentativ City Council hearing date - May 17, 1982. Associate Planner Piasecki reviewed the staff report and exhibit of the site plan with the Commission. He stated that the applicant requests the Planning Commission reconsider the requirement of the sixteen resi- dential units at the same time as construction of mini-storage. He stated that the Planning Commission could not reconsider as there was no new information, could initiate a change in the conditions, could approve the tentative map conditions and the application be held at Council level, or could delay the application at this time. However, the condition could not be changed this evening. The use permit re- quires the sixteen buildings, the tentative map says on Lot No.1. Assistant City Engineer Whitten stated that certain improvements had been tied to Lot No. 1 Associate Planner Piasecki informed the Commission that Council had waived the BMR requirements for this first phase. Those units would have to be built in the next phase. The condition could say that the tentative map state that the mini-storage facility not be occupied until the two residential buildings (16 units) are finalled. The Commission requested that the particular use permit condition be read. Condition 23. (last half) The mini-storage facility shall be constructed in conjunction with construction of at least two resi- dential buildings for a total of 16 units. PC-383 Page 7 Negative Dec. recommended for 2-Z-82 2-Z-82 recom- mended for approval 4-U-82 contin- ued PG-383 , 8 MINUTES OF THE MAY 10, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Mr. John Vidovich, De Anza-Forge, stated that he would like the tentative map approved. He realized the condition could not be changed at this time. The reasons he would like it changed: when he was asked to build the two buildings at the same time as the mini- storage he assumed he would get financing. However, he is having difficulty and felt that it would be better for the construction to be done separately. He stated that working drawings on the residential units have been done. It would be necessary to move a sewer line for these residential units. He stated that prior to construction of the mini-storage building he would submit working drawings for the residential which shows a substantial investment. A decorative wall will be built around the area. He stated he was not trying to escape building the housing, he would get construction started. He stated that this was a joint venture with Mr. Otis Forge, a long-time resident of Cupertino. He expressed the opinion that it was not fair to delay part of the project because some things were out of their control. He stated that there was no objection to building residential, just difficulty in getting financing. Chairperson Claudy stated that there were two issues. First is approval of the tentative map, then it would be necessary to hold a public hearing to change the use permit as they would be in conflict. He stated that the Commission could delay this and schedule a public hearing on both applications or decide to make no change and approve the tentative map tonight. Discussion followed regarding public hearings in use permit requirements. 3-TM-82 continued It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unanimously to continue the public hearing to June 14 at which time a joint hearing on both the use permit and tentative map would be conducted. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS - Easement behind Mobil station. The City Attorney stated that the City Council could hold a noticed hearing for abatement of a public nuisance. The Commission could send a minute order or resolution to Council requesting such a hearing. Discussion followed regarding the possibility of the building of a higher wall. Associate regarding McElroys. regarding Planner Piasecki suggested that staff do some research the easement and contact both Mobil Oil Corp. and the The staff would also contact the Sheriff's Department existing problems in the area.