Loading...
PC 02-09-82 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 PC-376 Page 1 MINUTES OF HELD ON THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COM}!ISSION FEBRUARY 9, 1982, KENNEDY JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA Chairperson Claudy called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., Kennedy Junior High School. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Adams, Binneweg, Blaine, Koenitzer, Chairperson Claudy Staff Present: Director of Planning and Development Sisk City Clerk Cornelius Director of Public Works Viskovich Assistant Planning Director Cowan City Attorney Kilian Director of Parks and Recreatiaþ Dowling Approximately 175-200 citizens were present. Chairperson Claudy introduced the Commission and staff members and stated that this was the third public hearing for the proposed Seven Spring Ranch development. He gave a brief review of the prezoning process and stated that the Planning Commission will probably meet regarding this matter again on February 22, 1982. Mrs. Fay King, 7748 Squirehill Court, spoke in opposition to the poten- tial widening of Stelling Road to four lanes. She stated that those in the courts off Stelling were often trapped. She recommended the widening to either five or three lanes to allow for stacking lanes. She also stated that there were many speeders in the area. Dr. Barbara Stofer, 20555 Prospect Road, requested that the area be subdivided in a reasonable way. Her preference was open space, as an alternateJa low density development. Concerns were sewer capacity, lack of water, traffic and density. She stated that Highway 85 should be completed or there should be no development. She requested that density be cut to 1/2 or 1/3 of the proposal. She also suggested that the City conduct a contest for school children to develop plans. Dr. Stofer stated that the City government's job is to consider those who have been here in the community. Mrs. Jones, 21550 Edward Way, showed a transparency demonstrating the various paths she uses to drive her daughter to school. She stated that often her daughter ends up walking. She further stated that traffic was already "broken down" on J:1cClellan by the golf course and on Rainbow. She stated that the Bubb and McClellan intersection is choked by a four-way traffic light and that road should be reserved for residents and that other traffic should be on some kind of freeway. PC~376 P 2 MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 1982 PLANNING CO}!MISSION }ŒETING Kirchner Forrest, 11360 So. Stelling Road, representing the Home- owners Association of Cupertino, expressed the opinion that not much thought had gone into what's going on. He stated that no one wants high density. He expressed concern regarding the additional traffic on Stelling as he could not get out of his driveway now. He stated that if Stelling was widened to four lanes there would just be more congestion. He also stated that the signs prohibiting trucks were not visible until drivers were already on the road. He requested that Highway 85 be completed and requested information regarding costs of each traffic alternative and if each were added up, how far would the figure come from completion of Highway 85. He expressed concern regarding the effect that additional homes would have on law enforcement capability. He said that he had heard a rumor of a recall if citizens protesting this development do not get consideration. He suggested that Stelling be widened to three lanes, two in the direction of heavy traffic during the morning commute and then changing to the opposite direction in the evening for the late commute. He asked if it were fair to close traffic to one area and push it on another (this is a Council decision). He asked if widening Stelling would encourage or discourage traffic flow (he was told that it could encourage traffic flow). He asked if residential streets were for residential use (yes), is Stelling a residential street (no). (City Clerk's Note: The responses to questions were from the Director of Public Works.) Chairperson Claudy stated that Stelling is an arterial street and the majority of traffic was from the local residents. He further stated that Council was elected, not the Planning Commission. The Commission is chosen to serve all the City and not just one neighborhood. They are an advisory body to Council. Mr. Forrest asked if it were possible to close Stelling part of the day to allow residents to get in and out. He also asked if a fair proportion of the residents' taxes were being spent in the residents' neighborhood. Chairperson Claudy stated that they probably were, basically for street maintenance, police and fire. Opal Lemmer, 1120 So. Stelling Road, stated that she has tried various routes in driving to work and has found them all to be congested. She stated that Cupertino was no longer a nice place to live and she would like to move, basically because the town is choked by traffic. She felt that widening Stelling would not make things better, and asked how it could be considered to let more houses be built and to have more traffic and more people when the town cannot handle what it already has. Ann Anger, 10185 Empire Avenue, stated that she had been working with the City of Cupertino for 11 years to attain the completion of Highway 85. She introduced Dave Fadness, the Chairperson of the Multimodal Task Force. He stated that the appropriate authorities in Washington, D. C. have signed off on the Highway 85 Corridor EIS ---- MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-376 Page 3 and that the corridor is not a dead issue. With the signing of the EIS,approximately $6 million is available to protect the Highway 85 corridor. He stated that it was a mistake to boost local streets and recommended that money not be spent that way. He further stated that in 1957 Route 85 was promised, and he urged citizens to make the state follow through on that promise. Mr. Robert Anthony, resident of the recent San Jose reorganization area, asked what it would cost to maintain Stelling and the other artery roads around Seven Springs. He felt that streets were deterior- ating and holes had already started forming since the last repaving. Shelley Williams, Brookridge Drive, Saratoga, stated that in 1980 the Planning Commission and City Council endorsed the preservation of Highway 85 corridor from De Anza Boulevard to Highway 101. The City of Saratoga is holding public hearings regarding Highway 85 in February and March. He quoted nationwide statistics which showed that 83-1/2% of travelers do use private vehicles. Alf Modine, 10385 Prune Tree Lane, requested that Adriana Gianturco of CalTrans be invited to Cupertino for a meeting. He also asked what percentage of the gas tax goes to rapid transit. Director of Public Works Viskovich stated that he believed approximately 25% of the money going to the County can be diverted to transit. Mr. Modine informed those present that he was a member of the Citizens Goals Committee and also of the subcommittee regarding traffic. He stated that if Highway 85 were put through even to Prospect, it would divert people from Stevens Creek Boulevard and keep them from filtering through the neighborhoods. He also said that there would probably be no need for an underpass at the intersection of De Anza and Stevens Creek Boulevards. He urged citizens to become politically active and to support those running for office who want Highway 85. KaylinKoslowsk, 1568 Stelling, stated that the City of Saratoga is planning an access road from Mt. Eden which would bring traffic to Prospect Road. Director of Public Works Viskovich said that this would result in approximately 800 vehicles in all day traffic. Ms. Koslowsk stated that apparently the City of Saratoga did not mind putting their traffic on Cupertino streets. She said that she often cannot get in and out of her driveway and that people pass on the right when she is trying to get into her driveway. She also stated that several cats and a dog belonging to her had been run over. She requested that Stelling be closed and rather than wait for the completio of Highway 85 that some mitigation regarding traffic be acomplished now. Mr. Don Allen, 7465 Plum Blossom Drive, stated that only the problem in Cupertino could really be dealt with and he felt that the group present was unanimous in the belief that Highway 85 should be completed before Seven springs is developed. He further stated that business interests in the area seemed disinterested in the completion of the freeway to Prospect. He said that Stelling is a secondary street, and it is not used that way because 85 is not completed. The City PC- ~"6 Pac 4 MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING needs a relief system and must do everything it can to get Highway 85 through if only to Prospect. He stated the opinion that if 85 goes through to Prospect, Saratoga will then want to have the freeway completed. He further stated that no building should be approved unless there is capacity to handle the dwellers. Jon Unter, 21192 Maria Lane, stated that living in the foothills she could see traffic coming from Campbell Avenue and Highway 9 in the Los Gatos mountains to Cupertino streets. She stated that more blockades would be nothing but bandaids. She further stated that there is a need for Highway 85 but there is also a need for some traffic mitigation now. Shelley Williams stated that tomorrow evening at 7:30 p.m. (February 10) at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, the Saratoga Planning Commission was conducting a General Plan review. Wayne Star, 1356 Primrose Way, requested that the City take care of the residents already there. He requested that the City keep the Hoover site fields. Jerry Sullivan, 7630 Kirwin Lane, stated that he would be affected by any Bollinger extension. He further stated that there are many accidents in front of his house, and he has had cars on his front lawn. He said he has talked to the planners before and he feels that the proposed project is a good one; however, one would not build a house in the hills without water and traffic is just as important. Complete Highway 85 before building the project. Be fair to the community. He inquired about inclusionary housing and stated that he felt it was unfair to put that next to Rl housing. Chairperson Claudy said there was no BMR requirement on Interland for this project. Mr. Sullivan asked if the Commission was responsible to the people or to Interland and requested that they think about what is best for the people in Cupertino. Dr. Stofer stated that the largest portion of the tax bill went for schools, and the citizens had bought the schools in the first place and why do they have to buy a school back. Mrs. Anger, member of the Citizens Goals Committee and the Transportation Task Force, stated that a consultant had been hired to review the staff study and the Committee study on traffic. She further stated that the traffic alternatives listed in the report would use money set aside for Highway 85. RECESS: 9:20 -9:45 p.m. MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 1982 PLANNING COMJ1ISSION MEETING PC-376 Page 5 Mr. Wes Williams, 10067 Byrne Avenue, stated that he personally would not have direct impact from Seven Springs development. He said that he had tried to get City action on Highway 85 and that the Director of Public Works had done a good job, but now is the time to do more. Get the traffic load off City streets. Highway 85 would move people through the town. In regard to youth sports, Mr. Williams stated that a three-acre parcel was not sufficient but would affect parenti child participation. He stated there was a need for a large site like Hoover. He asked if we are causing, aiding and abetting future delinquency. Tom Cate, 1105 Elmsford Drive, representing the West Cupertino Home- owners Association, stated that he had read the entire Seven Springs EIR. He felt that one thing the Planning Commission could do regarding the traffic problem was to turn down the Seven Springs application. There would be 419 houses, approximately 1,100 people, and most likely two automobiles per house. As a developer he felt this was a poor location for the proposed project. He stated that the EIR contained inconsistencies, was biased and made misleading assumptions. He stated there were errors in Table No. 4 and felt it unlikely that the proposed mitigation measure pertaining to traffic (encouraging people to walk and ride bicycles) would work. He stated an inconsistency in figures pertaining to number of dwellings. The statement on page 110 of the draft EIR that the development will not cause traffic effects to reach unacceptable levels was not supported in his opinion. He further stated that in this particular price range there is not a housing shortage in Cupertino. He also felt it debatable that the homes were close to job centers. He felt that the proposed development would not alleviate the housing shortage and it would make the traffic situati worse. He expressed opposition to the Seven Springs development and felt that the negative impact on traffic was understated and the good aspects overstated. Chairperson Claudy stated that EIR's were financed by the applicent. The City hired an independent third party in order to receive an unbiased report. He explained the draft EIR and EIR process. Mr. Cate stated that he had had engineers and lawyers review the draft EIR. He felt that it needed a lot of work and stated a need for the City to be impartial. Ted Swanson, Cupertino Homeowners Group, asked if the City were planning any funding for another EIR. The Chairperson informed him that City funds are usetl for EIR's only for City projects. Mr. Swanson expressed extreme concern regarding how the EIR was formal- ized. He had questions regarding its validity and stated the opinion that there was a large magnitude of mistakes. He stated that Stelling and Bubb are residential streets and extensions of Highway 85. He informed the Commission that Director of Public Works Viskovich and 11r. Nolte had addressed the homeowners group and at the end of the meeting the Director of Public Works had said that he agreed with what the group stated and that there were gross problems, but what they failed to see is how the Cityis built - to a breakdown condition .> P' '76 P~ _ 6 MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING and then take action that will patch/fix the condition. Mr. Swanson asked if that were the Planning Commission, City Council and staff modus operandi. He further stated that at the meeting Viskovich had said that the City is dealing with land use development first and traffic later as the money from the developer was needed to fix the traffic. He requested that the City put down a healthy foundation before growth. He stated that he did not want to advance "patch/fix" type of planning. Chairperson Claudy stated he had never heard of "patch/fix" before. Director of Public Works Viskovich stated that he did have a meeting with the homeowners group and many issues were discussed including the freeway. He had stated that the problem has to exist before State funds are available. He further stated that the City is in the same position. It is necessary to prioritize funds. He stated that it was unfair to quote him as had been done. He stated that there are many programs and funding is a problem. The technical answers are there, but not the money. Therefore, level of service must be set. Mr. Swanson stated that the Director's statements had been fair but he felt the point was that some decision making needed to be done prior to any funding, and building should not be continued. Paul Sonnenblick stated that he would like to correct an impression that seemed to have been expressed in the newspapers. He is not happy with the development. Even if the traffic problem is solved the density is too high, the internal circulation is poor and the rural nature of Upland Way is in peril. He reviewed a handout prepared by the West Cupertino Homeowners Association pertaining to the data used in traffic studies and the EIR. He further stated that the Planning Commission needs credible traffic studies, the final EIR, Parks and Recreation Commission input and public input on these items. He recommended that the public hearings be continued until the final EIR and traffic studies are available to the pubIc. He quoted a statement by Chairperson John Claudy from October 16, 1980 and stated that Commission and City Council need to under- stand the importance of adequate traffic capcity from a development, keeping traffic off of local streets and maintaining a proper quality of life for Cupertino residents. He stated that an initiative is being prepared to take steps to solve the traffic problem. He expressed concern regarding the traffic in the development itself . Chairperson Claudy asked what it would take, in Mr. Sonnenblick's opinion, for the traffic data to be credible. (This was in reference to the draft EIR.) Mr. Sonnenblick stated that the report should be consistent, the backup data should support the exhibit (Figure 2), the numbers regarding residences do not hang together. He stated that the Director of Public Works' models did not form a"gestalt" with the EIR. Other concerns pertained to understanding MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-376 Page 7 and agreement on baseline data, projection, assumptions regarding growth, assumptions regarding traffic and knowing basic assumptions governing the math model. Mr. Bill Lewis, Bollinger Road, stated that he wished to say something regarding Residential Streets for Residents. He stated the group is trying to get together some bylaws and objectives. They do not wish to be involved in closing, blocking and opening streets. They are interested in a broader scope and serving all the people. He felt the message should be clear - that if you are appointed by Council, you represent all of the people. He expressed the opinion that he âid not believe any of the Commissioners lived in the impacted area. Therefpre they had a greater obligation to examine the proposed develop- ment and its impacts. He requested that the development not be approved until Highway 85 is in place. He felt that if it were approved the City was leading the group to take political action. The group would support Mr. Sonnenblick's initiative to get 15% of the electorate to sign. He requested that the Commission not serve two masters, to try to find the solution to the problems and not to do anything until the solution is in place. Kay Duffy, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, stated that she had some answers to questions expressed at the last meeting. She requested the opportunity to give these answers at a more appropriate time. She urged everyone to go out to the area and see what is being proposed. Chairperson Claudy stated that the room had been reserved for February 22 but it might be more appropriate to wait until the Goals Committee Traffic Report and the draft EIR comments are available prior to another meeting. Director of Public Works stated that the consultant's report is expected to be completed in March, and the groups represented at the meeting were welcome to go over the reports with him. Com. Koenitzer suggested that the hearing be continued to the regular meeting of Harch 8, and at that time the Commission could decide when' to meet again at Kennedy Junior High for the Seven Springs Hearing. City Attorney Kilian suggested that it be readvertised when the new meeting date is set. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unanimously to continue the hearing to the regular meeting of March 8 in City Hall. Continued At 10:55 p.m., the meeting was adjourned. ATTEST: APPROVED: "I,t?~~ Claudy, Chairman