Loading...
PC 01-13-82 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING HELD ON JANUARY 13, 1982 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA COMMISSION CITY HALL Chairperson Claudy called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. in the Counci Chamber of City Hall. SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Adams, Binneweg, Blaine, Koenitzer, Chairperson Claudy Staff Present: Director of Planning and Development Sisk City Clerk Cornelius Assistant Planning Director Cowan (left at 11:30 p.m.) City Attorney Kilian (arrived at 8:00 p.m.) CDBG Coordinator Hendee (arrived at 8:20 p.m.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES - None POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unanimously to continue Application 7-u-81 to the meeting of February 8, 1982, to continue Applications 27-Z-8l, 23- 23-U-8l and 22-TM-8l of Town Center to the meeting of January 25, 1982 and to remove Application 26-TM-8l from the calendar. Chairperson Claudy announced that the public hearing pertaining to the Seven Springs Ranch area would be conducted at Kennedy Junior High School, 7:30 p.m., January 26, 1982. At that meeting it would be de- cided if another would be necessary; if so, it will be held February 9, 1982, 7:30 p.m., Kennedy Junior High School. The Clerk was requested to put the information pertaining to the January 26 meeting on the recording device at City Hall. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Assistant Planning Director Cowan stated that communications were re- ceived from Prometheus Development Co. in regard to Application I-GPA~8 , City of Cupertino, and from the Tri County Apartment Association in regard to the review of the Below Market Rate Program. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Application l-GPA-81 of City of Cupertino: Public Hearing to con- sider a General Plan Amendment involving the Town Center Planning Area. The 1bwn Center Planning Area is generally bounded by Stevens Creek Boulevard, Blaney Avenue, Rodrigues Avenue and De Anza Blvd. PC-372 Page 1 Seven Springs Ranch public hearing PC;=372 P 2 MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Environmental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. First Hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date - January 18, 1982. Continued to February 8, 1982. Assistant Planning Director Cowan reviewed the application with the Commission. Commissioners requested that the development control diagram contain a "bubble" plan and be accompanied by verbal performance standards. The Commission clarified previous action they had taken. (City Clerk's Note: City Attorney Kilian arrived at 8:00 p.m.) Commission stated that on the Lincoln Properties area the integration of office and residential shall be encouraged, not required. Discussion followed regarding the possible deletion on pages 2-39 and 2-40 of references to sewage study. Mr. Tom O'Donnell, attorney representing the Cali family, announced that they had retained the firm of Prometheus Development Co. to start development planning. The architectural firm of HOK has been retained. Mr. Sanford Diller, president, Prometheus Development, introduced Mr. Bill Ballantine of HOK Associates. Mr. Ballantine stated a preference for the bubble diagram idea and requested that the Commission keep an open mind regarding density. Chairperson Claudy explained the concept of trip end constraints. Mr. O'Donnell spoke regarding the Cali Mill. He stated that there was no immediate plan to remove the mill and that the intent was that the project would be phased. (City Clerk's Note: CDBG Coordinator Hendee arrived at 8:20 p.m.) Mr. Burch Boone, Lincoln Properties, submitted some pictures of a develop- ment the firm did in Larkspur. He also showed some slides of that develop- ment and the Town Center area. He stated that he would like to keep office and residential separate. Assistant Planning Director Cowan stated that perhaps the Commission would like to establish basic parameters that the designers then meet. Mr. Boone said that he would like to meet with Prometheus in the next few weeks. However, he does not wish to wait until Prometheus develops. Com. Koenitzer re-expressed his preference for a bubble design. Com. Adams requested that the staff submit a new Exhibit 2-G with input provided by the designers. Commission reached a consensus that a bubble plan be submitted along with guidelines. They also agreed that the main focus building should be the one on the corner of Stevnes Creek Boulevard and De Anza Boule- vard and that the buildings be oriented to street frontages and the parking lots not be next to the streets. They requested that the plaza area MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING be separated from the large parking lots either visually (berms, etc.) or physically. Mr. Boone expressed concern regarding building heights designated as the land in certain areas is sloped. Assistant Planning Director Cowan replied that the heights mentioned were to be used as a guideline and were approximate. Mr. Boone was informed that the heights pertained to the building and not the mechanical equip- ment on the roof which would be enclosed below the roof line. Commission requested a revised loose plan with input from Prometheus and Lincoln Properties firms. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed unan- imously to continue the hearing to the meeting of January 25, 1982. PC-372 Page 3 I-GPA-8l continued 2. Application 7-U-81 of Lincoln Property Company N. C. Inc.: to meeting of February 8, 1982. Continued 7-U-81 con- tinued 3. Applications 27-Z-8l, 23-U-81 and 22-TM-8l of Town Center Properties, Ltd.: Continued to meeting of January 25, 1982. 4. Application 26-TM-81 of Lawrence C. Mayerle: Removed 5. Application 27-U-8l of C. Thomas Reeves: Use Permit to construct a 9,800 sq. ft. office building and Environmental Review: The Environ- mental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declara tion. The subject property is located on the west side of Pasadena Avenue approximately 125 ft. south of Stevens Creek Boulevard in a P (Planned Development with commercial, incidential industrial and/ or residential intent) zoning district. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - January 18, 1982. Director of Planning and Development Sisk reviewed the application with the Commission. Mr. Tom Reeves, applicant, presented slides showing buildings from the late 1800's and early 1900's which were used for design ideas. He stated that two mature pepper trees on the area of the proposed development are desired to be saved as well as the heavy vine along a fence. It is planned for the buildings to be on the periphery with parking in the center. Mr. Stan Saitowitz, architect, also presented slides showing buildings. Ann Anger, 10185 Empire Avenue, who had attended the ASAC meetings on this application, spoke in support of the architecture. She said she would have liked to have seen more shops and less office space and would like a little more landscaping to be incorporated into the design. She expressed opposition to the Monta Vista area being developed with 1940's type buildings. An unidentified woman, a resident of the Monta Vista area near Orange Avenue, expressed concern in regard to the traffic that would be created by commercial being close to existing residential. She expressed a dis- like for most of the photos that were used as models and requested 27-Z-8l, 23-U- 81 and 22-TM-8J continued 26-TM-8l removed PC,,372 F 4 Public hearing closed Negative Dec. for 27-U-8l 27-U-81 approved as amended Public hearing closed MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING more landscaping in the development. She also requested that intensity be kept low. Ann Anger stated a preference for a IItown and countryll type building. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer and seconded by Com. Binneweg to close the public hearing. Com. Koenitzer withdrew the motion. Commissioners discussed the architecture, the location of the trash container and curb cuts to allow access to the property. Mr. Reeves pointed out the location of a power pole on the corner near the proposed development which limits the possible locations for access. He informed the Commission that he had no objections to neighboring parcels using his driveway. Steve Hoffman, attorney representing Mr. Reeves, requested clarification regarding maintenance costs of the easement and shared driveway. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unanimously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unan- imously to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration for Application 27-U-81. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unan- imously to recommend approval of Application 27-U-8l per Planning Com- mission Resolution No. 2274 with Condition No. 16 amended to include the following sentence: "In the future the applicant may be providing sole access from Pasadena to properties to the north and to the south." This application was approved per findings and subconclusions as in the staff report. RECESS: 10:45-10:55 p.m. 6. Application 28-U-8l of Monta Vista Properties (Terry Brown): Use Permit to construct two single-family residential homes and Environ- mental Review: The Project is categorically exempt, hence, no action is required. The subject properties are located on the south side of Stevens Creek Boulevard in a P (Planned Development with residential, 4-12 dwelling units per acre intent) zoning district. One parcel is approximately 250 ft. west of Orange Avenue and the other is 375 ft. west of Orange Avenue. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - January 18, 1982. Director of Planning and Development Sisk distributed a corrected Exhibit B to the Commission. Ann Anger told Commission that she did not like to see such small lots developed. It was moved by Com. Binneweg, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed unanimously to close the public hearing. MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to approve Application 28-U-8l per Planning Commission Resolution No. 2275 with Condition No. 18 amended to delete the words "depth of the lot" and insert the words "length of the building". This application was ap- proved per findings and subconclusions as in the staff report. 7. Review of Below Market Rate (BMR) Program and Subcommittee Final Report: Consideration of modifications of BMR Guidelines regarding implementation of the BMR Program. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - February 1, 1982. Director of Planning and Development Sisk reviewed the background of the Below Market Rate Program with the Commission. Discussion followed regarding the procedure of the hearing, particularly in view of the published notice. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed with Com. Binneweg dissenting to discuss proposed changes to the BMR Program and not possible elimination of the program. CDBG Coordinator Hendee reviewed the subcommittee report and the issues examined. She then listed the major changes in the proposed policy which she felt were basically procedural changes. (City Clerk's Note: Assistant Planning Director Cowan left at 11:30 p.m.) Commission expressed several concerns regarding the proposed procedural manual submitted. These concerns included 1. Lack of definition of equity sharing plan, 2. No comparison between family earnings for those in the Cupertino sphere of influence with those in the County, 3. Use of Bank of America guidelines, 4. The inclusion of a profit figure for numbers used in comparisons, 5. They requested information regarding the present value of the density bonus, the waiving of fees and other in- centives, 6. Other items were those on page 3 Section VB, page 5 Item VIlE, page 6 item XB, 7. City abuses in prolonging processing and lack of granting density bonuses, 8. page 6a and b, 9. Section 8 guidelines regarding eligibility, 10. Providing a BMR elsewhere than that particu- lar development and 11. Non-planning decision powers that would be granted to the Director of Planning and Development. Mr. Marty Hall, May Investment Co., requested clarification of the com- mittee recommendations and asked why the possibility of eliminatieg thA program was not originally considered. He suggested a public hearing be held on disposal of the BMR Program. Discussion followed regarding the procedure that would be required for such a public hearing. Mr. Tom Randazzo of the Mariani Co. requested a formal public hearing for elimination of the program. John Vidovich of De Anza Properties stated that when he transmitted a letter to the Council requesting a public hearing on the BMR Program and PC-372 Page 5 28-U-81 recom- mended for approval as amended Proposed BMR changes dis- cussed Concerns re Procedural Hanual P 72 Page 6 MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13, 1982 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING its elimination he thought that Council had replied in the affirmative. He requested that a legal notice be issued for such a public hearing. He felt that the homebuilder was subsidizing the entire program. He felt that reasonable alternatives to the BMR Program would be a mortgage revenue bond program or the building of smaller units which would result in lower cost housing. Ann Anger stated that she was against the BMR Program; she felt it was very similar to rent control. She also requested a public hearing and pointed out that she was not a developer. Beverly Lawrence representing the Peninsula read a letter giving the group's preference program and not elimination. The group has to the City to help with any modifications. Citizens for Fair Housing for a modification to the offered its assistance Steve Speno, Santa Clara County Building Industry Association, stated the Association's opinion that the emphasis has been on distribution of units and not how to create housing for all segments of the community. He stated that the purpose of the BMR Program was to provide housing opportunities for those who would not otherwise have the opportunity. He questioned whether or not the program is actually doing that. He requested that a public hearing on the General Plan be scheduled so that housing policies could be examined. He stated that the organi- zation had worked with the City of San Jose establishing a volunteer type program for low cost housing and stated that the program is working. Sharon Rintala, developer, informed Commission of problems that she had had with the BMR Program. She stated that marketing of the units is difficult, that often potential buyers cause difficulties when agents are showing others units and that often the BMR buyers have had cash for upgrading of units. She requested that the buyers be investigated after they are in the units and also that they be checked more carefully from the start. She also stated that the fact that all BMR's were required to be in the first devlopment phase caused economic difficulties, and she felt that the units should be scattered throughout the various phases of development. She also felt that the project should be audited to determine actual loss to developer. Minnie Lee, San Jose Real Estate Board, presented a position paper from the Board. The Board opposes the BMR Program and feels that it should be put on a ballot. Public hearing re B~1R con- tinued It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed with Com. Claudy dissenting to continue the public hearing to the second meeting in February.