Loading...
PC 10-12-81 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 MINUTES HELD ON OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COM!1ISSION OCTOBER 12, 1981 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Adams, Binneweg, Blaine, Koenitzer, Chairman Claudy Staff Present: Director of Planning and Development Sisk City Clerk Cornelius Assistant Planning Director Cowan Assistant City Engineer Whitten Associate Planner Piasecki (9:10 p.m.) City Attorney Kilian PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. Application 20-U-Sl of Dirk C. Reed: Use Permit to allow a veterinary clinic within the existing Silver Oaks Uest c:orrunercial center and En- vironmental Review: The project is categorically exempt, hence, no action is required. Said property is located on the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard in a P (Planned Development with Residential Single-family Cluster, Multiple Family Residential and Commercial Intent) zone. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - October 20, 19S1. The applicant requested a thirty-day continuance. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unan- imously to continue the item to November 9, 1981 at which time it will be placed as the first item on the agenda if at all possible. ¡O/RITTEr¡ C011MUNICATIONS Director of Planning and Development Sisk reviewed a letter received from De Anza Properties regarding a General Plan Amendment for public storage in the Cupertino Village project. Said letter requested that the GPA be considered as soon as possible and as a separate GPA item. Con- cerns expressed by the Commission pertained to the possibility of this being precendent setting and traffic problems. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unan- imously to direct staff to advance that public hearing. Assistant Planning Director Cowan reviewed a letter received from Paul Sonnenblick, president of Cupertino Homeowners Association, pertaining to an EIR on the Seven Springs Ranch property. He stated that staff will meet with Mr. Sonnenbli~k. The letter was accepted by the Planning Com- mission. PC-366 Page 1 I !20-U-Sl continued Advance public hearing PC-366 "e 2 33-U-79 tabled for 30 minutes ~IINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) 1. Application 33-U-79 of Gregg C. Bunker (Photo Drive-Up): Initiation by the City of Cupertino to consider the revocation of the Use Permit 33-U-79 (allowing the operation of a drive-up window) because of non-compliance with conditions of approval. Said property is located at the northwest corner of Wildflower Way and Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road in a C-l (commercial) zoning district. Public Hearing closed. Mr. Hansen, attorney for Mr. Bunker, addressed Commission stating that Mr. Bunker had signed the agreement with the City and that he has filed his bond. He stated that Mr. Bunker has not yet signed an ingress/ egress reciprocal easement with Mr. Yamagami, as Mr. Yamagami was in the hospital. The City Attorney stated that he had not yet seen these documents and requested a continuance of 30-45 minutes for review of the documents. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unan- imously to table this matter for 30 minutes or the time needed for staff review of the documents. (City Clerk's Note: City Attorney Kilian, Assistant City Engineer Whitten and Attorney Hansen left the Council Chamber at 7:50 p.m.) 2. Applications 2l-Z-8l and l6-TM-8l of James o. Arnold: Rezoning approximately 1.9 acres from Rl-lO (Residential Single-family, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zOne to Rl-7.s (Residential Single- family, 7,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; Tentative Map to subdivide said 1.9 acres into eight lots and Environmental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recomDlends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located adjacent to and easterly of Stelling Road approximately 375 ft. south of the intersection of Stelling Road and Pepper Tree Lane. First Hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date - November 2, 1981. 3. Applications 22-Z-8l and l7-TM-8l of James C. Hoffman: Rezoning approximately 2.2 acres from Rl-lO (Residential, Single-family, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone to Rl-7.5 (Residential Single- family, 7,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; Tentative Map to subdivide said 2.2 acres into eight lots and Environmental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located east of the northern terminus of Tula Lane. First Hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date - November 2, 1981. MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-366 Page 3 Assistant Planning Director Cowan reviewed the applications with the Commission and stated that the question involved went beyond land use and was one of access in the area. Mr. James Arnold, applicant, reviewed various options with Commission and st.ated that he does intend to live on the property and is interested in a quality development. (City Clerk's Note: City Attorney Kilian, Assistant City Engineer Whitte and Attorney Hansen returned to the meeting at 8:10 p.m.) Mr. Arnold presented the Commission with the results of his observation 0 traffic in the area. Staff clarified that the City was not requesting financial assistance fro the applicant for road development in surrounding areas. Mr. James Hoffman, applicant, stated that his home is across the street from the church property, and that he has an easement arrangement for access to his property. He stated that he was in agreement with the plan similar to that presented by Mr. Arnold. Charles Morehouse, 10359 Bonny Drive, stated his concern that if the street goes through, De Anza students would go through the neighborhood. He stated that he had circulated a letter in his area and had received signatures from residents of all 37 dwellings. He read the letter into the record and presented it to the Commission. He objected to the Bonny and Stelling Road connection. Mr. Lyle Topham, 10154 N. Portal Avenue, stated that he objected to anything taking the residents' parking places. Mr. Bryan Nicklin, 20853 Sola St., informed Commission that he was the original resident of Sola Lane, and at the time of first development he objected to the increase in traffic, and he is now opposed to any through streets being developed there. He expressed support for option no. 2 which would allow foot traffic but not through vehicle traffic. Mr. Edward Hill, 10309 Bonny Drive, stated that he had no objection to the rezoning or the number of houses. He felt that residents should have direct access to Stelling. He objected to a street plan that would allow a IIfreeway". Sharon Nodine, 20860 Tula Ct., stated that she was a student at San Jose State University and found that issuing stickers for residential parking did not work and students from San Jose State still parked on the city streets. It was a burden on the police department to enforce such a system. She stated that residents of Tula Court do not want a through street. Mr. Marv Kirkeby, civil engineer on the project, reviewed plans for Commission. Concerns expressed by the Planning Commissioners included room for guest parking, the possibility of an open street (they preferred no thròugh street) . PC- 366 P 4 Public hearing closed ~egative Dec. for 21-2-81, l6-TM-8l, 22-2- 81, l7-TM-8l Approval recom l1ended for 21-2-81 \pproval recom- l1ended for 16- rM"Bl with ].1 I condi- tions , ropo s ed con- :ìitions \pproval recom- TIended for 22- ,-81 \pproval recom- "ended for 17- [11-81 as lmended MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEE~ING Mr. Topham stated that he would like the church to have an opportunity to review the option proposed as it would entail uSe of church property. (City Clerk's Note: Associate Planner Piasecki arrived at 9:10 p.m.) Commission requested that Mr. Topham bring any comments from the church to the City Council. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams to close the public hearing on Items 2 and 3. Jean Reyda, 20880 Pepper Tree Lane, questioned the Commission regarding the proposed development and the preservation of existing trees. She also asked how far from the fences on Pepper Tree the proposed houses would be. She inquired if undergrounding of utilities would be required. It was passed unanimously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unan- imously to recommend the Negative Declaration of the Environmental Review Committee. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed unan- imously to recommend approval of Application 21-2-81 in accordance with Exhibit "A", Planning Commission Resolution No. 2246. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed with Com. Binneweg dissenting to recommend approval of Application l6-TM-8l per Planning Commission Resolution No. 2247 with the original exhibit and the addition of Conditions 17 and 18 as follow: 17. The four parcels fronting Stelling Road (Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8) shall share a single common driveway. Reciprocal cross easements and maintenance agreements located in the flag corridor for Lots 5 and 7 shall be recorded upon review by the City Attorney. 18. Lots 2 and 4 shall share a common driveway. Reciprocal cross easements and maintenance agreements located in the flag corridor for Lots 2 and 4 shall be recorded upon review by the City Attorney. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer to add the following conditions: 19. Adequate turnaround space shall be provided for emergency vehicles at the interior of flag lots. 20. Additional parking shall be provided on the properties with access to Stelling Road. The motion died for lack of a second. The Commission referred pro- posed Conditions 19 and 20 for consideration by City Council. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to recommend approval of Application 22-2-81 per Planning Commission Resolution No. 2248. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimously to recommend approval of Application l7-TM-8l per Planning Commission Resolution No. 2249 with Condition No. 18 added a$ follows: 18. Lots 2 and 3 shall share a common dríveway. Reciprocal cross easements and maintenance agreements located in the flag corridor for Lots 2 and 3 shall be recorded upon review by the City Attorney. MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-366 Page 5 The Commission requested that City Council look at Mr. Arnold's in regard to fire access and off-street parking. property 1. (continued) The City Attorney informed the Commission that he had reviewed the docu- ments and that he found them satisfactory. They have been executed by Mr. Bunker and will be presented to the City Council at their next meeting. Mr. Bunker shall deliver to the City the $2,700 filing fee prior to the City's execution of the agreement. Therefore, he requested that the Planning Commission continue this item to their next meeting. At that time, if the fee has been deposited and the agreement with Mr. Yamagami delivered and the City has executed the agreement, the revocation hearing will be dismissed. If the necessary fees have not been filed and agree- ments not signed, further hearings will be conducted. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unanimous ly to continue this item to the next meeting. 33-U-79 con- tinued RECESS: 9:45-9:57 p.m. s. Applications 23-Z-8l, 2l-U-8l and l8-TM-8l of Clifford C. Beck: Rezoning approximately one gross acre from San Jose R2 (Two Family Residence District) zone to the City of Cupertino P (Planned Develop- ment 10-20 dwelling units per gross acre intent) zone or whatever ZDn may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; Use Permit to construct 14 residential dwelling units; Tentative Map to subdivide the property into 14 airspace condominium units on one common area parcel and Environmental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located on the west side of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road appro mately 700 ft. south of Wildflower Way (behind the Galaxy Lighting retail facility). First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - November 2, 1981. 6. Application 26-Z-8l of City of Cupertino: Rezoning approximately 20 gross acres from various San Jose zoning districts (noted on table below) to the City of Cupertino P (Planned Development with commercia and/or residential 5-15 dwelling units per gross acre intent) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and Environmental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recom- mends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is generally located on the west side of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road between Rainbow Drive and Prospect Road. First Hearing. Ten-tative City Council hearing date - November 2, 1981. Existing San Jose Zones and Locations Existing Zoning Locations Gross Acres Cl (Commercial . District) Northwest Quadrant of Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road and Prospect Road 3.5 PC-366 pø..4'>e 6 MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Existing San Jose Zones and Locations (continued) Existing Zones R2 (Two family Residence District) Cl (Commercial District) Rl (Single- family Residence) Locations Gross Acres West of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 6.0 beginning approximately 300 ft. north of Prospect Road to a point approximately 1,000 ft. north of Prospect Road (between the Coach House Shopping Center and Minton Lumber) . \Vest side of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 10.0 from approximately 500 ft. north of Wildflower Way to 750 ft. south of Wildflower Way. South side of Wildflower Way approximately 250 ft. easterly of Poppy Way. .5 Associate Planner Piasecki reviewed Application 26-Z-8l with the Commission. Com. Blaine and Chairperson Claudy stated that they felt that the area next to the Woolworth Garden Center should remain as residential. Mr. Marvin Kirkeby, engineer and one of the property owners, addressed Commission. He stated that Galaxy Lighting and residents of Jamestown had been given the information regarding the plans for comments. He requested that Applications 23-Z-8l, 2l-U-8l and l8-TM-8l of Clifford Beck be considered separately from the City's Application 26-Z-8l. Mr. Robert Pollard, owner of the parcel just south of the Beck property, addressed the Commission. He stated that he could not understand the idea of residential surrounded by commercial, He stated that he owned over 25% of the area being considered under Application 26-Z-8l. Mr. Dick Chadwick, 1582 James Town Drive, stated that he had reviewed the Beck project and that the three homeowners backing onto the project saw no problem. He further stated that the City has an agreement with Mr. Pollard for twenty foot landscaping strip and that Mr. Beck should have the same type of agreement. He stated that he would like to get rid of the noise from the Alpha Beta store and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. He felt that this could be partially accomplished with landscaping in the development. He also stated preference for a landscaped median. Mr. Boggs, 7412 Wild Flower, requested that the Commission keep zoning as it is for single-family residential use on the dogleg of Wild Flower. 26-Z-8l con- ·tinued It was moved by Com. Adams, second£d by Com. Koenitzer and passed unanimously to continue the public hearings to the meeting of November 9, 1981. MINUTES OF THE OCTOßER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING . 7. Application l-CDPR3-8l of Robert Merrick: Conceptual Development Plan request to construct a three unit apartment building and Environ mental Review: The project is categorically exempt, hence, no action is required. The subject property is located on the northeast side of Alpine Drive approximately 380 ft. southeast of Foothill Boulevard in an R3 (Multiple Family Residential) zoning district. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - November 2, 1981. Assistant Planning Director Cowan reviewed the application with the Com- mission. Mr. Roger Griffin, representative of the property owner, stated that meetings have been held with the owners of property along the back of the proposed development, and no concern was expressed regarding visual intrusion. He stated the residents of the duplex to the south felt the same way. He stated that he would like to maintain the two side windows but would not object to a shifting of the back windows. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unan- imously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unan- imously to recommend approval of Application l-CDPR3-8l as per Conditions 1-16, Planning Commission Resolution No. 2250. The Commission recommended that the windows along the back be more cen- trally located. 8. Application 22-U-8l of Happy Daze Preschool: Use Permit to operate a preschool for approximately 30 children and Environmental Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Nega- tive Declaration. The subject property is located on the south side of Cali Avenue approximately 170 ft. east of De Anza Boulevard (20470 Cali Avenue) in a P (Planned Development with commercial, professiona office and residential intent) zoning district. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - October 20, 1981. The application was reviewed with the Commission by Director of Planning and Development Sisko It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unan- imously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unan- imously to recommend the Negative Declaration of the Environmental Review Committee. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Binneweg and passed unani- mously to recommend approval of Application 22-U-8l per Planning Commis- sian. Resolution No. 2252. 9. Application 24-Z-8l of William H. Avery: Pre zoning approximately 6.7 gross acres from pre A (Agricultural) to pre Rl-6 (Residential Single family, 6,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone or whatev~r zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; Environmental PC-366 Page 7 Public hearing closed Approval rec- ommended for l-CDPR3-8l ~ Public hearing closed Negative Dec. for 22-U-8l Approval rec- ommended for 22-U-8l PC-366 r '? 8 Public hearing closed Negative Dec. for 24-2-81 Approval rec- ommended for ë-8l Public hear- ing cIa sed MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMHISSION MEE¡ING Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located at the easterly terminus of November Drive. First Hearing. This application was reviewed by Director of Planning and Development Sisko Mr. Bill Avery, representative of Mr. and Mrs. Horn, property owners, answered questions by Commission. Mr. Paul Sonnenblick, 11525 Upland Way, president, West Cupertino Homeowners Association, addressed the Commission regarding Williamson Act blocks in general. He offered the services of the homeowners association for citizen input to set up conditions of cancellation for Williamson Act contracts. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unan- imously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unan- imously to recommend the Negative Declaration of the Environmental Review Committee. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Corn. Adams and passed unan- imously to recommend approval of Application 24-2-81 per Planning Commission Resolution No. 2251. 10, Application 19-TM-8l of Hugh F. Jackson: Tentative MaP to re- subdivide three existing parcels consisting of a total of one gross acres into four parcels ranging in size from 7,500 sq. ft. to 10,700 sq. ft. and Environmental Review: The project is categorically exempt, hence, no action is required. The sub- ject property is located on the south side of Cupertino Road approximately 100 ft. east of Foothill Boulevard in an Rl-7.s (Residential Single-family, 7,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - October 20, 1981. This application was reviewed for the Commission by Assistant Planning Director Cowan. Mr. Hugh Jackson, applicant, stated his opposition to the staff proposal. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed unani- mously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Adams to approve the application; the motion was withdrawn. MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 12, 1981 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING . Discussion was asked, property. occurred regarding access to APN 326-50-18. The question should access be provided to that parcel across the Jackson An informal poll of the Commission resulted as follows: No: Com. Binneweg and Claudy; Yes: Com. Blaine, Adams and Koenitzer. It was stated that there should be minimal impact on the Jackson applica- tion. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unan- imously to continue this matter to the meeting of October 26, 1981. 11. Application 2s-Z-8l of George E. Tucker: Rezoning approximately .2 of a gross acre from San Jose Rl-6 (Single-family Residence, 6,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size') zone to City of Cupertino Rl-6 (Residentia Single-family, 6,00.0 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and Environmen- tal Review: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Said property is located on the north side of Waterford Drive approximately 80 ft. west of Rose Garden Lane (7535 Water ford Drive). First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date- November 2, 1981. It was moved by Com. Koenitzer, seconded by Com. Adams and passed unan- imously to close the public hearing. It was moved by Com. Adams, seconded by Com. Blaine and passed unanimousl to recommend the Negative Declaration of the Environmental Review Commit- tee. It was moved by Com. Blaine, seconded by Com. Koenitzer and passed unan- imously to recommend approval of Application 2s-Z-8l per Planning Commis- sion Resolution No. 2253. 12. Application 20-TM-8l of Kirkeby & Associates: Tentative Map to record a single lot located at the southeast corner of Stelling Road I and Highway 85 right of way approximately 450 ft. north of West 1 Hill Lane. Environmental Review: The project is categorically : exempt, hence, no action is required. First Hearing. Tentative Cit1 Council hearing date - October 20, 1981. Mr. Kirkeby, representing the property owners, was available for Commis- sion questions. There se.emed to be some question about whether or not the parcel had been accepted as a legal buildable lot by the City of San Jose prior to its annexation to Cupertino. Mr. McNaughton, owner of property to the south of the area, stated that in 1975 he had bid on the property. He stated that he knew at that time it was not big enough to be a buildable lot. He asked that should the parcel being considered be allowed as a buildable lot, if he were to sub- divide his property, could he get 5,000 sq. ft. lots. The general feel- ing expressed by the Commission was that if it had not been accepted as a legal buildable lot while in the City of San Jose, the Commission would not allow it to be a planned development. PC-366 Page 9 19-TM-8l con- tinued Public hearing closed Negative Dec- laration for 2s-Z-8l Approval recom- mended for 2s-Z-8l