Loading...
PC 04-27-81 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupêrtino, Ca. 95014 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 PC-355 Page 1 MINUTES, APRIL 27, 1981 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER/SALUTE TO THE FLAG 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioner Adams Commissioner Binneweg Commissioner Blaine Commissioner Claudy Chairman Koenitzer ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN N~D VICE-CHAI~~ HOTI ON : SECOND: Com. Blaine~ to nominate John Claudy for Chairman Com. Adams MOT ION : SECOND: VOTE: Com. Adams, to close nominations Com. Blaine PASSED 4-1 Abst. VOTE: PASSED 4-1 abst. MOTION: SECOND: Com. Blaine, to nominate Victor Adams for Vice Chairman Com. Claudy MOT ION : SECOND: VOTE: Com. Claudy, to close nominations Com. Blaine PASSED 4-1 Abst. VOTE: PASSED 4-1 abst. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 13, 1981 were approved after the following corrections: Page 11, sixth paragraph, last line to read: "west part of the parce.l, next to the bank, leaving room on the other side of Torre for open space." Page 4, eleventh paragraph, last word "parties" to be substituted with tldevelopment". Page 9, third and fourth paragraphs, "Mr. Chardier"to read, tlMr. Chartier". HOTION: SECOND VOTE: Com. Claudy, to approve the Minutes as amended Com. Adams PASSED 5-0 POSTPONEMENTS/NEW AGENDA ITEMS Staff requested that Item HI be postponed. PC-355 Page 2 MINUTES, APR1L 27, 1981 REGULAR PLfu~NING COMMISSION MEETING MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. C1audy, to move Item #1 to the Meeting of May 28, 1981 Com. Blaine PASSED 5-0 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC HEARING ITEM #1 - Continued. UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS ITEM #2, Report Regarding Zoning Inconsistencies. Assistant Planning Director Cowan briefly explained the system that Staff was recommending. He sµggested establishing priorities, taking one or two cases each month, and referred to his memorandum to the Planning Commission of April 27th. He advised starting with Category 1 in the memorandum, the hillside areas, particularly the Kaiser area and some areas in Regnart Canyon and Rainbow's End where the zoning was inconsistent with the slope density approach suggested in the General Plan. He told the Commission that an application had been filed on the Seven Springs Ranch area, and that the Upland Way area, together with a series of small properties in the Rainbow Drive and Stelling Road area should be prezoned to prevent them being left as "islands". He suggested that this area should be a priority, and that it would be prudent to act as soon as possible. Next in his order of priorities was Category 2, valley floor areas where development was imminent, and where zoning was inconsistent with the General Plan. Some properties on Stevens Creek Boulevard still retained their County zoning, he advised, but Staff was reluctant to rezone presently because of the upcoming General Plan discussions where it would be recommended that the City adopt a plan for Stevens Creek Boulevard. However, he felt a broad zoning district could be built up for that area. His third suggested priority, Category 3, quasi-public and public uses at present wrongly zoned were not development areas, but needed clarification, he explained, and the next priority, Category 4, covered areas zoned too low, which, in the City Attorney's opinion were inconsistent with the General Plan. He thought that the Commission should conclude with the San Jose boundary area, Category 5, to eliminate San Jose zones, and the County pockets, Category 6, to prezone them. Tnere was some discussion on whether Category 3 should be moved somewhere e1se, with agreement that the properties where development was most imminent should come first. The comment was made that if owners prematurely approached the City to change the zoning, it would make the proceedings easier. MINUTES, APRIL 27, 1981 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-355 Page 3 CHR. KOENITZER questioned the wisdom of rezoning the Lester P~9perty in Category 2, as it was to be incorporated in the General Plan Hearings and might be changed again at that time. Assistant Planning Director Cowan in reply said he was concerned that if zoning was inconsistent with the General Plan there would be opportunities for lawsuits to be brought against the City. COM. CLAUDY mainly agreed with Staff priorities, but felt that if Categories 1 and 2 were equal, he would prefer to transpose them. COM. BLAINE agreed with Chairman Koenitzer with regard to the Lester Property and suggested it be left out. There was general agreement with Com. Blaine's suggestion, and the Commissio felt that the order presented by Staff was as good as any; and that they should work on the Zoning Consistency Program every month in the second meeting of the month. It was determined that there was a typographical error in Category 2 a. of the April 27th memorandum, the present zoning being 20/30 per acre. COM. BLAINE suggested that some items from Category 3 could be processed on the Same night as some from Category 1. Assistant Planning Director Cowan advised that some items could be prepared for the second meeting in May. ITEM #3, General Plan Status Report. Assistant Planning Director Cowan described Planning Director Sisk's Report to the City Council of April 16 as mainly focusing on the retention of an economic consultant. He explained that a time schedule had not yet been prepared because the County computer run Staff was using to help in studies of the 85 Corridor was based on different inputs than Staff had bee working with. It had therefore had to be adapted, so that the traffic portion was not quite ready, but Staff was hopeful that the Item would be on the Agenda for June or July. He informed the Commission that Staff's initial intent had been to find the , . best transportation strategy to make the present General Plan work, but that because the market-place was now trying to dictate industrial intensi- fication it was felt this should be tested. COM. ADAMS inquired whether the intensification, which Assistant Planning Director Cowan had described as being 35/40%, up from 25%, was due to the increased cost of property. Assistant Planning Director Cowan confirmed this, and stated that it was also due to a demand for commercial property, and that one reason Staff had hired an economist was to analyze that demand and what the growth rate would be. The build-out of commercial could go to 5,200,000 sq. ft., he explained, up from the present General Plan amount of 3,500,000, but noted that this was purely hypothetical, and that the actual build-out would have to be based on the traffic that could be absorbed, and would probably be somewhere between the two figures. PC-3s5 p -, 4 MINUTES, APRIL 27, 1981 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING COM. BLAINE wanted to know if Assistant Planning Director Cowan had the fîguresfor the industrial build-out also. Assistant Planning Director Cowan advised that these figures were not quite ready, but that this liIouldprobably go to 6,700,000 sq. ft., up from 5,200,000 sq. ft. in the present General Plan, assuming the areas on De Anza Boulevard were intensified, and a request for this had already been received from Apple Computer. CHR. KOENITZER wondered if Staff had received an indication from ABAG* concerning expectations of cities in the area.of jobs/housing ratios. Assistant Planning Director Cowan_~eplied they had not, except that local councils and governments were required ·to identify "Fair Share", and informed the ConmJission that two new Bills were in process, one requiring the State Department of Finance to estimate"Fair Share", ás they had experience with population estimates, and the other for an extension of time from the October 1st, 1981 deadline date, since roughly one-third of local governments could not meet the deadline. COM. CLAUDY wanted to know more about Questor Associates, the economic consultants that had been selected. Assistant Planning Director Cowan informed the Commission that Questor worked in both the public. and private sector and was making a two-fold study; firstly, a market feasibility analysis, i.e., how much the City could absorb of various tppes of development, and, secondly, what effect new office and commercial development in Vallco would have on the Crossroads area, as it was not intended that area should be hurt. He said that at the next meeting he would give the Commission the working document used by Staff to identify the three General Plan alternatives studied. COM CLAUDY hoped that the ,amount of development.t9 be. .allowed" could._finally be resolved, as lack of traffic information had been confusing to the Commission. ITEM #4, Interpretation of Trip Generation Requirements for Orchard Valley Market Place. CHR. KOENITZER referred to å letter dated March 31, 1981 received from Mr. Sher of Terranomics, Inc., requesting clarification of Planning Commission Resolutions 1577 and 1807. Assistant Planning Director Cowan reported that Staff had been very dogmatic in the past in having Mr. Sher submit trip 'analysis reports in all cases, but it was Mr. Sher's feeling, which was now shared by Staff, that an average case should be used, since it was impossible to estimate the success of a business. It was therefore being suggested that, based on the experience of the past 2/3 years, all small retailing activities be treated as generating two trips per thousand square feet. Mr. Sher thought the wording "take-out restaµrants" in the Staff Report should be substituted with "fast food for take-outlt, because a bakery, for ins·tance, could be interpreted to be take-out, and by using the latter wording the difference would be clearer, he felt. He was concerned because he had * ABAG - Association of Bay Area Governments · . lHNUTE£., APRIL 27, 19B1 REGULA.R PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-3SS Page 5 experienced a situation where food was being prepared for take out consumption, and after analysis, Staff had acknowledged that no extra trip would be generated, but he did not want to go through the process again. He advised that the tenants of the center were under the allowance for peak hour trips, and that many did not do business at all during that time frame. He felt the present allotment system was confusing, and was therefore suggesting that the category requiring a Use Permit should be the only category requiring a trip count ana~ysis. CHR. KOENITZER wanted clarification of what was being proposed. Assistant Planning Director Cowan explained that in the past Mr. Sher had been required to give a report of each activity, and that now anything less than 3,000 sq. ft. would not require traffic analysis. COM. CLAUDY agreed with this concept for general retail, but had doubts about its application in terms of fast food businesses, which he inter- preted as som~where that a whole prepared meal could be bought, not just some ingredients. ,He conceded that a bakery, for instance, could be construed as a general retail operation. Mr. Sher explained that traffic studies had cåused problems, and since delicatessen and bakery type businesses did well in the center, which was called "Orchard Valley Market Place" he was asking for flexibi.1,.ity in order to implement a good project for the area. COM. CLAUDY found difficulty in defining fast food, and suggested that the Commission should go ahead and combine this category with the one of retail operations, but that fast food restaurants where the food was designed primarily to be consumed on the premises or in the vicinity would require a trip end analysis. However, if problems came up, the whole interpretation would be subject to review. Mr. Sher was agreeable to this interpretation. SECOND: VOTE: Com. Adams, to support Com. Claudy's interpretation of Condition 16 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 1577. Com. Blaine PASSED 5-0 MOIl ON : A discussion followed on the problems of defining fast food outlets, delicatessens, etc., and what should be done when businesses evolved to different uses, as in the case of 7-11 Stores. Assistant Planning Director Cowan suggested that changes might need to be made in City Ordinances to allow for such problems to be dealt with. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR MEETING ADJOURNED 8:40P.L ,,..- ATTEST: ~. ~ 4~~'7 City Clerk