Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 243728-U-83 RESOLUTION NO. 2437 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY OFFICE BUILDING CONTAINING 73,650 SQ. FT. APPLICANT: Dennis Kobza, AIA (Wm. Marocco) ADDRESS: 2483 Middlefield Road, Middlefield Way, Mountain View, California 94043 SUBMITTED: August 1, 1983 LOCATION: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard approximately 300 ft. west of Portal Avenue and 200 ft. east of Blaney Avenue. ------------------------------------------------------------------- FINDINGS AND SUBCONCLUSIONS: Approval is recommended subject to the findings as set forth on Page 1 and subconclusions as set forth in the minutes of Planning Commission meeting of September 14, 1983. CONDITIONS: 1-14. Standard Conditions to the extent that they do not conflict with the special conditions enumerated herein. In the event a conflict does exist, the special conditions as enumerated herein shall apply. 15. This approval is based upon Exhibits A 1st Revision, B, D 1st Revision and E 1st Revision of Application 28-U-83 as may be amended by additional conditions contained herein. 16. Land_ Use_ Intensity_Limitation The approval of the construction of 73,600 _+ gross sq. ft. of building area is contingent upon the transfer of trip capacity from other sites. The applicant shall be required to record a covenant on the transferring sites to reflect the reduction of trips available prior to issuance of building permits for the subject structure. The land use intensity shall be limited to an intensity that will not generate more than 16 one-way trips per acre during the peak traffic hour or such other traffic constraints as imposed by the current General Plan. For the purpose of the 16 one-way trip Traffic Intensity Performance Standards, the following accounting of trips is hereby incorporated into the project approval. Trips generated by the project: Offices - 73,650 sq. ft. x 1 trip/1,000 sq. ft. = 73.7 Trips allocated to project site: 4.49 gross acres x 16 trips/acre = 71.9 Trips to be transferred = 1.8 -1- Planning Commission Resolution No. 2437 28-U-83 All sales or transfers of trips must be filed with the Planning Director and City Clerk. No sale or transfer shall be finally consummated until a use permit has been approved for the property to which the trips are to be applied. The applicant shall record a covenant to describe the trip acre constraint and the total number of trips allocated to the particular development at the time of development approval. The covenant shall be worded in.a manner to suggest that the future purchasers of properties consult the individual use permit files to obtain an up-to-date status report of trips allocated to each particular property. 17. Pronerty_Use_Constraints The approval is for a maximum of 73,650 sq. ft. two-story office building. The building may include industrial administration offices but shall specifically preclude manufacturing uses. All new uses or change in use which is not reflective of the office uses shall require use permit review as determined by the Director of Planning. Prototype research and development activity is not permitted. 18. Modification of_the AQerov_ed__Dev_eloement_Plan_or_a_Building --------------- Permit In the event that the applicant or subsequent property owner shall desire to make any minor change, alteration or amendment in the approved development plan or building permit, a written request and revised development or building permit shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Development. If the Director of Planning and Development makes a finding that the changes are minor and do not affect the general appearance of the area or the interests of owners of property within or adjoining the development area, the Director of Planning and Development may certify the change on the revised plan. If such approval is withheld, the applicant may appeal to the Planning Commission. If the changes are material, the Director of Planning and Development shall submit the change to the Planning Commission for approval. If the change is denied by the Planning Commission, the applicant may appeal to the City Council as provided in Ordinance 652 of the City of Cupertino. If the change is approved, an appeal may be made by an interested party. Further, any member of the City Council may request a hearing before the Council , said request to be made within ten (10) days from date of approval - when the change has been approved by the Planning Commission. r., Planning Commission Resolution No. 2437 28-U-83 19. 'rovi si on _of _Secured_Bi cyc i e_F'art i ng The applicant shall install facility (bicycle locker) building area which may be spaces. The term "in lieu" parking spaces be eliminated. 20. Shared Access Provisions one secured bicycle locking for every 6,500 sq. ft. of in lieu of equivalent parking does not require that the The applicant shall enter into negotiations with the owner of the adjoining property to the east to provide common ingress and egress through a shared driveway opening, and shall record appropriate easement documents effecting shared access. In the event that said negotiations are determined by the Planning Director to be unsuccessful, the applicant shall sign and record a statement acceptable to the City Attorney providing for a future joint driveway which serves both parcels at such time as the same can be required of the property to the east. Likewise, the applicant shall record an agreement to implement joint ingress and egress with the property to the west at such time as the same can be required of the owners of the property and approval of the City is granted. The applicant shall submit a joint driveway/access plan involving the adjoining easterly property to the Architectural and Site Approval Committee. Said plan must be reviewed by ASAC and adopted by the City Council prior to issuance of a building permit. If the affected adjoining property owner does not agree to cooperate with the joint approach, the driveway plan described on Exhibit A 1st Revision may be implemented. In the event, the adjoining easterly property owner agrees to the alternative joint driveway plan, implementation may be immediate or at such time as the easterly property owner redevelops or modifies his/her development. Should the alternative joint driveway plan not be implemented immediately, the driveway plan described on Exhibit A 1st Revision may be implemented. 21. Architectural_and_Site_AELarov_al_Committee_Rev_iew The applicant shall modify the proposed frontage landscaping to conform with the Stevens Creek Boulevard Sidewalk and Landscaping Plan as adopted by the City Council. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping, lighting and on -site traffic control plan to the Architectural and Site Approval Committee for informal approval prior to issuance of building permits. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2437 28-U-83 22. Pr_i. vacyr_Conttol s The applicant shall carefully screen any privacy impacts to the residences on the north from stairs or second story windows of the proposed two-story building, including but not limited to landscape screening, placement and orientation of windows, stair enclosures, etc. Tall trees shall be placed in close proximity to the building for screening purposes; smaller trees may be located in the northerly perimeter landscape strip to the extent that they do not impede solar exposure of the residential yards. 23. ArealEide_ImREgygments The applicant/property owner shall agree to participate in his proportionate share of major off -site improvements of a local or communitywide nature as identified in the General Plan. Said agreement shall include but not be limited to the following methods of fulfilling said obligation to participate. 1. Funded directly. 2. Funded through an assessment district. 3. Payment of construction tax in effect at the time ❑f occupancy. 4. Any other method deemed appropriate by the City Council. 24. Historical_ Investigation Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall complete an investigation of the historical significance of the subject site, and shall prepare a visual inventory, through photographic or other means, of the structures and orchard activities now present on the site. ------------------------------------------------------------------- PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of September, 1983, at a regular adjourned meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blaine, Claudy, Koenitzer, Szabo, Chairman Adams NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: ---------------------- James H. Sisk Planning Director APPROVED: --------- Planni ictor . Adams, Chairman rg Commission -4-