CC 04-03-95 CC-899
MINUTES
Cupertino City Council
Regular Meeting
April 3, 1995
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 6:45 p.m., Dean called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Council members present: $ohn Bautista, Don Burnett, Barbara Koppel, Lauralee Sorensen and
Wally Dean. Council members absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager Don Brown; City Clerk Kimberly Smith; Administrative Services
Director Carol Atwood; Community Development Director Bob Cowan; City Attorney Charles
Kilian; Public information Officer Donna Krey; Public Works Director Bert Viskovich; and Vera
Gil, Planner II.
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
Lt. Jim Huber of the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office introduced Ms..Janet Shannon, the city's
new School Resource Official. She said she would be working at Fremont High School District and
Cupertino Union School District, but hoped to expand the program to include elementary schools
too. She encouraged Council to contact her with suggestions or feedback.
Mayor Dean presented a proclamation on Emergency Preparedness declaring the month of April,
1995, as Earthquake Preparedness Month. Ms. Marie Moore, the City's Emergency Preparedness
Coordinator, accepted the proclamation and presented Council members with videotapes related to
the Santa Clarita earthquake.
POSTPONEMENTS
Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to continue item No. 12 to April 17, and to postpone item No.
14 so that it could be sent back to the Planning Commission for review of new plans. The motion
carried 5-0.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Dick Weaver, 21426 Rumford Drive, read copies of two letters dated April 3. The first request
that the minutes contain the exact wording of all main motions and amendments without being
edited. The second requested that Council's motion on March 20 regarding second tier growth in the
General Plan be rescinded because the action that Council took was not reflected on the agenda.
/~pril 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 2
CONSENT CALENDAR
Sorensen moved and Koppel seconded to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. The motion
carried 5-0.
1. Resolution No. 9307: Accounts payable, March 17, 1995.
2. Resolution No. 9308: Accounts payable, March 24, 1995.
3. Resolution No. 9309: Payroll, March 24, 1995.
4. Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage Control license for Pizza Presto, 19998
Homestead Road, Suite A.
5. Resolution No. 9310: Approving destruction of certain records (planning).
6. Resolution No. 9311: Declaring intention to sell surplus real property May 1:5, 1995 (Seven
Springs).
7. Resolution No. 9312: Annexation, "Lomita 94-09."
8. Minutes of the regular meeting of March 20, 1995, and the regular adjourned meeting of
March 24, 1995.
9. Resolution No. 9313: Supporting a regional economic development strategy and
commending the efforts of the economic development team of Joint Venture Silicon Valley.
10. Approval of Fine Arts Commission recommendation for the award of fine arts grants.
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES: Bautista, Burnett, Dean, Koppel, and Sorensen.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARINGS
11. Public hearing to review and approve use of twenty-first year (1995-1996) Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
(a) Resolution No. 9314: Authorizing submittal of funding proposal for the twenty-first
program year ( 1995-1996) of the Community Development Block Grant.
' Al~ril 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 3
Planner Vera Gil reviewed the staff report. Council asked whether there were any buildings
needing modifications pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for which
CDBG funds could be used. The City Manager said that the Blue Pheasant Restaurant would
not qualify because it is not free to the public, but that staff would investigate other
locations.
Ms. Mary Ellen Cheil, representing Cupertino Community Services, described the rotating
shelter program. Residents of the program can stay for three months, and in that time they
are assisted with finding jobs, opening a bank account, and finding housing. CCS has a 65%
success rote for assisting with a permanent job, permanent housing, or both. CCS manages
Chateau Cupertino and is now taking on below-market-rate housing sales.
Ms. Sandy Reischer represented the Pacific Autism Center for Education (PACE). She
discussed the opportunity to purchase the home they have been leasing on Kirwin Lane to
ensure that the children are not displaced, and there have been many offers of volunteer work
to make repairs. She asked Council if they could provide a bridge loan until the CDBG
funds were available, since the landlord wished to sell the property immediately. The City
Manager said that should not be a problem since it would just be a matter of advancing funds
until July. Dean said that he would like time to review the request for a bridge loan.
Bautista said another option might be a binding contract with the property owner.
Ms. Elizabeth Auton, representing the Emergency Housing Consortium (EHC), discussed
plans to rehabilitate the recently-acquired Monterey Glen Inn in San Jose. This is the first
time EHC has asked for funds from the city. They would be providing 95 units to the
homeless from Santa Clara County, of which three are expected to be from Cupertino in the
first year. She explained that the cost is subsidized by the Depa~hnent of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and will allow them to provide support services on site to teach
independent living skills.
Koppel moved to approve staffs recommendation, as follows. Sorensen seconded and the
motion carried 5-0:
Program Administration $ 15,000
Public Service Grant Implementation $ 7,500
CCS - Rotating Shelter $ 15,000
CCS - Affordable Placement Program $ 11,250
Pacific Autism Center for Education (PACE) $100,000
Urban County Rehabilitation Services $ 15,000
Affordable Housing Fund ~
Sub Total $190,000
Transfers: Transfer $21,000 from the Rehabilitation Program income account to
cover city staff costs. Transfer $5,000 from Rehabilitation Program income account
to cover Emergency Housing Consortium loan.
BMR In-Lieu Fees: Allocated $990 from BMR in-lieu fees for equipment
acquisition.
. . ,~,prll 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 4
--.- 12. Application 1-Z-95 and 1-EA-95, rezoning of various hillside properties in the Inspiration
Heights area from RI-10 (Residential single-family, 10,000 sq. ~. minimum lot size) zone,
Rl-40 (Residential single-family, 40,000 sq. fL minimum lot size) zone and PHS
(Residential Hillside) zone to RHS- zone and OS (private open space) zone. Environmental
Determination: The Planning Commission recommends the granting of a Negative
Declaration. Recommended for approval. (Continued to April 17, 1995.)
(a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1684: "An Ordinance of the City Council of
the City of Cupertino Amending Title 19 of the Cupertino Municipal Code by
Rezoning Various Hillside Properties Encompassing Approximately 105 Net
Acres in the Inspiration Heights Area; Located in the West Foothills of
Cupertino (Application 1-Z-95 - City of Cupertino)."
Under "Postponements" Council continued this item to April 17.
13. Applications 2-Z-95, 4-U-95 and 6-EA-95, Central Fire Protection District - Use Permit to
replace and expand an existing fire station. Rezoning a .4 acre parcel from R1 (Residential
single-family) zone to BA (public building) zone. The property is located at 22620 Stevens
Creek Boulevard. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission recommended
the granting cfa Negative Declaration. Recommended for approval.
(a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1685: "An Ordinance of the City Council of
.~-- the City of Cupertino to Rezone a .4 Acre Parcel From R1 to BA (Public
Building) (Application 2-Z-95 - City of Cupertino)."
Central Fire District Chief Douglas Sporleder reviewed the map of the proposed eleven fire
services boundaries and explained that the construction will be phased to allow the existing
Monta Vista station to remain in service. They hoped to build it in tandem with another
station on Stevens Creek Boulevard to save on costs. He explained the modifications made
to the plans as requested by the Monta Vista neighbors.
Mr. Glen Bower, the project architect, said that the architecture reflects a functional design
for efficient response time; a building that will fit into the neighborhood in terms of size,
scale, and materials; the ability to construct it in phases; and a drive-through design to avoid
having vehicles block traffic while they back into the apparatus area. He also discussed the
landscaping plans and said trees would be added to existing landscaping, and the enclosing
wall will be landscaped as well.
Mr. Robert West, 20232 Joseph Circle, showed an overhead chart which diagrammed and
weighted objectives by the City, Central Fire, and the residents. He said that all concerned
had done an excellent job, and he and his wife supported the project 100 percent.
Mr. Steven Sulgit, 22560 Stevens Creek Boulevard, said that he and his immediate neighbors
encouraged the approval of this project. The firefighters were excellent neighbors and
Central Fire District had been very cooperative throughout this process.
April 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 5
Mr. Ray Eddy, representing the Westridge condominiurn complex, said they heartily
endorsed the plan, and supported it for what it does not do - it does not have the continuous
noise of manufacturing and is not an eyesore.
A letter dated March 30, 1995, was received from Mr. John Hockenberry, President of the
Westridge Homeowners Association. The letter said that the Association gave its full
support for the new fire station plans.
Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to grant negative declarations. Motion carried 5-0.
Sorensen moved and Koppel seconded to approve the zone change per Planning Commission
Resolution No. 4594. Motion carried 5-0.
The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Burnett moved and Koppel seconded to read
the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first
reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0.
Burnett moved and Koppel seconded to approve the use permit per Planning Commission
Resolution No. 4593. Motion carried 5-0.
14. Applications 3-Z-83 (Modified), 3-U-95 and 5-EA-95 - Central Fire Protection District - Use
Permit to replace and expand an existing fire station on an adjacent parcel and modification
of Stevens Creek Blvd. Conceptual Zoning Plan to allow a 13 fL 6 in. setback. The site is
located at Vista and Randy Drive, north of Stevens Creek Boulevard. Environmental
Determination: The Planning Commission recommended the granting of a Negative
Declaration. Recommended for denial.
(a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1686: "An Ordinance of the City Council of
the City of Cupertino Amending Condition No. 8 of Ordinance No. 1223 and
Revised by Ordinance No. 1248, Also Known As the Stevens Creek
Boulevard Conceptual Zoning Plan, For a Portion of a Parcel Located
Between Vista Drive and Randy Lane, North of Stevens Creek Boulevard,
Also Known As APN 316-24-008."
Under "Postponements", Council postponed item No. 14 so that it could be sent back to the
Planning Commission for review of new plans.
Mayor Dean reordered the agenda to discuss item No. 16 first.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
16. Applications I-U-95 and 2-EA-95 - Hunter Properties - Use permit to construct a 6400 sq. t~.
retail building at Homestead Road and Grant Road. Environmental Determination: The
Planning Commission recommended the granting of a Negative Declaration. Recommended
.,-. for approval.
The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report, and discussed alternatives
regarding parking, property access, and costs of undergrounding utility poles. He suggested
April 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 6
that Condition 5 be changed to allow the applicant to go back to the first parking pattern if
they were unsuccessful in getting permission from thc adjacent property owner to put in the
preferred parking pattern, which had better traffic circulation. The preferred solution would
share access but remove six parking spaces.
Bautista asked why the rear wall of the building was so plain. The Community Development
Director said the Planning Commission had discussed alternatives and suggested landscaped
trellises and some architectural modifications. Those could be approved by staff or Council.
Dean opened the public hearing, and no one wished to speak on this item. The public hearing
was closed.
Bautista moved to approve the application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 4598,
and to (1) emphasize the option regarding ingress and egress to the property on the east of
this property; and (2) the applicant is to return to Council with the landscaping plan.
The Community Development Director asked Council to clarify that they preferred this
approach, but if there is no longer leverage for the use permit the applicant could come hack
with it. Or did Council want to see it again? Burnett said that the way the resolution is
written, that is a requirement. The Community Development Director agreed. Burnett said
that Council would not have to do anything and its a requirement. The Community
Development Director said the Commission did not know the lack of control we had over
that use permit, which is new information.
Bautista said that from that point of view, he would go with the staff and planning
recommendation, with the added condition that the applicant come back to Council on the
landscaping plan. Koppel seconded, and the motion carried 5-0.
Sorensen moved to grant a Negative Declaration. Burnett seconded and the motion carried
5-0.
(This item was reopened at a later point in the meeting and set for hearing on April 17).
PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued)
15. Public hearing to consider appeal of Planning Commission approval of Application 12-TM-
94, Rodger and Ronamae Woolley. The application requests subdivision of a .9 acre parcel
into two lots. The property is located at 11593 Upland Way. (Paul Roberts, appellant).
The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report and described the land use
concerns. He reviewed a map showing areas with slopes above and below 10% and
indicated which areas are still available for development. In this case, probably all 5 lots
would not develop at the same time, so there is a potential for a flag lot. He noted that next
Wednesday the Planning Commission will hold a study session on hillside zoning and they
will be discussing calculations for house size, grading, etc.
Mr. Paul Roberts, Planning Commissioner, said that he had been concerned about the way
the application was rushed through the Planning Commission without sufficient deliberation.
April 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 7
Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 are part of the County and this is the first action regarding those
parcels so it might be germane to the zoning. The Planning Commission was told that the lot
is relatively flat, but actually the slope is 8-13%. The City has a policy discouraging flag lots
and Mr. Roberts felt that they should think about stacking houses at maximum density as
they go up into the hills. He said that slopes in this particular area have considerable overlap
of slopes greater than 10 percent. One possible solution would be a lateral cul=de-sac
parallel to Upland Way with R=20 zoning. Mr. Roberts said that several Planning
Commission members were not sure why they were required to zone these lots at maximum
density and they would like the City Council to confirm that necessity. If the Planning
Commission had known that the back portion of lot 9 was as steep as it is, they may not have
agreed to three lots, but only two. These properties are not in the City and therefore are not
zoned, only pre-zoned.
The City Attorney said that the Permit Streamlining Act would apply and Council should
decide what they want to do tonight. If this item goes back to the Planning Commission, it
may be deemed ultimately approved if it runs beyond the time limits of the Act. He
suggested that Council act on this item tonight, and have the Planning Commission look at
the other lots later so that this one project is not delayed for a regional issue.
The Community Development Director said that the City Council and the Planning
Commission do not have to zone at maximum. If they wish to allow only two lots, they can
zone it to RH-30, but the future owner of the property could then change that. The long-term
~-- solution is a general plan change. The general plan does not prohibit flag lots, but it is a
stated policy oftbe Planning Commission.
Commissioner Roberts said that the Planning Commissioners all got copies of the appeal.
He had discussed it with them and there is substantial support for hearing this again. He
showed slides which indicated the semi-rural nature of the property, and said the City is
going to spend millions of dollars to recreate this kind of habitat, but here it can be
preserved. He pointed out an open drainage ditch and some areas of slippage in the hillside.
He said they should not permit urban densities in semi-rural conditions.
The City Attorney said that, regarding the annexation issue, pre-zoning authority under the
state planning act treats properties outside the city the same as inside the city. If Council
wishes to hold up building on this, they could pass an interim study zone which would allow
up to two years for review and establish a building moratorium during that time.
Mr. Neil Woolley said that his father owned the property. They had followed all the
guidelines given them by Planning staff, and were surprised at the controversy that has
arisen. He said that the rip rap, the drainage ditch and the slippage all shown in Mr. Roberts'
slides did not occur on this property. He said he expected the other two lots to be developed
shortly. Mr. Woolley said that his father has retired and would like to use his retirement
funds for this project, and they do not want to have a lengthy delay.
Mr. Roger Woolley, the property owner, said that he had hoped to buy the neighbor's
property, but they plan to develop with the lots closer to Rainbow. He said if Council was
worried about the flag lot, he did not care if they put in his half of the cul-de-sac. He said that
April 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page
Commissioner Roberts' suggestion would force him to move his house because the street
would cut across the front of it.
City Attorney said that one alternative is the interim zone, if Council wants a building
moratorium. Sorensen said that she was interested, although the project would probably end
up with the same result. The City Attorney said that the motion could be to continue this
application to the next meeting and that staff should return with an interim zone for the area.
Sorensen moved to continue this item. Bautista seconded.
Dean said the applicant followed' the rules and should not be penalized. Koppel agreed.
Bautista said he did not feel there would be that much delay, and the real issue is whether
there should be three or two lots, and they should be considered in light of properties to the
south and west.
The motion failed to carry 2-3, with Koppel, Dean and Bumett voting no. Koppel moved to
approve the Planning Commission recommendation. Bumett seconded and the motion
carried 3-2 with Sorensen and Bautista voting no.
Sorensen said she would like to see other areas looked at as a whole, including Upland Way.
Dean said the issue should be looked at quickly and directly. The Community
Development Director said only the Planning Commission and Council can initiate a change
of zone. Dean said he would like the Commission to agendize a discussion on that site, and
for lots 8, 9, 10, and 11, as well as farther up. He said Commissioner Harris brought up some
valid points on designation and interpretation of General Plan, and staff's recommendation
needs to address that. Although they would meet this Wednesday, he would like to see a
whole evening spent on those issues.
Bautista asked if there was consensus to direct the Commission to look at this in temps of
more restrictive zoning. Koppel said she was not in agreement. Sorensen moved to direct the
Planning Commission to evaluate the lower Upland area in terms of zoning. The motion
carried 4-1, with Koppel voting no.
The Community Development Director said that staff would bring back a report from the
city geologist regarding the issues associated with building and grading practices in that area.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS (continued)
16. Applications 1-U-95 and 2-EA-95 - Hunter Properties (reopened).
Dean explained that Council had already taken action on his item and it was approved. Mr.
Hunter said he had not been present at the hearing, and asked if it could be reopened to
address a couple of issues. The City Attorney said there could be no other actions taken
now. Mr. Hunter said he wished to confi, rm the Council action because there was some
ambiguity in the way the report was drained, and some confusion at the Planning
Commission level. Dean asked him to meet with staffduring the break.
April 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 9
Council recessed at 9:17 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m.
Dean said there is a question about the option on the driveways, thinking that if we didn't get
one we could fall back on the other, like the two drawings that were presented. The City
Attorney said that the decision, according to the Clerk, was that Council only consider the
one option. The City Manager said one of the questions raised during the hearing was
whether or not they should only have the one driveway option, or whether they should try
hard and have the other one as a fallback. He said he was not sure what was the actual intent
or wording of the motion. The City Clerk read back the motion. The City Attorney said that
according to the minutes, only the landscaping plan will be returned to Council. Koppel
asked if the applicant, who was not present at the hearing, was not in agreement with the
motion? The applicant said yes. The City Attorney said Council could let it stand or move
to reconsider. Ordinance 2-08.095 provides that the action must be re-noticed so that any
members of the public would not leave here thinking there was one approval and then find
out there was a later decision. It would come back to Council after the Clerk notifies the
relevant parties or the public.
Koppel moved to reconsider this item. Sorensen seconded, and the motion carried 5-0. The
City Clerk said this is a planning application and no newspaper advertisement is required.
Notice would be mailed to the applicant and properties in a 300-foot radius.
Koppel moved to set the item for April 17. Sorensen seconded and the motion carried 5-0.
NEW BUSINESS
17. Consideration of acceptance of commissioned, donated art work by Chinese artist Zhunwang
Zhao.
Mr. Andrew Springmeyer, Fine Arts Commissioner, introduced Mr. Zhao and highlighted his
professional experience, and said his works have been displayed around the world. Mr. Zhao
offered to donate an original painting to the City as a token of his love and appreciation for
the social, cultural, and environmental beauty of Cupertino, and sees the gift as an expression
to bridge the cultural influences in the city that he sees today. Mr. Springmeyer said the
Commission had been working with Mr. Zhao, who had submitted a number of ideas, and
the Fine Arts Commission unanimously recommended acceptance of the gift and the
proposed subject matter as reflected in the watercolor sketch which was displayed. The final
product is a water ink painting to be initially placed in the east wall of the City Hall foyer,
with the understanding that it can and may be moved from that site to other locations. Mr.
Zhao will complete the painting in the summer, and hopes it will be dedicated at the Art and
Wine Festival.
Sorensen moved that Mr. Zhao continue with this process through completion of the final
product. Koppel seconded, and the motion carried 5-0. Council members expressed their
gratitude for the generous gift of the painting and the artist's time.
April 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 10
18. Resolution No. 931 S: Authorizing the release of agreement with Santa Clara County Traffic
Authority for the payment of $998,735.38.
Sorensen moved to adopt the resolution. Koppel seconded, and the motion carried 5-0.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Koppel reported that a meeting will be held on April 25 in Council Chambers regarding the proposal
to change the name of Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road to De Anza Boulevard. This will mostly affect the
San Jose area. She said they had heard no complaints at this point, and Caltrans was also in favor
and may pick up the cost.
Sorensen reminded everyone that the Cherry Blossom Festival occurs April 8 and 9. She asked the
City Manager to address a survey taking place in Cupertino.
The City Manager said the consultant coordinating the survey cannot disclose the client, but it is not
sponsored or in any way affiliated with the City of Cupertino. He had heard there are a lot of
questions asked about city policies and some political questions, although he had not seen a copy.
The City Manager reviewed the Legislative Review Committee recommendations. Bautista moved
that adopt the recommendations. Koppel seconded and the motion carried 5-0:
Opposed SB 858 (Mountjoy), Maintenance of effort, public safety services
Opposed SB 323 (Kopp), Public Records Act
Opposed SB 167 (Polanco), Local agencies, peace officers' time bank
Supported AB 1191 (Takasugi), allocation of Prop. 172 sales tax revenue
Directed staffto analyze AB 866 (Aguiar) and SB 602 (Wrigh0, allocation of use tax on
leased vehicles.
CLOSED SESSION
At 10:05 p.m., Council recessed to a closed session to discuss significant exposure to litigation
subject to Government Code Section 54956.9Co)~1) related to a letter from Mr. Dick Weaver. At
10:05 p.m. Council reconvened in open session, and the City Attorney said that no action had been
taken.
AD,IOURNM~NT
At 10:06 p.m. the meeting was adjourned.
Kimb~/y Smith
City Clerk