Loading...
CC 02-21-95 CC=g96 IVHNUTI 8 Cupertino City Council Regular Adjourned Meeting February 21, 1995 CALL TO ORDER At 6:46 p.m. Mayor Dean called the meeting to order. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Council members present: John Bautism, Don BurneCt, Barbara Koppel, Lauralee Sorensen and Mayor 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; Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling; Public Info~ation Officer Donna Krey; and Public Works Director Bert Viskovich. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ms. Janet Hunter said she represented Delta Theta TaU, Epsilon Rho Chapter. She presented the Mayor with a check for $I000, which represented her organization's profits from the Highway 85 Celebration. She said that the money was donated for the purpose of provicling a television for the Senior Center, and that the balance shoUld be used for Parks and Recreation scholarships for needy children. CONSENT CALENDAR Sorensen moved and Koppel seconded to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. The motion carried 5-0. 1. Resolution No. 9289: Accounts Payable, Febr~sry 3, 1995. 2. Resolution No. 9290: Accounts Payable, February 10, 1995. 3. ResolufionNo. 9291: Payroll, Febv~_ary 10, 1995. 4. Acceptance of municipal improvements--Tung P. Chang project at 7394 Wildfiower Way. 5. Monthly Treasurer's Report and budget update, January, 1995. Febr~ary 21, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 2 6. Request from County of Santa Clara to partially fund county-wide homeless census. Vote Members of the City Council AYES: Bautista, Burnett, Dean, Koppel, and Sorensen. NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. Applications 9-U-94, 3-Z-94, 8-TM-94 and 27-EA-94 - Forge/Homestead, Charles O. Forge/Eileen Hutching Company, Trustees - Use Permit to develop a 204 unit for-rent condominium project; rezoning a 9.26 acre parcel from A-215 to P (Res 20-30 Planned Development for 20 to 30 units per gross acre); tentative map to subdivide one parcel into 204 condominium units; project is located at 20691 Homestead Road. Environmental Detesmination: The Planning Commission recommends the granting of a negative declaration. Recommended for approval. (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1680: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving a Zone Change of a 9.26 Acre Parcel from A-215 to P (Res. 10-20), Planned Residential Development for 10-20 Units Per Gross Acre (Application 3-Z-94)." The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report and a chart showing a number of density computations based on base density. He said that Council is not permitted to make the project economically infeasible by picking a low base density, and that staff recommends a base density of not less than 16 units per acre. He explained that this property is under a Williamson Act contract which keeps the property as agricultural in return for reduced property taxes. Council must cancel the contract through a separate public hearing process. He reviewed some suggested changes to the conditions, including lowering the minimum number of parking spaces to 403, including requirements for testing for pesticide contamination, granting 50% park fee credits, and adding that park fees would not be applied to the affordable units. Mr. John Vidovich, representing the applicants, said that the first issue of importance was density. When the project was proposed at 240 units it allowed them to meet park dedications and provide a desirable product. To address concerns raised by the neighbors, units on two sides of the project were reduced to two stories and the project brought down to 204 units. He reviewed a line-of- February 21, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 3 - sight diagram illustrating the view of the new development from the neighboring parking lot, and said there was no aesthetic mason to reduce the density. Mr. Vidovi'ch said a base density of 16 units with a bonus was not reasonable, and if Council still wanted a multi-family development at this location the density should be kept as high as possible Mr. Vidovich reviewed the exterior elevations and conunitted to providing genuine wood siding. He asked for the flexibility to add garages, have a 1.95 ratio for parking instead of a fixed number of spaces, and said he was willing to work with staff to address issues regarding the on-site well. He said they were concerned about sharing a driveway with the Sunnyvale building next door. He aiso said that the density would not affect the neighborhood except for a minor impact on traffic. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the project: Mr. Jim Mitchell, 11093 Firethome; Ms. Janet Wang, 590 La Cohner Drive, Sunnyvale; Ms. Lynore Slaten, 20552 Shady Oak Lane; Mr. Richard Chavarria, 20539 Cedarbrook Terrace; Mr. Edward Merlo, 11079 Flowering Pear Drive; Mr. David Kiel, 11107 Flowering Pear Drive; Ms. Diana Stickler, 11109 Flowering Pear Drive; Ms. Kathy Dumas, 11117 Flowering Pear Drive; Mr. Paul McNicol, 11040 Firethome Drive; Ms. Nancy Trankle, 11069 Flowering Pear Drive; Ms. Karen Durra, 20682 Celeste Circle; Ms. Naren Kalra, 586 La Conner Drive, Sunnyvale. Ms. Slayton distributed a list of issues contrasting the developer's project with suggestions proposed by Countrywood residents. The concerns and/or objections raised by these speakers included: (1) Density is too high, and it will have a negative impact on the quality of life, property values, and traffic; (2) The intersection is already at a level D, which is unacceptable, and adding the traffic of this and other projects is not feasible; (3) There is a potential for vandalism, car theft, etc., because of the perimeter parking; (4) The increased traffic will create more noise and fumes, and there may be possible soil contamination from the well which will be impacted by grading; and (5) New residents may use Franco Court for overflow parking and reduce access for emergency vehicles. Also, two examples were shown of the view from existing homes before and after the proposed project. These speakers made the following recommendations: (1) Reduce the density to no more than 12 units per acre; (2) Lower all buildings to two stories; (3) Restrict traffic to a right-turn-only on to Homestead Road; (4) Construct a bus pull-out to streamline traffic; (5) Provide better fencing, and include landscaping on the Sunnyvale side of the project; (6) Require an EIR and feasibility index to calculate the appropriate number of units per acre; and (7) Parking is inadequate. FebruAry 21, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page Ms. Elizabeth Mumm, 20699 Celestine Circle, said there was a need for affordable housing in the community which could be provided by higher density developments. She suggested that mass transit may help to address the concerns about traffic. Council discussed the appropriate number of parking spaces, minimum density calculations, and potential impacts on traffic. The Community Development Director said that the 1993 General Plan included an exhaustive environmental impact report (EIR) for the city, to include 2500 unit throughout the community and 20 units per acre on this site. Bumett agreed with residents that the traffic patterns are confusing. He suggested lining up driveways or installing center strip dividers. Dean said that his goal at this time was not to meet the needs or people who will move to the community in the future, but to meet the needs of the residents already here. The city ranks 50th in computer availability in schools, and it needs to develop a formula to dictate fees on a project to provide funds for schools at each level for library books and computers. Bautista expressed concern about the impacts on the level of service at the intersection. The Public Works Director explained that the General Plan had modeled the capacity of the street network, and that a D level of service would be waintained except at DeAnza Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Each project that is built must meet the test. Although this particular intersection might become a D-, from an overall perspective thc traffic meets the standards. Thc City Manager added that the bridge widening at DeAnTo would help to ease the bottleneck. The Public Works Director said that installation of a median barrier would cost about $250,000, and suggested Council ask the applicant to pay a percentage. The City Manager discussed the $2.65/sq~*are foot fee instituted by the Sunnyvale School District to be paid by developers. Koppel said she did not want to limit the schools on how the money could be spent. Dean said the schools heavily endorsed the suggestion for computers and books, and that in particular Council should direct the funds to Cupertino schools. Mr. Vidovich said this project would produce $200,000 to $300,000 in direct fees to schools, and if there was flexibility in how they can make a direct community impact he was in favor of the idea particularly if he was given flexibility in mitigating the low-income housing. He said he would support an agreement in which the schools specify directly what it is they want. February 21, 1995 (2upertlno City Council Page ---. Bautista said he favored no three-story buildings. Ilurnett agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation. Sorensen also agreed and said maybe all the buildings should be made two-stories. Koppel said there should be consistency in building heights; she shared concerns about safety in the perimeter parking; and reducing all buildings to two stories satisfies the neighbors concerns. Bumett said he wanted a solid row of trees around the perimeter. Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to grant a negative declaration for the use permit, zone change, and tentative map. The motion carried 4-1 with Baufista voting no. Dean called for a straw vote. Baufista moved that they approve the Planning Commission recommendations with the following modifications: construct a two- story project with the same footprint as currently shown, bringing the number of units down to 178, which includes the 10% very low income affordable housing units. Regarding parking, there shall be approximately 1.98 spaces per unit (or as recommended by the Planning Commission); that landscaping be consistent around all three perimeters; wall height of 8 feet; real wood siding; amend the condition regarding soil contamination as recommended by staff; consider changes to the bus stop location, to be discussed at a later time. Koppel seconded. ._ Bautista made the finding that the concentration of 3-story units in the center means a higher concentration of people who have to travel longer distances to get to their cars, waste disposal sites, and to leave the property, as well as having to travel longer distances to get from the ground to their property. There is an essential safety element here that is not a concern in closed buildings, but this is an exterior arrangement. There is also a safety issue in te~ms of the number of cars that enter and exit the project and anything Council can do to diminish the number of trips should be of concern. Dean asked how he felt about the subject of computers. Bautista said that he did not fully understand the proposal. Dean said that the precedent h~s been set by another city, and he wanted to take steps to address problems that had been identified. Koppel suggested that it be brought up as a separate policy but say that it would be effective as of this proposal. Dean agreed as long as it was retroactive. The City Attorney suggested that it be addressed during the Williamson Act cancellation hearing. Bumett said he was not advocating a traffic study, but rather to modify thc street design to make it safer. It could be followed up on later, perhaps under the five- year capital improvement program: The Public Works Director said it should be specified tonight that the developer shall pay its fair share of the median costs. A draft condition had been prepared and would be read into the record at the appropriate time. · . February 21, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 6 Mr. Vidovich asked to address the conditions raised in the straw vote. He said that there were certain base densities that Council must recognize unless they could make findings the other way. He said they had made a lot of concessions at the request of the neighbors, and that the 204-unit proposal by the Planning Commission would have a drastic effect and jeopardized the economic value, they discussed the lowest they could go to, which was detemfined to be the 16 units per acre pins the 48 bonns was the lowest, and it is the most drastic thing that Council could do while still maintaining multi-family housing on the site. This site is the most appropriate site in the city for multi-family housing. Bautista said that multi-units here make sense, and the architecture is well- designed. He felt that the number of units is high given the level of service and safety concerns, and that's why he proposed 178 units, which he did not feel was a dramatic difference. Burner said one of Council's responsibilities was to provide a range of housing in the community. Based on staff's analysis, the developer's request has already been reduced quite a bit, and the General Plan which actually urges staff to push developers towards the high end of density. There is a community need and a fairness issue, and the compromise that the Planning Commission reached is as fair as it can get. Bautista pointed out that with the Planning Commission figures the density would calculate to 21.1 units per acre, which is above the range. His proposal would be 17.5, which is at the upper end of the 10-20 range, which is within the ~enerai Plan mandate of providing affordable apartments in the city, and that's why he supported the project generally. Dean took a straw vote between Baufista's recommendation for 178 units and received 2 votes (Bantista, Koppel), and the Planning Commission. recommendation for 204 units and received 3 votes (Burnett, Sorensen, Dean). Dean said the only reason he would support 204 units is that if extra funding goes to Cupertino libraries and schools for computers and books. Mr. Vidovich said that was acceptable. Dean said it would be finalized at the Williamson Act cancellation hearing. Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to adopt a negative declaration for the use permit, zone change, and tentative map. The motion carried 4-1, with Bautista voting no. Febr-~ry 21,199S Cupertino City Council Page ? The Community Development Director suggested the ordinance be amended to reflect that the project is not to be approved until the Williamson Act cancellation takes place. The City Clerk read the title of ordinance No. 1680. Burner moved and Sorensen seconded to amend the ordinance as suggested, to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. Bumett moved and Sorensen seconded to approve the use pe~it application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 4584 with the following modifications: The exterior shall include the use of real wood siding; fences shall be 8 feet high; park dedication fees shall not be applied to the low-income nnits; that park fees may vary depending on the number of below-market-rate units; the developer shall provide a minimum parking ratio of 1.98 spaces per unit; garages may be provided (not to exceed 35 one-car garages) but they should not be used for storage; the developer shall contribute its fair share, based upon traffic generation (5% of p.m. peak hour traffic) for the design cost and installation of a median on Homestead Road; soil studies shall also include investigation of fuel or pesticide contamination; staff shall verify that rodents have been eradicated prior to any site work and staff is directed that the applicant shall provide a constant row of trees around the perimeter of the site. The motion carried 3-2 with Koppel and Bautista voting no. Burner moved and Sorensen seconded to approve the tentative map application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 4586. The motion carried 3-2 with Koppel and Bautista voting no. Burner moved and Sorensen seconded to make a finding that the project meets the requirements for a $0% park dedication fee credit. The motion carried 5-0. 8. Application No. 3-Z-83 (Amended) and 34-EA-94 - Barry Swenson Builder, First Development Corporation - zoning amendment for Condition No. 7 to change the required landscape setback from 50 feet to 35 feet for certain properties located east of DeAnza Boulevard, to reduce the required front building height from a 1.5 to 1 height, to setback ratio 36 feet and reduce the required rear setback from a 4 to 1 height, to setback ratio to 20 ft.; property is located on Stevens Creek Boulevard between Stelling Road and the easterly city boundary. Environmental Determination: The Pllmning Commission recommends the granting of a negative declaration. Recommended for approval. (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1681: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Condition 7 of Ordinance 1223 and Revising Ordinance 1248 Also Known As he Stevens Creek Boulevard Conceptual Zoning Plan for the Parcels Febr-~,'y 21, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page Located on the Southwest Comer of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau, Also Known As APN 375-07-002 and 375-07-003." Sorensen moved and Burner seconded to grant a negative declaration. The motion carried 5-0. The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Koppel seconded to read Ordinance No. 1681 by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. 9. Application No. 81,166 - City of Cupertino, citywide - amendment to Ordinance No. 1426 proposing technical revisions to ordinance permitting Beverage Container Redemption and Recycling Canters. (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1682: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Ordinance No. 1426 and Adding Chapter 19.82 to the Cupertino Municipal Code to be Entitled 'Beverage Container Redemption and Recycling Centers'." Sorensen moved and Burner seconded to approve the application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 4587. The motion carried 5-0. The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Sorensen seconded to read ordinance No. 1682 by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 10. Application 13-U-94 and 35-EA-94 - Imwalle Stegner, Union Oil Company of California, use permit to construct a 5,800 sq. ft. retail building; project located at the northwest comer of DeAnza Boulevard and Bollinger ROad. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission recommends the granting of a negative declaration. Recommended for approval. Mr. Dick Fish, representing the applicant, said he concurred with the staff recommendations. He requested deletion of the requirement for tile banding under the overhangs, and to have it on the signs instead. The Community Development Director reviewed the elevation drawings and said the building might look better without the two-tone banding. He suggested deleting condition No. 13 and directing staff to use the elevation drawing. Sorensen moved and Bumett seconded to grant a negative declaration. The motion carried 5-0. Febvmry 21, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 9 Sorensen moved and Koppel seconded to approve the application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 4589, modified as follows: Delete condition 13 and require the architecture as shown on the fight-hand-side of the elevation drawing; and to add a "Welcome to Cupertino" sign. The motion carried 5-0. NEW BUSINESS 11. Confirmation of date for City Council study session to review the five year forecast. These meetings were scheduled as follows: Annual goal-setting session - Friday, March 24, l:O0 p.m., location to be announced · Council study session to review the five-year forecast - Monday, March 27, 7:00 p.m., conference rooms C & D. · Council study session to review the 1995-1996 budget - Wednesday, May 31, 7:00 p.m., conference rooms C & D. · First public hearing on the 1995-1996 budget - Monday, June 5, 6:45 p.m., Council Chambers · Second public hearing on the 1995-1996 budget - Monday, June 19, 6:45 p.m., Council Chambers 12. One year review of appeal fees. Council concurred to receive the report. 13. . First reading of Ordinance No. 1683: "An Ordilmnce of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 11.24.150 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating .to the Establishment of Parking Prohibition on Franco Court from Homestead Road to the Southerly Terminus." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Sorensen 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. ORDINANCES February ~!1, 1005 Cupertino City Council Page 10 14. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1658: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.40, Residential Hillside Zones, of the Cupertino Municipal Code." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Koppel seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion can'ied 5-0. Sorensen moved and Koppel seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1658. Motion carried 5-0. 15. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1659: "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 185 Net Acres in the Regnart Canyon Area; Located in the West Foothills of Cupertino." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Koppel seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. Sorensen moved and Koppel seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1659. Motion carried 5-0. 16. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1679: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Adding Chapter 2.88 to the Cupertino Mnnicipal Code to Establish An Audit Committee." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Sorensen seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Motion carried 5-0. Sorensen moved and Bumett seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1679 Motion carried 5-0. COUNCIL REPORTS Koppel gave an update on Kaiser traffic and said that vehicle speed around Stevens Creek and Foothill had dropped from 34 to 21 miles per hour. Secondly, there will be a meeting in these chambers to consider changing the street names Sunnyvale/Saratoga Road from Bollinger to Prospect (most of which is in San Jose) and they are getting a good response from their chamber of commerce. The only part of Cupertino that is not already named DeAnza is from Rainbow to ProSPect. Cupertino City Council Page 11 Burner reported on meetings of the Northwest and North Central Flood, and said a lot of flood damage was prevented in the recent rains by projects that were already built, and they were shown maps of where flooding would have occurred. The Corps of Engineers Flood Control program is under heavy assault, but there would be much impact on Cupertino except that it may jeopardize pwjects slated for Calabasas Creek at Bollinger and Blaney. Sorensen said there had been a meeting on the Community Development Block Grant program and she would return to Council at a later time with an update on proposed projects. The City Manager listed the actions recommended by the Legislative Review Committee: · Support AB 82 (Pringle), booking fee reform. · Oppose SB 150 (Johaunessen), vehicle license fees and gas tax revenue allocations · SupportSB 11 (Ayala), unfunded mandates · Oppose SB 51, (Haynes), inverse condemnation · Support the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors resolution encouraging better enforcement of the vehicle code section prohibiting littering and supporting the Adopt-A-Highway program. Bautista moved and Koppel seconded to accept the recommendations. The motion carried unanimously. At 10:15 p.m., the meeting was adjourned. City Clerk