Loading...
CC 01-03-95 CC=893 MINUTES Cupertino City Council Regular Adjourned Meeting January 3, 1995 CALL TO ORDER At 6:45 p.m., Mayor Dean called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Council members present: John Bautista, Don Burnett, Barbara Koppel, Lauralee Sorenson and Mayor Wally Dean. Council members absent: None. Staff present: City Manager Don Brown; City Clerk Klm Smith; Community Development Director Bob Cowan; City Attorney Charles Kilian; Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling; Public InfoLraation Officer Donna Krey; and Public Works Director Bert Viskovich. CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS None. POSTPONEMENTS Item No. 28 was continued at the request of the applicant. The public hearing was opened on item No. 18. No one wished to speak and the item was removed from the agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CONSENT CALENDAR Koppel moved to approve the items on the consent calendar. Sorensen seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 1. Resolution No. 9251: Approving Change Order No. 1 for Homestead Road and DeAnza Boulevard Widening, Project 94-112. - 2. Resolution No. 9252: Approving Change Order No. 2 for Street Maintenance-Slurry Seal, Project 94-105. Sanuary 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 2 3. Resolution No. 9253: Approving Change Order No. 1 for Landscape Improvements by Route 85, Project 94-109. 4. Resolution No. 9254: Declaring intention to order vacation of a public utility easement, fixing time and place for hearing, north of Rainbow Drive, south of Route 85. 5. Approval of minutes of the Dec. 5 regular meeting and Dec. 17 adjourned regular meeting. 6. Granting of Negative Declaration for Source Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element of the General Plan. 7. Review of applications for alcoholic beverage license: (a) The Corner Cafe, 21730 Stevens Creek Boulevard; (b) Pacific Steamer, 22350 Homestead Road; (c) Lotus Inn, 21271 Stevens Creek Boulevard. 8. Resolution No. 9255: Setting date for consideration of annexing area designated "Orange Avenue 94-07", property located on the west side of Orange Avenue between Almaden Avenue and San Fer~ando Avenue; approximately 0.16 acre, trash and debris in front, side and rear yards. The public hearing had been opened and no one wished to speak. Council concurred to remove this item from the agenda since the nuisance had been voluntarily abated by the property owner. 9. Resolution No. 9256: Setting date for consideration of annexing area designated "Orange Avenue 94-03", property located on the west side of Orange Avenue between Dolores Avenue and Alcazar Avenue; approximately .032 acre, Mehta (APN 357-14-022). 10. Acceptance of Carol Marble's resignation from the Cable' Television Advisory Committee. 11. Reclassification of facility manager position at the Cupertino Sports Center. 12. Resolution No. 9257: Accounts Payable, 12/02/94. 13. Resolution No. 9258: Accounts Payable, 12/09/94. 14. Resolution No. 9259: Accounts Payable, 12/16/94. 15. Resolution No. 9260: Accounts Payable, 12/22/94. 16. Resolution No. 9261: Payroll, 12/2/94. 17. Resolution No. 9262: Payroll, 12/16/94. January 3, 1995 Cuper6no City Council Page 3 Vote Members of the City Conncil AYES: Bautista, BurneR, Dean, Koppel, and Sorensen. NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HEARINGS 18. Res. No. 9263: Ordering abatement of nuisance on parcel 326-22-032, 10220 Peninsula Avenue, storage of trash and debris in front, side, and rear yards. The public hearing had been opened and no one wished to speak. Council concurred to remove this item from the agenda since the nuisance had been voluntarily abated by the property owner. 19. Consideration of appeal of Planning Commission denial of portion of Application 15- ASA-94, El Torito Restaurant, located at 10330 N. Wolfe Road. Appeal is regarding denial of a single strip of neon outlining the restaurant. -- The Conununity Development Director said that the Planning Commission felt that the restaurant's new colors were lively and the neon was not needed. Mr. John Otto said he was the applicant's consultant. He explained that the main reasons for needing the neon were visibility and accessibility to the restaurant. The neon border along the roof of two sides of the building was part of the corpemte trademark which is being included as they remodel all their restaurants. Current lighting conditions and heavy landscaping obscure the view of this restaurant, and its location makes access difficult. Neon has been used at thc neighboring Vallco mall, and a restaurant across the street is haloed by lights. Also, there are no residential uses in the area. Mr. David Specht said he represented Family Restaurants, Inc., which operates the restaurant. There has been a 13% increase in business in bay area El Torito Restaurants which have been remodeled with new paint and neon lighting. The Cupertino location has not been as successful, which they attribute to the visibility problem. Mr. John Statton, representing the Chamber of Commerce, supported the project. Although the Chamber helped write the sign ordinance controlling neon, they felt the heavy landscaping in this area justified the use of a tasteful single line of neon. The Community Development Director clarified that this request is for a building modification and would not fall under the sign ordinance. Mr. Statton said that the _ building color and the neon addition were important to increase visibility during both day and night. January 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 4 Koppel said that although she was not a fan of neon lighting, she could not see the El Torito Restaurant in the color photographs and would not oppose the applicant's request. Burner said he passed the restaurant frequently and it was not hard to find. Neon lighting may lead to even more brilliant lighting with a Las Vegas-type appearance. The access problems are separate from the visibility issue, and he would not support the use of neon. Sorensen said she was concerned about the use of neon, and that even the building color looks like Southern California architecture. Bautista said he did not want Cupertino to become "tinsel town," and other projects in town have been allowed to use too much neon. He suggested they find other ways of lighting up the building. The Community Development Director said they may be able to use exterior lighting, or possibly change the landscaping. Sorensen moved to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission. Burnett seconded, and the motion carded 4-1 with Koppel voting no. Item Nos. 20 and 21 were discussed together. 20. Application Nos. 81,156 and 9-EA-94 - City of Cupertino. Amendments to various - sections of Chapter 19.40 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, Residential Hillside Zones, regarding regulations for fiat yard area, second story off-sets and house sizes. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission recommends the granting of Negative Declaration. Recommended for appmvai. (Continued from December 5, 1994.) (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1658: "An Ordinance oftbe City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.40, Residential Hillside Zones, of the Cupertino Municipal Code." 21. Application Nos. 1-Z-94 and 2-EA-94 ~ City of Cupertino. Request for rezoning of various hillside properties encompassing 185 net acres in the Regnart Canyon area, located in the west foothills of Cupertino., Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Recommended for approval. (Continued fiom December 5, 1994.) (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1659: "An ordinance ofthe 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 Community Development Director reviewed the staff report and explained that _. Residential Hillside Ordinance (RI-IS) did not adequately address the issue of clustering homes on hillside lots. Jallnary 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 5 Council agreed to defer taking testimony on this item until after the clustering issue had been addressed by the Planning Commission, and to have it return to City Council on January 17. Mr. John Sobrato was permitted to address Council since he would not be available on that date. Mr. John Sobmto, Sobrato Development, said he concurred with staffs recommendations to take a proportionate look at house size. He said that both options for hillside clustering should be preserved, and referred to Model Nos. 1 and 2 of Exhibit 8 of the staff report. In case of the Diocese project, for which he was a representative, the property would be very expensive to maintain in tem,s of security, fire protection, etc. Mr. Sobrato said that both models should be maintained to preserve the City's flexibility. Sorensen moved to refer Item Nos. 21 and 22 to the Planning Commission to amend the formulas for calculating house size under the hillside lot clustering provisions of the Residential Hillside Ordinance, specifically, clustering model 1 (j~rivate open space) and model 2 (j~rivate open space held in common), and to have the item brought back to City Council on January 17. Burnett seconded, and the motion carried unan'unously. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 22. Applications 10-U-94 and 29-EA-94, Barry Swenson Builders, First Development Corp., Southwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Avenue. Use Permit to construct a 3-story, 56-unit affordable aparh~tent project and a 1-story 4,000 square foot. commercial building. Environmental Detetrtiination: The Planning Commission recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. Recommended for denial. (Project now proposed for 44 units.) Request from Community Housing Developers for a $700,000 loan for the acquisition of property at the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau. Matthew Thompson, the project architect, said the lower level of the buildings would be used for tenant storage, laundry and garbage facilities, etc. The living areas would be set back from the street and would be above pedestrian and vehicle traffic. The design would blend in with plan.q to have landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard, and would add even more trees behind the units to separate them from the single-family neighborhood. He discussed unit size, and said that since the units were small the project itself would have a much smaller scale and mass than would a project with units of 1,000 square feet. Mr. Thompson said the project would have on-site management. Ms. Hendee, Community Housing Developers, said this would be an unusual joint venture between a non-profit and a for-profit business which would enable them to use the skills of both. CHD and the developer met several times with neighborhood groups, and although they did not reach agreement, the developer has been responsive to the neighbors' concerns. She said there had been expressions of interest regarding the retail opportunities, which will probably be something like a coffee shop or a cafe. Jan,,~ry 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 6 The following individuals spoke in favor of the project: Mr. Don Elclridge, Adults Toward Independent Living; Ms. Marilyn Howard, 867 E. Estates Drive; Ms. Jane Adams, 10102 Senate Way; Ms. Oetttade Welch, 10605 Oascoigne Drive; Ms. Sharon Blaine; Mr. Sterling Speirn; Mr. John Statton, Cupertino Chamber of Commerce; Ms. Susan Mirch-Kretschmann, 20568 Blossom Lane; Mr. Eric Weaver, Lenders for Community Development, 960 W. Hedding Street, San Jose; Mr. Frank Pafitucci, Housing Action Coalition, 7901 Stoneridge Drive, Pleasanton; Ms. Sally Brennan, 19917 Twilight Court; Mr. David K. Specht, 10330 N. Wolfe Road; Ms. Deborah Samison, 21346 Rumford Drive; Mr. Carl Guardino, 5201 Great America Parkway, Suite 426, Santa Clara; and Ms. Donna Austin, 22283 DeAnza Circle. Comments in favor of the project included the following: The reputation of Conununity Housing Developers and Barry Swenson Builders; the critical need for atTordable housing in this community, both to meet state mandates and serve the needs of Cupertino workers, and to provide housing for the children of Cupertino citizens who are moving into their own homes; the efforts made by the developer to accommodate the concerns of the neighbors; the availability of on-site management services; easy access to commute options and proximity to a major shopping center, which may reduce vehicle trips; the importance of affordable housing in the city to economic growth; the traffic level of service (C) would not change; and that studies have shown that affordable housing does not decrease surrounding property values and in some instances may increase values. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the project: Mr. Ralph Bridges; Mr. Ron Walker, 19160 Anne Lane; Mr. Al Deridder; Ms. Denice Everham, 10307 Judy Avenue; Mr. Steve Lopez, 10375 Tantau Avenue; and Ms. Deborah Landreth. Concerns regarding this project included the following: Project density, particularly since it is near a single-family home neighborhood; the need to provide affordable housing in developments throughout the city instead of concentrating it in pockets; the small size of the units; lack of a children's play area; high mm-over rates in unit rentals and creation of a transient population; the potential for noise created by young adults having parties or frequent guests; and insufficient privacy for existing homes; There were also concerns related to parking, which included the impact of noise upon the group home nm by Independent Living for Men; insufficient parking for residents and/or visitors; the need to share parking between residential and commercial uses, and an increased impact on traffic in an area which is already congested. J'an-~ry 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 7 '-- Some suggestions were that Council restrict the new development to senior housing and also to require all future developments to provide below-maxket-rate units in their projects The following written materials were received: A letter of January 3 from Ms. Susan Silveira, Citizens for Quality Neighborhoods, in support of the project; rental infom~ation for 1985-1995 for duplexes west of Blaney, provided by Ms. Marilyn Howard; and a map modified by Mr. Ralph Bridge to reduce the number of apartments, add some houses, and change the parking lots. Mr. John Gibbs, 70 W. Hedding St., San Jose, represented County Supervisor McKenna's office. He said he had the opportunity to attend both public meetings and those held in the community, which included the unincorporated areas under Supervisor McKenna's jurisdiction. His comments were neither for nor against the project, but merely a discussion of the process. This project seemed to be a good one, and he was willing to go back to the County and advocate for funding if the project is approved, at any density level, in order to make it a better project. There are dollars going in from the City, and there is the opportunity for fimding from the County. Mayor Dean asked whether, since the City was considering providing $700,000, the County might provide additional funds to help offset some of the costs of reducing the density. Mr. Gibbs clarified that there is a · - funding process which must be followed, and this may be one of many projects competing for funds. However, this is a good project at any density, and County funding might make it a better project. The dollars would not necessarily equate to density, but could be used toward upkeep of the project, etc. The funding cycle would end in May. Koppel said she would not have a problem with this kind of first-step housing being built in her own neighborhood. Mr. Thompson proposed that the parking be separated from the single-family homes by a solid 7-foot wall at the rear of the property. The sharing of residential and commercial parking was common in Cupertino. Discussion followed regarding the possibility of reducing the number of studios or mini-- studios to reduce the total number of residents in the project. Burnett said that most residents would avoid Tantau if it were already busy, and Stevens Creek Boulevard would be the main egress and access. He had visited the sites of other affordable-housing projects built by non-profit agencies, and invariably they were well maintained. Partly because the nnits are designated as low-income, the management is very alert because others are watching for failure. He said he would prefer more trees in the parking lot, since there will be some children and that is probably where they will .... play. Children attending kindergarten through high school will be able to walk to school without crossing a major arterial. Overall the project seems to be good for the City, January 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 8 especially since some of the residents may not even need cars. First priority will be given to those people who live and work in the City, and that will help reduce travel distance. Sorensen said that in this project they would not be able to make everybody happy. Although she shared concerns raised by speakers on both sides of the issue, the project is consistent with the General Plan, and at least three of the members on Council worked on an ordinance. The state mandates for affordable housing are a law and they must live within the laws of the country. The good things about the project are its design, although fewer units would be preferable, the on=site management, and the opportunity it provides as first=step housing. She agreed with a comment by an earlier speaker that Cupertino should be a community for everyone. Sorensen said she supported the project. Bautista said Council's affordable housing policy has two parts. One is that 10% multi- unit projects be below=market-rate units. In some cases exceptions have been mede, but it is important that they not be mede any more and that Council continues to seek 10% BMR in future projects. The second part of the policy is to develop affordable housing in projects that are not mixed in with other units. This plan is a good one, and goes far toward achieving Council's goals. In an area where all the housing is affordable, new developments must be model developments. Because the goal of meeting affordable housing requirements seems unattainable does not mean that Council can give up on creating livable space and a model development. He was concerned that the density is a .- little too high, but the footprint of the project is all right. He agreed with Koppel that perhaps the number of studio units should be reduced. He did not like the idea of access between the commercial and residential area, and suggested a wall between them to eddress the security issues for people in the project. Discussion followed regarding different scenarios in number and type of units and the effect it would have on total number of residents and probable number of children. Ms. Hendee said that they cannot discriminate on the basis of household makeup, although it could be restricted to seniors. Also, they can restrict the number of residents through the management agreement. Bautista said they need to address the number of people living in the mini=studios, which could help the parking and traffic situation. He urged other Council members to ask the applicant to come back with a proposal and work with staff so the numbers work to reduce the number of minis below forty or less. Bumett said, in defense of mini=studios, he had lived in less than 350 square feet with his family, and it was possible to have a satisfactory life in a small unit. It also makes them more affordable. He strongly supported the project just as presented. The Community Development Director said that shared parking would not work if there ._ were no access between the residential and commercial parts. At 9:10 p.m. the Council recessed. At 9:26 p.m. Council reconvened. January 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 9 The City Attorney said that the state homing code puts a cap of not less than 220 square feet of superficial floor area for two people or less. Any other people require an additional 100 sq,,_are feet. If the owners wish to restrict occupancy in a way that is not discriminatory, those are the maximum number of occupants per unit. The Community Development Director said that the rental agreement can be written to limit the number of cars per tenant. Baufista said there are practical reasons why there would not be three people in a mini- studio. The developer would probably limit that because they want a model project. He said that in a discussion during the break, the applicant estimated a cost of $100,000- $250,000 to reduce the project to 40 units. The City Attorney said the developer did not feel that would be a significant redesign, so it would not have to go back to the Planning Commission. Sorensan asked if they could require Community Housing Developers to put a cap on the number of cars as well as the number of people. Her biggest concern was the impact on the neighborhood, and did not want to have crowded conditions. Ms. Hendee said they were willing to do so. She asked that Council make their intentions -- clear and then allow them to work out details with City staff. Ms. Hendee said that a wall between commercial and retail areas would hurt the project, but their architect could probably come up with a creative, acceptable alternative. They would also try creative ways to make it a no-car project if possible, and that is why storage is emphasized. Ms. Hendee distributed a page showing a minimum and maximum range of number of people per unit, based on 44 units configuration. Bautista suggested that they remove whichever combination of units achieves the lowest number of residents. The Community Development Director said that condition number 3 of page 22-7 can be the basis for the condition. Koppel moved to approve the project for 40 units by reducing either the number of mini- studios or studios by, or a combination thereof, and that square footage could be used to increase the size of some of the other units. Discussion followed regarding the calculation of the maximum number of cars to be Koppel amended her motion to approve a maximum of 40 units, and 53 cars, and not requiring that they increase the size of the other units, and adopting all other recommendations of staff. Bautista seconded the motion and it carried 4-1 with Burner _ voting no because he preferred 44 units. January 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 10 Dean asked ii' the wall at the rear of the property could be raised to 8 feet if there were a noise problem. The Community Development Director said such a change would be expensive, and they would instead require an 8-foot wall at the outset. Sorensen moved to grant a negative declaration. Burner seconded, and the motion carried 5-0. Sorensen moved to authorize $700,000 in funding. Koppel seconded, and the motion carried 5-0. NEW BUSINESS 23. Request to approve the priority established by the Bicycle Ad Hoc Committee for using the funds established for bicycle route signage to the MoTart Bridge at Los Gatos Creek. Bumett moved to change the priority for the use of funds from signage to pavement and a bridge modification at Mozart. Koppel seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 24. Appointment to Santa Clara County Library Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors. Sorensen moved to appoint Koppel to the Santa Clara County Library Joint Powers - Authority Board of Directors. Bautista seconded, and the motion carded 5-0. 25. First reading of Ordinance No. 1675: "An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Cupertino Repealing and Reenacting Chapter 1.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to Right of Entry for Inspection." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Koppel moved and Burnett 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. 26. First reading of Ordinance No. 1676: "An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 11.04 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to Abatement of Abandoned Vehicles." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Koppel moved and Burnett 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. 27. Review of bids and award of contract for Bubb Road Sidewalk (west side), Project 94- 111 to provide a safe route to schools. _ Koppel moved to award the contract to R.H. Wehner in the amount of $118,392.30, and to approve a 5% contingency of $5,920, for a total project cost of $124,312. Bumett seconded and the motion carried 5-0. January 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page 11 2g. Consideration of installation of a Ropes Course at Linda Vista Park or McClellan Ranch Park. This item was removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant. 29. Extension of filing deadline for boards, commissions and committees. Council concurred to extend the filing deadline to December 31, 1994, to include o. ll of the applications that had been received. They confirmed that interviews would be held on Tuesday, January 10, at 6:30 p.m. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORDINANCES 30. Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1674: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending the Park Dedication Ordinance, Section 18- 1.602.10." The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Koppel 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. Koppel moved and Sorensen seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1674. Motion carried 4-1, with Burnett voting no. COUNCIL REPORTS Koppel reported that she had agreed to accept a reappointment to the Board of Directors of Silicon Valley. The first meeting on the new transportation board will be held this week. She explained that she has been an alternate on the Santa Clara County Transit District Board, and will now be a full-fledged representative. It is still being decided how they will handle filling the second year of her two-year term after she goes off Council in November of 1995. Burnett reported on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) meeting held in December and the recommendations from the constitutional revisions committee. They agreed to simplify and clarify the initiative process; no action was taken regarding term limits; that state legislators should fall under the same retirement rules as other state employees; that legislative operating expenses shall be limited by statute. He also discussed some proposed changes in the ntunber of votes required to adopt the budget, taxes, bonds measures, etc. - Sorensen asked if Council wished her to continue to be the designated representative on the Joint Venture Silicon Valley/Public Sector Round Table. Council concurred. City Manager Don January 2, 1095 Cupertino City Council Page 12 Brown noted that the other Council members were invited to attend, and it would be held at the Qulnlan Community Center. Bautista referred to the League of California Cities summary of 1994 legislation and asked whether a review would be appropriate. City Manager Don Brown said that he had attended an ail-day briefing on the new legislation, and there were not a lot of substantive issues that would affect cities. He said he would review his notes from the briefing and update Council. Dean said that he would like to implement the use of electronic access to City Council meetings. He proposed that an on-line connection be created so that individuals could participate in the meeting via computer, and that if Council members wished they could also participate by having a portable computer at the meeting. He explained that this would be a tool to increase the opportunities for communication with Council by communicating through the Interact or City Net. There would be perfotttmnee criteria for those on-line, and there would be a testing and evaluation phase. Bautista said he wanted to understand how it would work, and what criteria would be used to measure its effectiveness. It sounds like a good idea if the purpose is to increase the efficiency of communication, but he wanted to be sure Council was in agreement as to the goal of this project. Dean explained that this was a first step, and later on it would be possible to access the - geographic information system under development in Public Works. Koppel asked when communications would be tcmdnated on a particular discussion, and said she would like to see more criteria on how the proposal would be integrated into the meeting. Sorensen felt it was an interesting concept. Burnett said he did not feel the need for another means of communication, and this could be complication the process. Bautista said they should not be averse to experimenting, but for the best chance at success the Council members need to be educated about how the process would work. City Manager Don Brown said that staff would work with Mayor Dean to prepare a written report specifying the testing period and evaluation criteria. The City Attorney cautioned that the communications that Council would receive are still governed by the Brown Act and the Public Records Act, which means that they cannot treat any communications received via computer differently than traditional communications. For example, individuals who speak under oral communications are asked for their name and address but they are not required to provide that information. The same rules would apply to electronic communications. Bumett asked if he could change his vote on item No. 22, the Barry Swenson project. He explained that he was in favor of the project, but had not wanted the number of units reduced from 44 to 40. The City Attorney said an ordinance had been passed which prohibited Council members from changing their votes on public hearing items. Although item No. 22 was not a public hearing, the audience members who had been present for that item had a right to know how he had voted. Burnett agreed. ' lanuary 3, 1995 Cupertino City Council Page Council concurred to adjoum to Tuesday, January 10 at 6:30 p.m. in Conference Room A for interviews of applicants for boards and committees. Klm Marie Smith