Loading...
CC Resolution No. 17-020 to Deny Authorizing a Prospective Development Proposal to Proceed as a General Plan Amendment ApplicationRESOLUTION NO. 17-020 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO TO DENY AUTHORIZING A PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL TO PROCEED AS A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No: GPAauth-2017-01 Applicant: Keith Fichtner (Kings Mill Group) Location: 19900 Stevens Creek Boulevard. WHEREAS, on September 15, 2015, the City Council adopted procedures for considering future General Plan a1:1endments, including to review prospective applications twice a year and decide which are authorized to proceed as a General Plan Amendment !3-pplication; and WHEREAS, the City Council decision to authorize one or more applicants to proceed with a General Plan amendment application, does not in any way presume approval of any proposed amendment or project; and WHEREAS, the City received one application by November 14, 2016, the deadline to be considered in the 2017 first cycle of the General Plan Amendment application review process; and WHEREAS, on February 21, 2017, the City Council held a public hearing to consider said General Plan Amendment authorization applications; and WHEREAS, the proposed Resolution is not a project within the meaning of section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. In the event that this Resolution is found to be a project under CEQA, it is subject to the CEQA exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility of a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted criteria for determining whether an application will be authorized for processing as follows: a. General Plan goals achieved by the proposed project, including, but not limited to, the following: (i) Site and architectural design and neighborhood compatibility; (ii) Brief description of net fiscal impacts (sales tax, transient occupancy tax or other revenue provided by the project), including the extent to which the project would diversify the City's economic base; Resolution No. 17-020 Pa e 2 (iii) The provision of affordable housing; and (iv) Environmental Sustainability. March 7, 2017 b. General Plan amendments (and any other zoning amendments or variances) requested. c. Proposed voluntary community amenities, defined as (i) school resources, (ii) public open space, such as parks and trails, (iii) public facilities and utilities, such as library, community center or utility systems and (iv) Transportation facilities with an emphasis on city-wide bicycle, pedestrian and transit improvements, such as community shuttles, pedestrian and bicycle bridges, and transit centers/stations d. Staff time and resources required to process the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony, staff reports, public comments, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has determined that the following proposal is not authorized to proceed as General Plan Amendment applications based on the criteria shown in Exhibit A: Scandinavian Furniture Site -19900 Stevens Creek Boulevard -an application to incorporate 1,790 sq. ft. of existing outdoor arcade area into the existing 26,239 sq. ft. retail space on site and convert it to either an incubator office or medical office use totaling 28,029 sq. ft. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 7th day of March 2017, by the following roll call vote: Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Members of the City Council: Mayor Vaidhyanathan, Vice Mayor Paul, Chang, Sinks, Scharf None None None APPROVED: ~,1JT Grace Schmidt l ~LI_~ City Clerk Savita Vaidhyanathan Mayor, City of Cupertino Ex h i b i t A   Ta b l e  1:  Su m m a r y  Ev a l u a t i o n  of  th e  De v e l o p m e n t  Pr o p o s a l   Pr o j e c t   Si t e  an d   ar c h i t e c t u r a l   de s i g n  an d   ne i g h b o r h o o d   co m p a t i b i l i t y    Fi s c a l  im p a c t s ,   in c l u d i n g  a  di v e r s e   ec o n o m i c  ba s e   Pr o v i s i o n  of   af f o r d a b l e  ho u s i n g   En v i r o n m e n t a l   su s t a i n a b i l i t y   Ge n e r a l  Pl a n   am e n d m e n t s   re q u e s t e d   Pr o p o s e d  vo l u n t a r y  community   am e n i t i e s  Staff  time  and  resources  (2)  1. Sc a n d i n a v i a n   Fu r n i t u r e   a. Si t e  an d   Ar c h i t e c t u r a l   de s i g n  –f u r t h e r   re v i e w  re q u i r e d   fo r  de s i g n ,   ci r c u l a t i o n ,  si t e   pl a n n i n g  an d   la n d s c a p i n g .  (1 )   b. Ne i g h b o r h o o d   co m p a t i b i l i t y  –  ge n e r a l l y   co m p a t i b l e  in   te r m s  of  la n d   us e  an d   bu i l d i n g  si z e .   a. In c r e a s e  in  se r v i c e   co s t s  to  th e  Ci t y ’ s   Ge n e r a l  Fu n d   $3 3 , 0 0 0 ‐$3 6 , 0 0 0 .   b. Th e  Ci t y ’ s   Ec o n o m i c   De v e l o p m e n t   Sp e c i f i c  Pl a n   su p p o r t i v e  of   in c u b a t o r  or  co ‐ wo r k i n g  us e s .   c. Mo d e r a t e  in c r e a s e   in  pr o p e r t y  ta x   re v e n u e .   No  be n e f i t s  in  te r m s   of  af f o r d a b l e   ho u s i n g  ot h e r  th a n   st a t u t o r i l y  re q u i r e d   pa y m e n t  of  Be l o w ‐ Ma r k e t ‐Ra t e   Pr o g r a m  fe e s .      Pr o j e c t  wi l l  me e t  al l   st a t u t o r i l y  re q u i r e d   en v i r o n m e n t a l   su s t a i n a b i l i t y  fe a t u r e s    No  ad d i t i o n a l   su s t a i n a b i l i t y  fe a t u r e s   pr o p o s e d      Of f i c e  al l o c a t i o n :   16 , 0 0 0  sq .  ft .     a. Sc h o o l  re s o u r c e s  – none   b. Pu b l i c  op e n  sp a c e  – none   c. Pu b l i c  Fa c i l i t i e s  – none   d. Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n  Facilities  – none   To t a l  ‐   $0 / s q u a r e  foot. 0.3FTE  (full ‐time  equivalent) of  staff  time  and  consultants  for  environmental  review, etc.    (1 ) AS A ‐20 1 6 ‐13   &  TR ‐20 1 6 ‐35   to   pe r m i t   pa r k i n g   lo t   mo d i f i c a t i o n s   to   im p r o v e   la n d s c a p i n g   an d   en s u r e   pa r k i n g   co u n t   co n f o r m s   to   re t a i l   st a n d a r d s  (1  space/250  sq. ft.) on  the  site  was  approved  on  November  10, 2016. The   AS A  en t i t l e m e n t  do e s  no t  af f e c t  th e  la n d  us e  ho w e v e r  th e  de s i g n  wi l l  pr o v i d e  en o u g h  pa r k i n g  fo r  ei t h e r  re t a i l  or  in c u b a t o r  of f i c e  us e .   (2 ) Al l  st a f f  ti m e  an d  re s o u r c e s  wi l l  be  pa i d  fo r  by  ap p l i c a n t .