Loading...
PC 10-14-85 -ever zone _ Commission :c .ei 'e: .tial single fa _,e_•an- ._ _._:.:;.. F - subdivide approximately 1.2 acres ,._ .. urge=s. _".'.�I1.ON' :TAL REVIEA: The Environmental .ev_e-.: �a_-a tFe recommendation is pending. -''.e subject prover - cn the south side of Peninsula Avenue apprcxi:ratei: east of 2arranca Drive on the former Southern Pacific ..-all- road right of way. First Hearing. Tentative City Cc:ncil hearing date is Yovember u, 1985. '4r. Piatenki, giving the Staff Report, exrlained `hat as the parcel was traversed by numerous easements, Staff felt the concessions were lustifled to get a quality, sintJ.e- family, development. He noted the Environmental tev w Committee had now given approval, but had requested a noise report, and the consultant was requiring that a sound wall be constructed, he height of wnlch Staff questioned_ since it was not aesthetic or totally beneficial. He advise the Applicant had now modified the architecture acceptably. �uesticr.ed by Com. Sorensen, Mr. Piasecki felt the traffic noise was at a very low level there. Con. Adams determined with Mr. Whitten that parking would to allowed on both s. ^s of the street. 'ob Zeil, Applicant, had heard from Caltrans they proposed to add soundbarriers there by 19E9 which would protect the w`cle property. Also, since every house had space for four - did not see a crotlem with on-street parking, he sa' . -_nsch, Penir.su'a Avenue, wa. icncerned about the wli of the street-, did nct want sidewalks added and won�rred about lighting. He was also concerned t,, know how the Applicant would deal with the sur{lus land to t. northeast. Chr. Claury and Mr. Kilian discLssed and explained sotbacks and easements with Mr. Mansch. :eff Mansch, Peninsula Avenue, was concerned with the solar. :hr. Claudy assured him the solar units wont be on the nc.rts�, side, overlooking the freeway. Fay Watts, Peninsula Avenue, did n,t a_ of !.'s vard taken for the street, but wasdove•-:.�- _. ;ardi,e existing. terL'es .. ._ ar _re war -.e street ncx. .onstrat licant was .._....- _. 3 c• e street. ._. .'acobscn agree. :-Et was too narrow ., _ either side an - _ to know for _..re _ �f wall to be erecter. bar. Piasecki advised -. - _ - >:e:: •wcu:d be Fufficient, and, 1_ aff .as su,vesting a chalr. . .. --___ .. , ..,stead of &. «a__. Ch.. Claud advised Xs. .'accbscr t --ate could not �o required to build a wall where the fence was, and also that the Applicant could not be required to build it. Asked by Chr. Claudy his Flans for the northeastern end, Mr. Hail listed a P.G. & E. access and g_roundcover and landscaping. The matter of a covenant to maintain the landscaping was discussed and Staff felt it could be divided between the six homeowners, with. the City as beneficiary if not maintained, bu the ^-ommisslon felt this would be too hard to enforce, and that lot 1 only should be involved. Mr. Watts advised dirt likes were creating dust and annoyance on the berm of 280 1 '.he area and felt something better than the chain link fence the State had installed was needed. Questioned b} the CoamSsslon, the Applicant said he would make a change, if required. Mr. Whitten advised Mr. Marsh that if there was no street lighting now, none would be added, exoept maybe at the in'ersection. MOTION: Con. Adams, to close the Pu,tic Hearing SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed Com. Szabo felt that from the freewa;, side the scurdwall height would not matter, and that the homeowners might ben-f't from having it higher. ^om. Adams, reeollectinv the Applicant's comments about a State-tuilt wail, felt E ft. here would be suffic'._.... ^TICS:: Com,,. :iackenzie, to grant a Kegative Ceclara'.'on SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed NCTICS': Com. Mackenzie, to ^ecommend approval of Application - sub.ect to the ?indln;r of the Staff P.etcr' and Subconclusicns of the Hearing, with r::ard %ndltions 1-1c and Condition 16 _taff Report. SECOND: Com. Sorensen '✓GTE: Passed c-C MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, ­.r.end approval of Application - - ,ect to the ,incc:.- of the Staff Fe .'ubconclu=irs P iiearing, with ztandar�. .nditica.. --. 16 modified tc 1e1Pt, refer.: e ` and to char.., let revislor Conis. 17-21 as clarify that rear not have accounst:a�1 °zi_b. Ie3 ..ferer.ce -e the s t ..-. tc _ y that the etb . _ P LO 3:ac:. .^.';:•- .• f_ .._. . t:.o second story elene all references de_ eri^ _ed; _.,._. icna'' ._ -er. )`that fencing 'es t, mpreper access to the . _ tetween the developmentand the freeway stalled, with design subject to Staff approval ;dams c s, c-C • -- - .. _. le, to recommend approval of TM-E5, sub,ect to the Findings crt and Subionclusiona of the - ndard 3onditions :-I,; - 1"; Additional Condition 18 re recordation of restrictions on lot 1 maintenance of the landscaping In the wed¢e-si.aped area to the northeast of the drive- way easement access with the CIty as beneficiary, -.,_ re;,Irement sub,ect to approval by the ,c continue :terss w= throu�.h 012 Ad;curned }:eet:n- to be i:eld �ctcber at M. nhatever 7 cla: roc'. in; C: ft. cn an,exi3t' :..-..-. .- -..°^ling of ':egative .., .., =cated '?' - enta- it araatectuc-al •ssue --- zoning would now confc_. being replaced with a c- ':'r""' .__uct_:e. 't was determined there would be a tra'_rr remaininP, and a modification should to added to allow it to remain. -gene F. =itzen, representing the Applicant and the -'hurFt , advised there were currently permits .or both trailers andthe secord one would be removci in approximately five years for parking lot stage. He uestioned having to underground utilities, since Ot. nudes Church adjacent had not been required to do that. :Ir. Whitter. thought Jity Council had waived in the case of :t. ,;udes. Chr. Claud _observed it was a political issue and •ised the Applicant to address City Council on the matt.er.. Com. Mackenzie established the remaining trailer was, and would continue to be, a classroom. Mr. Eltzen establis:ed with Staff that Condition 1: did not apply in their case. He advised they would be renewing fencing on their southerly Corder, except where . cyclone fence F.ad been <rected, ut no cost to the homeowners. 'ache_ raver, ay was in favor of undercr^__,._.. -,e-n„ done througho . -. ad ro6r tands in the . _ was concerned with no'.. I .eek, she said, and rondere- _-.., the zonin6. She also suE...:ted . . exp_z'ned the concepts of the zoning action.. -.isslonerb felt fencing would not help currently. _cuan felt the noise ordinance would adequately address any probler.s. MOTION: Com. Adams, to close the Putl'.c Hearing SECOND: Com. Yackenzle VOTE: Passed a_p MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration. SECOND: Com. Sorensen V3:7-: Passed =_ Ton. Mackenzie, to recommend approval of An,--cation l8-Z-8= j ... Co-. Szabo Pawed _ :as .felt by ` he :om:nisricn that fen :ht »hen the remai :ng trailer was remcvedfc: __. .. _ .t was ar.reed to reference v.orship acriv't: since they had 'teen inadvertently omit!, RESOUMON NO. 2701 OF THE PLANNING CO10aSSION OF THE CITY OF CUPEIQ'INO APPROVING A USE PER= FOR EXPANSION OF AN E7{ISTING RETIREMERr CARE FACIISTY BY 16,600 SQ. Fr. INCLLNDING NEW DWEIUNG UNITS AND EXPANDED AEA=STRATIVE OFFICE AND DINING SPACE. APPLICANT: sunnyview Lutheran Home ADDRESS: 22445 Cupertino Road Cupertino, CA 95014 SUBMr=: September 3, 1985 LOCATION: Northeast corner of Foothill Blvd. and Cupertino Road FINDINGS AND SUBODNCLUSIONS: Approval is subject to the findings as set forth on Page 1 and the subconclusions as set forth in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 1985. CONDITIONS: 1-15. STANDARD CONDITIONS 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. 16. APPROVED EXHIMS That the recommendation of approval is based on Exhibits A, A-1, B, B-1 of Application 36-U-85 except as may be amended by special conditions enumerated herein. 17. USE L IITATION The subject use permit authorizes addition of 16,600 sq. ft. of new floor space which shall erK=Pass eight (8) one bedroom units, personal care beds plus related improvements to the administrative office, employee lounge, kitchen and crnmon dining areas as indicated on the approved exhibits. 18. ARICI2JG Parking shall be provided on site at a minim= ratio of 0.5 spaces per dwelling unit, for a minimum total of 118 spaces. The Director of Planning and Development may require installation of additional parking spaces in the future if necessary to rectify inadequate availability of parking within the complex for staff, residents and visitors. 2- Resolution No. 2701 (Continued) 36-U-85 To the extent that they do not conflict with the provisions of this Resolution No. 2701, all conditions enumerated in Planning Commission Resolution 1627, and Architectural and Site Approval Committee Resolution 694 shall rennin in full force and effect. Prior to issuance of construction permits for the addition of floor space approved under this use permit, the applicant shall submit the following material for informal review by the Architectural and Site Approval Committee: Site and landscape drawing depicting the effects of ocimpliance with flood control conditions upon existing structures and plantings. Diagram illustrating removal and replacement of existing trees, and detailed specifications for preservation of existing trees which may be affected by construction activity. Dimension diagram for the proposed new parking stalls adjacent to the west side of new Building 6 illustrating conpliance with City Standard dimensions. A) FO(ISTING FACILITY: The applicant shall work with the Public works Department staff to determine suitable means to rectify the current flooding problems at the Sunnyview Lutheran Facility including, but not limited to berming, installation of new storm lines or pumping facilities. If the existing site cannot be reasonably protected from flooding, the applicant shall record a deed restriction and covenant running with the land, subject to approval by the city Attorney, which notifies future purchasers of the property about the flooding problem. B) PROPOSED FACILIV: The applicant shall modify the proposed plan set as necessary to ensure that added structural couponents are not subject to flooding to a level satisfactory to the Director of Public Works. Solutions may include raising the first floor elevation, berming or installation of inproved drainage facilities. A professional engineering analysis shall be generated for Staff's review for acceptance of the flooding mitigation points prior to issuance of building permits. 3- Resolution No. 2701 (Continued) 36-U-85 22. MODIFICATION OF THE APPROVED DEVSLOPNEW PIAN 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 plan or building permit shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Development. If the Director 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 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 shall submit said changes to the Planning commission for approval. If the change is denied by the Planning Osmnission, 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 City Council, said request to be made within ten 10) days from the date of approval - when the change has been approved by the Planning Commission. 23. PARCEL OONSOUDATION Zhe applicant shall solve the problems created by individual parcels by any one or more of the following means: a) Record a parcel map which consolidates the parcels into one map. b) Prepare reciprocal easements covering utilities, access, parking, etc., to be placed in escrow and recorded with any transfer of ownership. c) Record a covenant preventing transfer of ownership of any of the individual parcels. d) Other measures which are acceptable to the City Attorney. ihe applicant shall resolve the issue of individual parcels to the staff's satisfaction prior to release of building permits. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1985, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll -call vote: AYES: CCMMISSICNERS: Mackenzie, Sorensen, Adams, Szabo, and Chairman Claudy NAYS: CCI24MICNERS: None ABSIMIN: 03OUSSICNERS: None ABSE2Jr: C30USSIONERS: None Robert Cowan Robert Cowan Planning Director John Claudy John Claudy, Chairman Planning Commission 1 17—Z-85 RESOLUTION NO. 2715 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO REZONE 1.7+- GROSS ACRES TO lip P(PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY INTENT) ZONE. APPLICANT: Robert W. Keil ADDRESS:3776 Moorpark Avenue, #2, San Jose, California 95117 SUBMITTED: September 4, 1985 LOCATION: South side of Peninsular Avenue approximately 60 ft. east of Barranca Drive FINDINGS AND SUBCONCLUSIONS: Approval is subject to the findings as set forth on Page 1 and the subconclusions as set forth in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 1985. CONDITIONS: 1-15. STANDARD CONDITIONS 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. 16. APPROVED EXHIBITS That the recommendation of approval is based on Exhibit A of Application 17-Z-85 except as may be amended by special conditions enumerated herein. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1985, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Adams, MacKenzie, Sorensen, Szabo and Chairman Claudy NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: APPROVED: s/ Robert Cowan s/ John Claudy Robert S. Cowan John Claudy, Chairman Planning Director Planning Commission 1. —TM RESOLUTION NO. 2717 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE -CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 1.37 NET ACRES INTO SIX LOTS. APPLICANT: Robert W. Keil ADDRESS:3776 Moorpark Avenue, #2, San Jose, California 95117 SUBMITTED: September 4, 1985 LOCATION: South side of Peninsular Avenue approximately 60 ft. east of Barranca Drive FINDINGS AND SUBCONCLUSIONS: Approval is subject to the findings as set forth on Page 1 and the subconclusions as set forth in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 1985. CONDITIONS: 1-15. STANDARD CONDITIONS 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. 16. APPROVED EXHIBITS That the recommendation of approval is based on Exhibit A of Application 18-TM-85 except as may be amended by special conditions enumerated herein. 17. SEISMIC AND GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS The applicant shall retain an engineering geologist to evaluate and mitigate potential seismic and geologic hazards. 18. RECORDING A COVENANT The applicant shall record a covenant on Lot 1 to require maintenance of the landscaping in the wedge shaped area to the southeast of the driveway easement access. The City shall be named as beneficiary of the covenant. The covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1985, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California. by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Adams, MacKenzie, Sorensen, Szabo and Chairman Claudy NAYS: None 111 ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: APPROVED: s/ Robert Cowan s/ John Claudy Robert S. Cowan John Claudy, Chairman Planning Director Planning Commission RESOLUTION NO. 2718 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONING CLASSIFICATION 410 FOR 2.26 ACRES FROM R1-10 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO BQ (QUASI-PUBLIC BUILDING) APPLICANT: Cogun Industries ADDRESS: 1930 W. Glenoaks Blvd. Glendale, CA. 91201 SUBMITTED: September 9, 1985 LOCATION: South side of McClellan Road, easterly of Stelling Road FINDINGS AND SUBCONCLUSIONS: Approval is subject to the findings as set forth on Page 1 and the subconclusions as set forth in the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 1985. CONDITIONS: NONE PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1985, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll-call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Sorensen, Szabo, Mackenzie, Adams, Chairman Claudy NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: APPROVED: s/ Robert Cowan s/ John Claudy Robert Cowan John Claudy, Chairman Planning Director Planning Commission RS01B2B5 2 - AP