101-Draft Minutes.pdfCITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT MINUTES
6:45 P.M. March 13, 2012 TUESDAY
CUPERTINO COMMUNITY HALL
The regular Planning Commission meeting of March 13, 2012 was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in
the Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA., by Chair Marty Miller.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners present: Chairperson: Marty Miller
Vice Chairperson: Don Sun
Commissioner: Winnie Lee
Commissioner: Clinton Brownley
Commissioner: Paul Brophy
Staff present: Community Development Director: Aarti Shrivastava
City Planner: Gary Chao
Assistant Planner: George Schroeder
Senior Planner: Vera Gil
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
1. Minutes of February 14, 2012 Planning Commission meeting:
Com. Brownley:
• Noted that his name was misspelled in the two motions in the February 14, 2012 minutes.
MOTION: Motion by Com. Brownley, second by Com. Brophy, and unanimously carried
5-0-0 to approve the February 14, 2012 Planning Commission minutes as
amended.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None
CONSENT CALENDAR: None
Cupertino Planning Commission March 13, 2012
PUBLIC HEARING
2. U-2012-01 Use Permit to allow a restaurant to operate until 12 a.m.
Fancher Development Sunday through Friday and Sunday until 1 a.m. on
(Byer Properties) Saturday, and to allow separate bar facilities.
20750 Stevens Creek Blvd. Planning Commission decision final unless appealed
George Schroeder, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report:
• Reviewed the use permit application to allow a separate bar facility at the new Islands
Restaurant replacing the Marie Calender restaurant in the Crossroads Center, and to extend
the operating hours to midnight Sunday through Friday, and 1 a.m. on Saturdays.
• He reviewed the background of the application, operational details, proximity to residential
area, parking, security, and environmental assessment.
• Said that the issues raised by neighbors relative to landscaping were currently being addressed
through the building permit for TJ Maxx which is still underway, and is associated with holds
on their final occupancy.
• Staff recommends approval of the Use Permit for the late night hours, parking modifications
and bar facility per the draft resolution.
Louis Jackson, Vice President Real Estate, Islands Restaurant:
• Provided a background of Islands Restaurant, a 30-year old company started in west Los
Angeles, which is a casual-themed full service restaurant operating primarily in Southern
California and some locations in Northern California.
Vice Chair Sun:
• Expressed concern about the request for extended hours from midnight to 1 a.m. because of
the issues related to the safety of the community. He noted that the parking lots for BJs and
Elephant Bar had extra security.
• Also stated that he felt the late night hours may potentially attract college students to the late
night bar, and he did not feel the security was adequate to overcome the concern. He said he
felt the midnight closure for seven days per week was more appropriate.
Louis Jackson:
• Said that the request for extended hours is merely to meet the demand for late night patrons; if
there is no demand, they will not stay open later. He said that many of their restaurants are
located close to college campuses and they tend to provide a good employee source and tend
not to be their customers. He added that in 30 years of operating, they have not lost a liquor
license or had a conditional use permit pulled; and the process they go through in most
communities has very strict on their operations. Their restaurants cater to families and
professionals and the atmosphere is rather quiet after 9 p.m.
The applicant answered questions about the parking study conducted by Hexagon Transportation
Consultants. Staff clarified information contained in the parking study.
Chair Miller opened the public hearing.
Lucille Honig, Scofield Dr., Cupertino:
• Said she resided directly behind the parking lot of the new restaurant and was concerned about
the late operating hours. She noted that BJs and Outback are not directly behind the residential
area and she felt the Islands Restaurant may become a destination for high tech people in the
Cupertino Planning Commission March 13, 2012
late evening, and may create noise in the parking lot. They have resided in the neighborhood
for 38 years and have had incidences of patrons going to their cars, playing loud music, games,
and car races. The landscaping has not yet been addressed and they have not yet fixed the
lighting. Many residents are concerned about the late night noise it will create.
Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident:
• Expressed concern that many family restaurants in the area are closing or being considered for
closing, such as Chili’s and IHOP. She suggested that consideration be given to hours of
operation of other eating establishments in the area relative to later hours and if there are any
issues of concern with those.
Chair Miller closed the public hearing.
George Schroeder:
• Relative to the landscape concerns raised by the speakers, he said that shrubs that were
removed will be replanted prior to TJ Maxx’s final approval. Relative to the lighting, glare
shields have been installed facing the residential area but haven’t put glare shields facing the
front towards Stevens Creek; the ones on the back have eliminated much of the glare onto the
residential and the lighting consultant will check to ensure there is no glare at night, and add
additional glare shields if needed. Relative to the noise concerns, a noise study was conducted
in the original approval and the sheriff did not have any concerns about noise. Staff does not
foresee any additional noise impacts from the setbacks for the restaurant to the residential area.
• Relative to a speaker’s concern about past noise issues, he said neither the Sheriff’s
Department nor Code Enforcement had any concerns about late night use proposed with the
application.
Com. Brophy:
• Said he concurred with Jennifer Griffin’s comment about the difference between a restaurant
with a small bar and a bar. He commented that Chili’s restaurant has about 20 bar seats and
had no problems with late night issues, and he did not view it as a dramatic change in the
nature of what has been proposed. He said there was a demand in Cupertino for places to go
for a late night meal. He noted there were enough controls in place through the Sheriff and
Code Enforcement that if misrepresentation was made by the applicant, the city would require
they be fixed.
• He said the proposal and hours are not unreasonable, similar to Elephant Bar and BJs, and he
supported it.
Vice Chair Sun:
• Reiterated his concerns about the safety and security issues, the glare of the lights and the
proposed late night closing time. He recommended that the closing time for Saturday night be
reduced by one hour, and said he did not feel the later closing hour would be economically
feasible for the business.
Com. Brownley:
• Concurred with Com. Brophy’s comments about the restaurant; and said it was a project that
both the Planning Commission and City Council were looking forward to implementing.
• Relative to the issues about time and noise, the first time through a noise study was done to
look at noise issues, the distance from residences, the noise study, and everything suggests that
this will not be an issue. The timing of the opening of the bar is consistent with other
restaurants and bars in Cupertino. In terms of security, there have been no problems with the
other restaurants in Cupertino in the past; as the applicant stated, there are no problems with
Cupertino Planning Commission March 13, 2012
Islands itself in the past; which are issues the Sheriff addressed and will address in the future.
• For the reasons of being consistent with existing restaurants and times, and with previous
studies showing that some of the concerns should not be an issue, he said he would also
support the project.
Com. Lee:
• The applicant is asking for the separate bar facility, which may have an impact on the parking;
but the parking is shared with other large parcels in the center which may be sufficient. She
said she would support the project as she felt the extended hours would fulfill the need for
residents to dine at later hours.
Chair Miller:
• Asked if a condition could be added that the landscaping be addressed as a condition of
approval.
• In terms of potential for noise, if the restaurant does generate additional noise after it opens,
what is staff’s normal reaction to that.
George Schroeder:
• Said poles have already been in place in terms of the lead permit for TJ Maxx as well as the
new building pad to address those issues. Staff works with the owner to ensure that the issues
are addressed; there is also a condition tied to the approval that if any future issues arise,
especially regarding noise and security, other measures requiring additional enforcement or
security patrols may be necessary. It is not necessary to add anything further to the conditions.
Chair Miller:
• Said he supported the project, and commented that perhaps the parking studies could have
been done differently and they could have known about the bar in advance. It is clear that the
Hexagon study was done appropriately and the study is acceptable as an alternative means of
determining the parking demand. He supports the parking study as well as the extended hours
of operation under the condition that if it does cause a disturbance, the city will address it at
that time.
Motion: Motion by Com. Brownley, second by Com. Lee, and carried 4-0-1, Com. Sun
voted no, to approve Application U-2012-01
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
3. General Plan Annual Review Annual Review of Implementation of General Plan
Policies and Strategies
Tentative City Council meeting date: March 20, 2012
Gary Chao, City Planner, presented the staff report:
• Said it was an annual status report of the General Plan progress and program implementation,
including a compressive list of the General Plan policies and the status of each policy; some
are ongoing, some are in the policies the Council put on hold; and during the Commission’s
work program this year and later in discussions, they will talk about reactivating some of
those. It also includes the annual status report to the Housing and Community Development
(HCD). Before the release of the update to the HCD it is forwarded to the Planning
Commission and City Council for input.
Cupertino Planning Commission March 13, 2012
Chair Miller:
• Said the Islands Restaurant is an example of having a plan for Stevens Creek Boulevard but
continually coming up for exceptions to the plan. He questioned if they should be revising the
plan or looking at the reasons why they are doing the exceptions and perhaps not allowing
them.
Aarti Shrivastava, Community Development Director:
• Said that adherence to the Heart of the City Specific Plan (Plan) is something they strive for;
however, there are cases in which the Plan notes that if there are instances where
improvements can be made or if there are some extenuating circumstances because of the site
plan, there may be a case for an exception; that is the only time that staff recommends
approval. There are applicants who would like to ask for the exceptions but staff has a strict
interpretation of what exceptions can be supported and those that cannot. Addressing whether
or not the Plan should be changed, staff recently went through a two to three year process
looking at the Plan which was adopted in 2010 when the question was asked about the
setbacks specifically and there was not a lot of interest in making changes to those. The result
was to address the question again in four or five years; the feeling was it was recently
reviewed and adopted and staff planned to adhere to that Plan unless they felt there were
circumstances which supported an exception. She noted that there has only been one
exception in the last three years.
Chair Miller:
• Said there were a number of references to mixed use in the commercial areas and his
perception is that their experience with mixed use in the commercial areas and also the
practice of putting one to five retail stores isolated from a larger shopping center here and
there in the city, has not been successful, e.g., Trevenia and the Metropolitan. He questioned
if they should be reviewing that.
Aarti Shrivastava:
• Said they would look at that when they do the next review of the General Plan. Said their
interpretation of a mixed use corridor is not all housing with small pieces of retail below it.
They have seen the evolution of some of those and realize that some work better than others;
however, what the Council has said is if they do have housing, they do want to see retail in the
front along Stevens Creek. Developers are being told if they want to develop on any of these
housing sites, the city wants more retail, preferably in a more horizontal rather than vertical
format with its own parking lot because that is what seems to work.
Chair Miller:
• Said that experience shows that the small retail center doesn’t do well as a stand alone and a
better approach might be to put office space in there or allow instead of just retail uses,
professional uses in that space which seems to have a high demand and is easier to fill. From a
logical standpoint shouldn’t they be discussing doing it a better way because what they are
presently doing is not working.
Com. Brophy:
• Said it was discussed at length in the Heart of the City update and the Planning Commission
unanimously took the position not to force retail in places where it wouldn’t work and the City
Council unanimously decided against it. The Planning Commission has been trying to walk
the line between Council policy and common sense.
Cupertino Planning Commission March 13, 2012
Aarti Shrivastava:
• Pointed out that 25% of it can be non-retail uses along the front which allows some flexibility.
She said one such project will likely surface in the near future; staff has worked carefully to
say they want a parking lot, and want to look at a successful retail model and make sure it is
modeled after that. She said that staff agrees that a more successful mixed use retail format is
probably on larger projects like Main Street with a senior housing component, hotel,
commercial and office; they acknowledge that they are not seeing very successful
developments in the individual small parcels. That is why they chose the housing element
sites very carefully because they wanted to make sure they didn’t repeat those and that is
where, if people want to build the two things they are advised they have to have good retail in
front, and parking in front and the housing can be in the back.
There was a discussion about the most suitable parking to entice patrons to the commercial and
retail areas. Staff said they tried to provide a compromise between creating a more pedestrian
friendly environment and also making sure people do seek parking at least twice; once before and
once after they pass a building.
Chair Miller opened the public hearing.
Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident:
• Said she was pleased they were addressing the General Plan implementation and the housing
element because of their importance. She expressed concern that in many different places the
General Plan document talks about allowing potential to have reduced parking for some types
of development. Other concerns included allowing extra density for housing projects and the
old jobs housing balance. She said some items are going to be coming up over the summer
that are both housing and retail, and she was concerned that they may have a tremendous
potential for degradation of existing intersections on Stevens Creek Boulevard, although she
was aware that the General Plan does address that the city has to ensure a good rating on the
city intersections. There is a great demand for additional traffic on Stevens Creek because of
projects that are coming up from one end of the city down to Santa Clara and many of the
intersections are already below a D rating. It is hoped that there will be discussion about
traffic impact on the intersections of Stevens Creek Boulevard from one end of the city down
to Santa Clara because if you can’t get from one end of the city to another, no one is going to
go to those places to shop. She said the General Plan says that the city will reduce building of
housing and office space if it looks like the traffic is going to impact and degrade the
intersections. There are already problems with intersections, and traffic will be one of the
things that could bring the city to its knees.
Keith Murphy, E. Estates Drive, Cupertino:
• Said he also attended meetings where housing and mixed use was discussed and there was a
housing overlay presented by speakers that showed places in the city where mixed use could
go. Many people in Cupertino support retail and want to see it viable as well as the
commercial side be viable, and don’t want to have the mixed use concept destroy both. He
suggested that if anything be changed in the General Plan, it be wherever the reference to retail
appears, it be preceded by the word “viable”, and if there is a desire to discuss that word, go to
the developers and ask what the retail is, what do they want, and what it would take to make it
viable for them; whether it be parking, more square footage, or product storage in the back.
He said he felt the community would stand behind the viable retail.
Com. Brophy:
• He said don’t ask the developers, but ask the people who would be signing the leases, since the
clients will tell you very quickly what is viable and what isn’t and if it isn’t, they won’t sign a
Cupertino Planning Commission March 13, 2012
lease. He said he had his share of prospective tenants tell him what he was proposing wasn’t
going anywhere and they need to use the same perspective. He said he would try to remember
in the next General Plan to make sure the word “viable” is used.
Chair Miller closed the public hearing.
Chair Miller:
• Asked staff to summarize the status of the housing element and where the city stands with
respect to the RENA requirements.
Vera Gil, Senior Planner:
• Reported that there are no low and very low units that have been constructed, only the above-
moderate units. They are trying to capture the low and very-low income units in the media,
and to date there aren’t any for the last cycle. She said when the new project receives its
permit it will go in the next year’s report.
Chair Miller:
• The report showed a negative number for above-moderate; does that mean the city cannot
build any more above-moderate housing in town?
Aarti Shrivastava:
• Responded that it is not a requirement; they can do what they want.
• Said the housing did not apply to meeting the RENA requirements; almost 2/3 of them are in
some affordable category and typically do meet the above-moderate category, but are low on
the other two. In the past over 700 units were built, but credit was given for only 500 or so
because that was the maximum that was needed to be built. At this point, there are no laws to
penalize the city, but it is not known what will happen in the future.
Motion: Motion by Com. Brophy, second by Vice Chair Sun, and unanimously carried
5-0-0 to accept the report as presented.
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE: No meeting
HOUSING COMMISSION:
• Com. Brophy reported on discussion of the upcoming community block grant allocations. He
commented that in hearing the presentations from 11 different applications, it was sobering to
hear the problems faced in other communities. Cupertino was faced with having to allocate a
significantly smaller amount of money than the previous year.
MAYOR’S MONTHLY MEETING: No meeting.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
Com. Lee reported the following:
• Main St. Cupertino was approved in 2009 but never built, and are resubmitting a planning
applications for revisions to the approved use permit; substantial increase in office square
Cupertino Planning Commission March 13, 2012
footage and a decrease in retail; discussed a Residence Inn hotel with no banquet hall; an
alternate plan to construct apartments instead of an athletic club. The project is tentatively
scheduled for March 27th Planning Commission hearing.
• Rose Bowl mixed use project submitted plans for their building permit;; the foundation and
podium work are completed.
• Apple submitted a project on the corner of Bandley and Alves Drive to locate a 19,000 square
foot private cafeteria and underground parking for Apple employees; tentative Planning
Commission hearing is end of April.
• Apple resubmitted plans with changes, on their website, and environmental review will be in
late summer and go to Planning Commission in November.
• The Aloft Hotel project on 10165 No. DeAnza Boulevard at Alves got their building permit on
December 28th.
• Promethius Real Estate Group has a project on Stevens Creek and Blaney involving 100
residential units and 7,000 square feet of commercial space; tentative Planning Commission
hearing is end of April; tentative City Council meeting May.
• Other residential projects under review include a subdivision on Rainbow Drive to subdivide a
parcel into 3 lots; a project on Bollinger Road to divide a parcel into 5 residential lots; all
going to Planning Commission on March 27th.
• Cleo Avenue is under construction and building permits were issued the end of January 2012.
• The Green Building Ordinance (Green Building Ordinance) is tentatively scheduled for City
Council on May 1st. In May 2011 the Council decided to delay consideration and review of
the draft GBO for one year to allow the public time to review and provide comments on the
draft ordinance including the changes that Council made at the meeting.
• Construction of the Western Athletic Club at Sears on Wolfe Road has begun with opening
scheduled for early summer 2012.
• TJ Maxx/Home Goods and Party City at Crossroads has an estimated May 2012 completion
date.
• R&D vacancy rate in Cupertino is less than 1%; office space vacancy rate is very low, almost
non-existent.
• Discussed the Economic Development Manager position; job description will be revised and
considered by the City Council before hiring another ED Director.
• A six-story office building is planned for the IHOP Restaurant in Santa Clara; Aarti
Shrivastava mentioned a General Plan amendment may need to be considered for Cupertino at
some point to increase the amount of office space.
REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
Aarti Shrivastava:
• Provided update on dog park and Monta Vista High School sports lighting projects; comments
similar to the previous ones have been sent in and staff has been working with the
neighborhood and school district. There are many projects ranging from residential two story
additions to interest in some commercial properties.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned to the next regular Planning Commission meeting
scheduled for March 27, 2012 at 6:45 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted: ___/s/Elizabeth Ellis________________
Elizabeth Ellis, Recording Secretary