Loading...
CC 10-04-93 CC-868 MINUTES Regular Meeting City Hall Council Chamber October 4, 1993 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The meeting was called to order by Mayor Szabo at 6:48 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue. ROLL CALL Council members present: Wally Dean, Marshall Goldman, Barbara Koppel, Lauralee Sorensen, and Mayor Nick Szabo. Council members absent: None. Staff Present: City Manager Don Brown City Clerk Kim Smith Public Works Director Bert Viskovich Community Development Director Bob Cowan Administrative Services Director Blaine Snyder Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling City Attorney Charles Kilian Public Information Officer Donna Krey Planner II Tom Robillard CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS A. Recognition of student delegation from Toyokawa. Mayor Szabo introduced Mr. Yoshiyuki Kawai, one of the teachers who accompanied the delegation. Mr. Kawai explained that this was the 15th anniversary of their Sister City student program and they were honored to come to Cupertino in this special year. Mr. Kawai then read a letter from the Mayor of Toyokawa to Mayor Szabo which expressed pleasure at the visit of Cupertino's junior high students who had visited, and introducing their own delegation. Mr. Takahashi Sugiyama, representing the students, thanked the City for its hospitality and said that visiting in person helped them to understand the differences in the two societies. Mayor Szabo exchanged gifts with member of the delegation. B. Presentations to outgoing members of Architectural and Site Approval Committee (ASAC). Mayor Szabo presented a proclamation and a plaque to the ASAC members in attendance, which were Robert Hoxsie, Andrea Harris, and Gordon Frolich. October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 2 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Gordon Frolich, 1202 Belknap, reviewed the provisions of the sign ordinance and noted that with one exception, all of the candidates for local offices had signs in violation of the ordinance because they were over-sized, on public utility poles, etc.. He said the Council should enforce the ordinance, change the ordinance, change the staff, or give them the tools to do the enforcement. CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Dean, and passed unanimously to approve the consent calendar as submitted, with the exception of Item No. 2. 1. Review of applications for Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses: (a) Romeo's, 19998 Homestead Road, Unit C; (b) Stevens Creek Market, 10629 S. Foothill Boulevard; (c) Farm Fresh Produce and Grocery, 10021 S. Blaney Avenue. 2. Approval of minutes of City Council meeting held on September 20, 1993. 3. Resolution No. 8959: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Community Development Block Grant Contract Between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino for Fiscal Year 1993-94 and Authorizing Execution of Agreement." 4. Resolution No. 8960: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Allowing Certain Claims and Demands Payable in the Amounts and From the Funds as Hereinafter Described for General and Miscellaneous Expenditures for the Period Ending September 20, 1993." 5. Resolution No. 8961: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Allowing Certain Claims and Demands Payable in the Amounts and From the Funds as Hereinafter Described for General and Miscellaneous Expenditures for the Period Ending September 24, 1993." 6. Res. No. 8962: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Allowing Certain Claims and Demands Payable in the Amounts and From the Funds as Hereinafter Described for Salaries and Wages for the Payroll Period Ending September 19, 1993." 7. Resolution No. 8963: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Authorizing Execution of Agreement with Kier & Wright for Engineering Services, Phase II, Blackberry Farm." October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 3 8. Resolution No. 8964: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Contract Change Order No. 3 for Cupertino Nine School Site Improvements, Project 93-9106." 9. Resolution No. 8965: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Accepting Quitclaim Deed and Authorization for Underground Water Rights from Jonathan Van Den Berg and Vicky Van Den Berg, Palo Vista Road (APN 357-01- 052)." 10. Resolution No. 8966: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving the Final Map and Improvement Plans of Tract No. 8529, Located at Gardenside Lane; Developer, Landmark Property; Accepting Certain Easements; Authorizing Signing of Final Map and Improvement Plans; Authorizing the Execution of Agreement in Connection Therewith." 11. Resolution No. 8967: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Parcel Map and Improvement Plans of Property Located on Tula Lane; Developer, Henry Lozano; Authorizing Execution of Improvement Agreement; Authorizing Signing of Parcel Map and Improvement Plans." 12. Receive report on Commission and Committee terms expiring January 15, 1994. Vote Members of the City Council AYES: Dean, Goldman, Koppel, Sorensen, Szabo NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 2. Approval of minutes of City Council meeting held on September 20, 1993. Counc. Sorensen said that Page 4, paragraphs 3 and 4, should be amended to reflect "Community Development Director" instead of "Public Works Director" It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Goldman, and passed unanimously to adopt the minutes as amended. PUBLIC HEARINGS 13. Applications 81,004.8 and 4-EA-93 - Amending Residential Hillside policies in the municipal code. Continued from meeting of September 20, 1993. October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 4 (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1634: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.40, Residential Hillside Zones (RHS), of the Cupertino Municipal Code." (b) First reading of Ordinance No. 1635: "An Ordinance of the city Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 19.08, Definitions; Chapter 19.28, Single Family Residential (R1) Zones; and Chapter 18.13, Hillside Subdivisions, of the Cupertino Municipal Code." Planner Tom Robillard reviewed the staff report and highlighted the changes which had been made pursuant to Council direction at the September 20 meeting. He added that staff also suggested a clarification to the wording regarding prominent ridge lines and second-story offsets, as shown in the staff report, and he drew a diagram on the overhead transparency to illustrate the setback requirements. He said that wording was suggested in the design guidelines which stated that wall planes exceeding one story or 20 feet in height must contain architectural elements which provide relief and break up expansive planes, and he also recommended that small dormers be allowed on the second story. Ms. Barbara West, a resident of Cordova Road, discussed the recommended changes as reflected on pages 4 and 5 of the staff report regarding Exceptions. She said that she agreed with all those changes, but noted that they were not reflected in the text of the ordinance, Exhibit A. The Planner explained that he had not made any changes in the ordinance text, and if Council approved the ordinance, they could do so with the original wording plus the amendments made in the staff report and discussed during the meeting. Mr. Mark Sandoval, 885 San Antonio Road, stated that he was an architect, and he had reviewed with staff some of the potential problems with the ordinance, particularly the third story setbacks. He stated that the current wording would force the design of "wedding cake" layered houses. He asked for an opportunity to allow houses integrate well into the site while still reducing mass. Mr. Sandoval also discussed the height restrictions and said that the substitution of the word "grade" created a problem because slopes that were 30%-35% grade, the house can actually be moved higher than current zoning would allow. He suggested the context of the ordinance be adjusted to give a more desirable effect, and noted that he had not yet had an opportunity to review the latest staff recommendations. Ms. Deborah Jamison, a resident of Cupertino, stated that she was relieved to see the proposed new language in the watercourse protection section which increases setback from riparian corridors from 50 to 100 feet. She said there may be instances where there are other environmental concerns that it would be appropriate for that setback to be even larger, but that the 100 foot minimum, in conjunction with General Plan ordinances prohibiting construction on flood plains, will go much farther in protecting watercourses and existing riparian vegetation. October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 5 Mr. Mike Bruner, 1144 Derbyshire Drive, represented the Roman Catholic Diocese and himself. He suggested modifications to the wording regarding clustering and gave an example of a property owned by one person but which was on two sides of a county road, with all the clusters on one side with some open space, and the rest of the open space on the other side of the road. He said that the owner would be meeting the intent of the ordinance without actually complying with the requirements of the recommended wording. He discussed the design of homes, and said that staff's wording was appropriate. He asked for clarification that the dormers allowed on second-story setbacks were separate and gables would still be allowed on a second story. The Planner concurred. Mr. Sandoval asked for clarification on the 10-foot minimum offset for front and rear downhill elevations and asked if it had to be for the entire length of building or could it be on different planes because of the topography. The Planner drew a diagram on the overhead transparency, and said that current language would require the structure to be stepped back all the way across. In response to a question from Council, Mr. Sandoval discussed how current development standards placed restrictions on architectural designs, and said that no city had the ideal formula, particularly for hillside lots. He said the biggest problems were privacy issues, bulk, mass, mitigation measures, etc., but if the buildings were to be properly integrated into the site, each one needed individual design review. Mr. Larry Miller, 11835 Upland Way, said that on September 21 he had received final map approval for a three-lot subdivision, and this ordinance would require him to go through an exception process to build on the second two lots, since they exceed 30%. He said that there was the possibility that the exception would be denied. He said that the general intent of the ordinance was in the right direction, but there should be some exemptions included in the ordinance for people who have existing lots. Discussion was held regarding the reasons for the proscriptive requirements, the matching requirements in the General Plan, and the appeal process which is available. Mr. Harlan Sethe, 11845 Upland Way, said that he had a acre lot for which he has sold, but the ordinance would now require that the property go through the exception process because of its overall slope. He reviewed his letter of September 18, 1993, which was included on page 13-37 of the backup. He said his buyers wanted to purchase now but build for some years, and they are afraid they will not be allowed to build. He asked for a letter from staff assuring them they could build on the lot after the exception process. Mr. Mike Bruner noted that he was confused by the wording on the 10-foot setback requirement, and thought it was from main wall plane, and require that it's October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 6 ten feet from every offset would result in an unreasonable design. He said the bottom line was to have quality housing and quality design, and probably nothing that could be put in writing would assure that. Mrs. Connie Ignacio said that she and her husband had purchased a lot from the City in December on Stauffer Lane. They had been diligently pursuing getting permits and architect began working with the City and June, when he was told this ordinance would not be in effect until January. She said they would be ready to submit their plans in a matter of weeks, they had already spent $30,000, and now may have to redesign the entire plan because of the new ordinance. She noted that her husband reviewed the plans with Planning staff last week and was told there would be no problem. Mr. Tevis Ignacio discussed the design features of the plan would have to be changed to conform with the ordinance, including setbacks and grading issues. He said that the requirements were too limiting on the architectural design and increased the cost. The City Attorney stated that any building permit issued must be consistent with the General Plan, but did not have to be consistent with the present ordinance because it isn't yet effective. He said that if the application could be finalized prior to the effective date of the ordinance that would be okay. Mrs. Ignacio indicated that if the plans were submitted in a 30-day window prior to the ordinance taking effect, the plans would be put on hold. The Planner explained that the plans had to conform to the General Plan, and most of the General Plan policies were being implemented by this ordinance. He added that this particular lot would also have to go through a design review process because it was a planned development. Discussion was held regarding possibility of adopting an urgency ordinance. Mr. Fred Martin said that he was a realtor representing Mr. Sethe. He said that the conversion process was a difficult one, and once it was past and people knew what the rules were it would not be as disruptive. However, looking at the individual situations shows how important it is to try to accommodate projects that are caught in the transition. He discussed Mr. Sethe's situation and said this ordinance would force his previously conforming lot to go through an exception process which it may not survive, and this discourages the pending buyer. He suggested that the exception process be redesigned to include a window of time to address the properties in transition. The City Attorney discussed some alternatives for addressing the situation, including an interim emergency ordinance. Discussion was held options for addressing the properties in transition, including an emergency procedural October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 7 ordinance to include an exception process, or including a mandate allowing individuals to build on lots that conform to the General Plan but do not necessarily meet the proscriptive requirements. Mrs. West said that she was in favor of some kind of transition recognition, and she reminded that they had been addressing the Planning Commission and Council for well over a year, and if there was not a cutoff point this same type of situation will keep recurring. She said that a fair cutoff would be a transition time included in the exception process. Discussion was held regarding various alternatives, including the possibility of the Community Development Director issuing an automatic exception if complete building permits, conforming with the current General Plan, have been submitted prior to a certain date, or to consider developing an interim exception process for those properties with a 30% or greater slope. It was moved by Counc. Goldman, seconded by Counc. Dean, and passed unanimously to direct staff to bring this item back at a regular adjourned meeting on Monday, October 11, to consider alternatives, which include (1) the potential adoption of the existing ordinance as an urgency ordinance, and (2) the potential adoption of another ordinance which would establish an interim procedure to address the projects that are already in process. Counc. Koppel stated that her main concern was that the setback requirements were too restrictive. Mayor Szabo agreed that more flexibility in design was needed. Counc. Dean said that one of the main issues to be addressed was the policy regarding a 30% grade. At 9:00 p.m., the City Council recessed. At 9:15 p.m., Council reconvened. Mayor Szabo reordered the agenda to hear Item No. 22 next, and to hear Item No. 19 after No. 15. STAFF REPORTS 22. Information regarding family day care. The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Dean, and passed unanimously to direct staff to place the matter on the Planning Commission agenda, for the Commission to consider alternative criteria for reviewing daycare operations, including the possibility of creating more specific standards in the ordinance and thereby eliminate the need for individual use permit review. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 14. Application 4-U-76 (Modification) - Bay Area Cellular Telephone Co. (Russell & Dorothy Bilinski), 10655 Mary Avenue - Modification to the site development October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 8 plan to increase the maximum height to construct a 60 ft. cellular telephone antenna. Environmental Determination: Categorically exempt. Recommended for approval. Recommendation: Approve application per Planning Commission Resolution No. 4474, modify, or deny. The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. Mr. Mike Mangiantini,representing the applicant, said that this antenna would result in a stronger signal and a better quality of service overall in Cupertino and along the highway corridors. He requested that the landscaping requirement be waived, since it was intended to address only the location near Mary Avenue, and the preferred location was closer to Highway 85. He indicated they were in agreement with all other conditions. The Community Development Director agreed that it would be appropriate to waive that condition. It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Sorensen, and passed unanimously to approve the application to construct a 60-foot cellular telephone antenna at the staff-preferred location near Highway 85 and to waive the landscaping requirement. NEW BUSINESS 15. Report on auction of Lot 187 located on Dorothy Anne Way, Seven Springs Development, and sale of the city-owned lot. The Public Works Director explained that this was the third unsuccessful auction to sell the lot in question. He said that some of the comments he received from the interested parties were that this was a steeper lot which on which it would be more expensive to develop retaining walls, the market prices have dropped, and there was some uncertainty over the provisions of the hillside ordinance. He explained that there were four alternatives available to Council, which were to (1) wait for the market to rebound; (2) get a new appraisal and re-advertise the sale with a different value; (3) advertise it through multiple listings at the current value and pay a commission for that service; or (4) negotiate with the three interested individuals who attended the bid opening meeting. By consensus, the City Council agreed to wait for the market to rebound. 19. General status report and request for special appropriation to fund the Stevens Creek Boulevard Design Charette. The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report, the tentative schedule for the charette project, and explained how the process would work. He stated that when the charette was finished there would be one or more proposed designs which would then go to a joint session with the Planning Commission and City Council. Counc. Dean expressed concern regarding the nearly 50% increase in the cost for this design project. The Community Development Director explained that the costs were higher than earlier anticipated because their original October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 9 estimates were based on the Palo Alto model, which was much smaller in scope, and the Stevens Creek area project was far more ambitious. Counc. Dean said that he wanted to keep the costs around $20,000. Mr. Herman Hijmans, representing the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce, said it was disturbing to see employers leaving the area and other companies downsizing. He urged that Council take every step to counteract that trend. He said that the goals committee created by Council had recommended a renewal process for Stevens Creek Boulevard, and the community now demanded that it be changed from a thoroughfare to a destination. Ms. Ann Anger, a resident of Cupertino, asked that the design charette not be limited to Stevens Creek Boulevard, and that consideration especially be given to the Oaks shopping center area. She suggested that a parking structure might be a solution to freeing up more space at the Oaks. The Public Works Director confirmed that the design charette was intended to address Stevens Creek Boulevard and the surrounding area, which would include the Oaks. It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Goldman and passed by a 4- 1 vote, with Counc. Dean voting no, to appropriate an additional $15,000 for the design charette as recommended by staff. By consensus, Council agreed to schedule a joint meeting between Planning Commission and the City Council on Monday, December 13, 1993, to review the design charette results. 16. Application No. 81,130, a one year review of Chapter 9.06, Health and Sanitation Code, establishing procedures regulating massage establishments and service. The Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. It was moved by Counc. Dean, seconded by Counc. Koppel, and passed unanimously to direct staff to initiate a public hearing to amend Chapter 9.06. 17. Consideration of position on consolidation of the Transit District with the Congestion Management Agency. The Public Works Director reviewed the staff report. It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Goldman and passed by a 4- 1 vote with Counc. Dean voting no, to support the consolidation of the Santa Clara County Transit District with the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) on the following conditions: (1) That a staged transition occur from the current CMA to the new agency in 1995; (2) That the current CMA develop and administrative structure that will be used for the new agency; and (3) That the term of the five elected members be limited to two terms of four years each. October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 10 18. Alternative method for adopting delinquent tax apportionment for County of Santa Clara. (a) Resolution No. 8970: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Electing the Alternative Method of Distribution of Property Tax Levies and Assessments." The Finance and Administrative Services Director reviewed the staff report and explained that if the City chose to participate, it would receive approximately $52,000 of delinquent taxes. It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Dean, and passed unanimously to approve Resolution No. 8970 authorizing the city to participate in the Teeter Plan. 20. Request for award of alternates previously withheld for the Cupertino Nine School Sites Improvement, Project 93-9106. The Public Works Director reviewed the staff report. Discussion was held regarding the aesthetics of ground cover versus chipper mulch, and how the maintenance costs would compare over time. The Public Works Director noted that the irrigation contract had already been awarded, and the youth sports organizations were taking over some of the maintenance. Discussion followed regarding the cost savings that could be realized by using mulch instead of ground cover in the areas that remained, versus the agreement that had been made with the youth sports organizations. The City Manager said that the City had agreed to do the project if it could be completed for less than $5 million, and they had not only built a strong partnership with the youth sports organizations but would bring the project in well under the $5 million cap. It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Goldman, and passed by a 4-1 vote with Mayor Szabo voting no, to take the following actions as recommended by staff: (1) Award $41,000 for ground cover landscape at Eaton; (2) Award $12,283 for irrigation for ground cover at Lincoln; (3) Award $132,700 for ground cover for the remaining school sites as previously bid; (4) Authorize $9,300 for a 5% contingency fund; and (5) Authorize a total project cost of $195,283. 21. Approval of agreements with Stevens Creek Quarry for compost and recycling programs. The Public Works Director reviewed the staff report, and stated that they had reduced the limit on free compost to two bags per person. He acknowledged the October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 11 Stevens Creek Quarry, in particular the Voss family and John Kolski, for their effort and quick response, and expressed his thanks for all of their assistance. (a) Resolution No. 8968: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Execution of Agreement Between Stevens Creek Quarry and the City of Cupertino for the Lease of Property for the Compost and Recycling Programs." It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Koppel, and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 8968 as presented. (b) Resolution No. 8969: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Approving Execution of Contract Between Rich Voss Trucking, Inc. for the Purpose of Transporting Compost." It was moved by Counc. Sorensen, seconded by Counc. Koppel, and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 8969 as presented. COUNCIL REPORTS 23. Appointment of Council members to the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) Advisory Board and the Santa Clara County Local Transit Authority (LTA) - (Mayor Szabo). Mayor Szabo began with the Santa Clara County Local Transit Authority (LTA) and explained that there were attempts to move forward some projects, which would have an impact on operating costs and would result other projects being delayed or not begun. He said the latest discussion was to move Cupertino's project on Sunnyvale/Saratoga back two years, and to move Steven's Creek Boulevard back four years. He added they are assuming a 4.7 % annual increase in operating costs, but that for the last 11 years there has actually been an 11% annual increase. He stated that the City needed strong representation on the board with Cupertino's interests in mind, and suggested that Counc. Koppel be nominated. The City Council agreed by consensus to nominated Counc. Barbara Koppel for election to the Santa Clara County Local Transit Authority. Counc. Koppel referred to the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) Advisory Board and explained that it is a new board in addition to the existing CMA. It is proposed that the alternates on the CMA, including herself, would sit on this advisory board until their term as alternates ended, at which time they would then become a representative on the CMA. The City Council agreed by consensus that Counc. Koppel would serve on the Congestion Management Agency Advisory Board. October 4, 1993 Minutes of the Cupertino City Council Page 12 The City Manager referred to the Legislative Review Board and noted that the Santa Clara County Cities Association had taken a position in support of the local option for a 1/2 cent sales tax since the County had adopted an ordinance which assures distribution of funds to the cities in the same percentage as the sales tax is currently distributed. The local option for the sales tax would only go into effect if the statewide proposal failed and the countywide proposal passed. It was moved by Counc. Koppel, seconded by Counc. Goldman, and passed unanimously to endorse the local option for a 1/2 cent sales tax. Counc. Koppel referred to the Santa Clara County Local Traffic Authority (LTA) Policy Advisory Board and gave a status report on Measure A. She stated that it was back from the Court of Appeals, and supplemental briefings were requested. Although there is a 90-day deadline beginning October 1, it was expected that the issue would be resolved in 30 days. ADJOURNMENT At 10:45 p.m., the Council concurred to adjourn to Monday, October 11, 1993, at 7:00 p.m. in Conference Room C and D located at Cupertino City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue. ________________________ Kim Marie Smith City Clerk.