Loading...
PC Packet 09-24-2019CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber Tuesday, September 24, 2019 6:45 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Subject: Draft Minutes of August 13, 2019 Recommended Action: approve of modify the Draft Minutes of August 13, 2019 Draft Minutes of August 13, 2019 2.Subject: Draft Minutes of September 10, 2019 Recommended Action: approve or modify the Draft Minutes of September 10, 2019 Draft Minutes of September 10, 2019 POSTPONEMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect to a matter not on the agenda . WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff or a member of the public, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.Subject: Use Permit to allow the commercial parking and storage of vehicles in the parking lot of an existing retail center (The Oaks). Application No(s): U-2019-05; Applicant(s): Patrick Bumb (Stonebrook Asset Management); Location: 21269 Stevens Creek Boulevard APN# 326-27-042, 043 Page 1 Planning Commission Agenda September 24, 2019 Recommended Action: That the Planning Commission find that: 1) Find that the denial of the project is exempt from CEQA; and 2) Deny the Use Permit (U-2019-05) Planning Commission decision final unless appealed Staff Report 1 - Draft Resolution for U-2019-05 2 - Justification Statement OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS ADJOURNMENT If you challenge the action of the Planning Commission in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Cupertino at, or prior to, the public hearing. In the event an action taken by the Planning Commission is deemed objectionable, the matter may be officially appealed to the City Council in writing within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Commission’s decision. Said appeal is filed with the City Clerk (Ordinance 632). In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend the next Planning Commission meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. Upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, Planning Commission meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. Also upon request, in advance, an assistive listening device can be made available for use during the meeting. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission after publication of the packet will be made available for public inspection in the Community Development Department located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, during normal business hours and in Planning packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the Cupertino web site. IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code 2.08.100 written communications sent to the Cupertino City Council, Commissioners or City staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City’s website and kept in packet archives. You are hereby admonished not to include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public; doing so shall constitute a waiver of any privacy rights you may have on the information provided to the City . Page 2 Planning Commission Agenda September 24, 2019 Members of the public are entitled to address the Planning Commission concerning any item that is described in the notice or agenda for this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the Planning Commission on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located in front of the Commission, and deliver it to the City Staff prior to discussion of the item. When you are called, proceed to the podium and the Chair will recognize you. If you wish to address the Planning Commission on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so by during the public comment portion of the meeting following the same procedure described above. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less. For questions on any items in the agenda, or for documents related to any of the items on the agenda, contact the Planning Department at (408) 777 3308 or planning@cupertino.org. Page 3 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ACTION MINUTES, August 13, 2019 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6:45 p.m Vice Chairperson Saxena called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting in the Cupertino Community Hall Council Chambers, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Vice Chair Vikram Saxena, Commissioners Kitty Moore, David Fung, Alan Takahashi. Absent: Chairperson R Wang APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1.Subject:Draft Minutes of July 30, 2019. Recommended Action: Approve or modify the Draft Minutes of July 30, 2019 (Commissioner Moore recused herself) Commissioner Fung provided corrections for the vote recording and suggested language changes. Moved by Fung and seconded by Takahashi to: “Approve the minutes as amended”. The motion carried 3-0-2 (Wang absent, Moore recused) (Commissioner Moore returned to the dais) ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Jennifer Griffin thanked the Planning Commissioners for discussing a range of topics she felt were valuable to the Community Jim Moore did not think the minutes should have been deliberated at this meeting WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Two letters were received regarding agenda item #4 and one letter was received as a general comment regarding the July 30th meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR: None STUDY SESSION: 2. Subject: Presentation from City Staff and a Consultant on Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) and the City’s Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) requirement to adopt a long term GSI Plan. Continued from the July 23rd cancelled Planning Commission meeting. Recommended Action:Receive presentation and provide any input to Staff Environmental Programs Manager, Cheri Donnelly, Senior Environmental Scientists for EOA, Incorporated, Vashakha Atre and Leisbeth Magna, gave a presentation of the draft Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI) to the Planning Commission. They explained the City’s Municipal Regional Permit requirement. Staff and the Consultants were asked and answered questions. Vice Chair Saxena opened the public comment period and the following individual(s) spoke: Lisa Warren Jennifer Griffin Vice Chair Saxena closed the public comment period. The Planning Commissioners provided comments and recommendations to Staff and the consultants about the GSI Plan to forward for consideration by the City Council. 3. Subject: Below Market Rate (BMR) Residential Housing Mitigation and Commercial Linkage Fees update for the Cupertino BMR Housing Program, Application No(s): CP-2019-01; Applicant(s): City of Cupertino; Location: citywide. Continued from the July 23rd cancelled Planning Commission meeting. Recommended Action:Receive update and provide any input to Staff Housing Manager, Keri Heusler, and Associate Planner, Erick Serrano (City Staff), Eric Phillips, Special Counsel to the City from Goldfarb, Lipman, and Sujatha Srivastava, from Strategic Economics (consulting) provided background, existing conditions and an update on the Below Market Rate (BMR) Residential Housing Mitigation and Commercial Linkage Fees.Staff and the Consultants were asked and answered questions by the Planning Commissioners. Vice Chair Saxena opened the public comment period and the following individual(s) spoke: Jennifer Griffin Connie Cunningham Lisa Warren Greenie Van Buren Vice Chair Saxena closed the public comment period. The Planning Commissioners provided comments and recommendations to Staff and the consultants to forward for consideration by the City Council. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 4. Subject: Hillside Exception to allow the construction of a new 4,076 square foot, two-story, single family residence within the 15% site line of a prominent ridgeline. Application No(s): EXC-2018-07; Applicant(s): Walter Chapman (Barniv residence): Location: 21650 Rainbow Court APN #366-38-007 Recommended Action:Conduct the public hearing and find: 1) that the proposed actions are exempt from CEQA; and 2) approve the application per the Draft Resolution Associate Planner, Gian Martire, presented the Staff Report, provided background information on the lot, explained the Hillside Ordinance, and why an exception is required for this development proposal. The designer, Walter Chapman and the property owner, Zuni Barniv, also made presentations to the Commissioners. Staff and the applicant were asked and answered questions from the Commissioners. Vice Chair Saxena opened the public comment period and the following individual(s) spoke: Greenie Van Buren Donald Van Buren Avi Tepman Kathryn Nicolino (a written statement was read) Vice Chair Saxena closed the public comment period. The project designer reviewed the proposed on-site drainage and sewer plans with the Commissioners. The Commissioners thanked Staff and the property owner for their work to bring a thoughtful design project forward that will be a benefit the neighborhood. Moved by Fung and seconded by Moore to approve the application per the Draft Resolution. The motion carried 4-0-1 (Wang absent). REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Commissioners Moore mentioned the various public meetings and events she had attended. Commissioners Fung and Saxena, along with others, attended the grand opening of the Verandas Senior Housing Project. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:05pm to the next regular Planning Commission meeting on August 27, 2019 at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: ______/s/Beth Ebben_______________ Beth Ebben, Deputy Board Clerk CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ACTION MINUTES, September 10, 2019 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6:45 p.m Chairperson Wang called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting in the Cupertino Community Hall Council Chambers, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson R Wang, Vice Chair Vikram Saxena, Commissioners Kitty Moore, David Fung. Absent: Alan Takahashi APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Jennifer Griffin spoke about housing laws recently passed in the State of Oregon WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARINGS: None STUDY SESSION: 1. Subject: Presentation on possible adoption of Reach Codes – Building Codes more stringent than State Standard Title 24, Part 6 (Energy) and Part 11 (CalGREEN) Recommended Action:Receive presentation and provide any input to Staff The Director of Community Development, Ben Fu, provided some background information on the project. The Sustainability Manager, Andre Duurvoort, provided an overview of the City’s Climate Action Plan, projects and goals of the Sustainability Commission to the Commissioners. He explained what a “Reach Code” is. John Supp, Program Lead, Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority, addressed the Planning Commission regarding which neighboring cities in Santa Clara County are considering Reach Codes and some sample changes to consider for the existing building codes. The Planning Commissioners asked questions of the presenter and of Staff. Chair Wang opened the public comment period and the following individual(s) spoke: Jennifer Griffin Rhoda Fry Dashiel Leeds Gary Latshaw Lisa Warren Scott Shell Rahul Vasanth Chair Wang closed the public comment period. The Planning Commissioners provided comments for consideration to the Sustainability Commission. 2. Subject: Study Session on the General plan Annual Review/Implementation Plan Recommended Action:Receive update and provide direction to Staff Planning Manager, Piu Ghosh, provided background information on the City’s General Plan and the reporting requirements. The City Council is seeking recommendations on the formatting of the annual review and the narrative of the on-going, updates, amendments, or changes in policies, programs and implementations. Staff was asked and answered questions. Chair Wang opened the public comment period and the following individual(s) spoke: Jennifer Griffin Lisa Warren Chair Wang closed the public comment period. The Planning Commissioners provided comments and suggestions to Staff regarding the formatting of the annual report of the General Plan. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Commissioners Moore and Fung mentioned the various public meetings and events they have attended. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:25pm to the next regular Planning Commission meeting on September 24, 2019 at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: ______/s/Beth Ebben_______________ Beth Ebben, Deputy Board Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting: September 24, 2019 Subject Use Permit to allow the commercial parking and storage of vehicles in the parking lot of an existing retail center (The Oaks). (Application No: U-2019-05; Applicant: Patrick Bumb (Stonebrook Asset Management); Location: 21269 Stevens Creek Blvd.; APN: 326-27-042, 326-27-043) Recommended Actions That the Planning Commission adopt the proposed draft resolutions to: 1. Find that the denial of the project is exempt from CEQA; 2. Deny the Use Permit (U-2019-05) (Attachment 1); Discussion Project Data: General Plan Designation:Commercial/Residential Special Area:Heart of the City Zoning Designation:P (CG, Res) / Planned Development General Commercial and Residential Required Available Auto Parking:661 (per Municipal Code)593 Project Consistency with General Plan:Yes Zoning:No Background: The project site is known as the Oaks Shopping Center and is located in the Heart of the City Specific Plan Special Area within the Oaks Gateway of the West Stevens Creek subarea. The shopping center is on an approximately 8.1 gross-acre site bounded by Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south, Mary Avenue to the east and north and Hwy 85 to the west. The surrounding uses include the Glenbrook Apartments to the north, De Anza College to the south (across Stevens Creek Blvd.), and the Cupertino Senior Center to the east (See Figure 1 below). Page 2 of 5 The 71,684 square foot leased area includes a mix of retail, restaurant, specialty schools, and small office tenants. Currently much of the shopping center is vacant, including the former theaters. Since 2011, the site has been home to the West Coast Farmer’s Market,held every Sunday morning, approved with application DIR-2010-26. In the Spring of 2019, Staff was notified by residents that the portion of the site that the West Coast Farmer’s Marker was approved to operate on at the Oaks Shopping Center was being leased to the Auto Nation Dealership Group. The area was being used for the offsite parking and storage of approximately 165 vehicles.The cars are parked on the western edge of the site (see Figure 2.) According to Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Chapter 19.60 General Commercial (CG) Zones, the commercial parking of vehicles requires a Use Permit to be approved by the City’s Planning Commission. On June 20, 2019, Staff received an application, including a justification statement (Attachment 2), for a Use Permit (U-2019-05) to allow the offsite commercial parking of vehicles. Analysis: Parking Parking standards are available in Chapter 19.124: Parking Regulations, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. For a shopping center, the analysis is conducted by comparing the parking supply and demand at the site with the assumption that the center is either 100% Figure 2:Location of Proposed Use Figure 1: Site & Surrounding Area Page 3 of 5 occupied or, at the very least, available to be leased. The parking supply onsite must meet not only the current demand of the development but also one when it is fully tenanted to ensure there are no adverse impacts in the event parking demand outstrips parking supply. Table 1 below indicates the parking demand and supply at the project site prior to and with the proposed use. Table 1: Parking Analysis No. of Parking Stalls Existing 593 Required 496 Available before Proposed Use 97 Needed for Proposed off-site parking 165 Available after Proposed Use -68 As noted in Table 1 above, with the parking of the Auto Nation cars onsite, there would be a deficiency of 68 parking stalls. This shortage would hinder future tenants from leasing units in the development, ensuring continued vacancy at the shopping center. Conflict with Farmers Market In 2011, DIR-2010-26 was approved to allow the Cupertino Farmers Market to operate on the site on Sundays from 9am-1pm. The Market was approved to be located on the most westerly parking lot aisle, encompassing 105 parking stalls. This portion of the parking lot was approved specifically for the following reasons: Circulation is maintained around the shopping center. Being closer to Stevens Creek Boulevard mitigates potential noise from loading and unloading the portable facilities and visual effects from residents along Mary Avenue. This portion of the shopping center is partially below the Stevens Creek Boulevard grade and screened by perimeter landscaping and will have minimal visibility to passing motorists. The proposed market site is in an underutilized parking lot area at the Oaks Shopping Center. Because the Auto Nation Dealership Group vehicles have been parked in the above- mentioned location, the Farmers Market has been forced to relocate to a parking area fronting Mary Avenue where the market is exposed to the Glenbrook Apartment residents across the street. Combined with the parked Auto Nation Dealership Group cars, there is a parking deficiency of about 173 spaces for a better part of Sundaymornings and early afternoons. As such, due to the displacement caused by the off-site commercial parking being conducted, the Farmers Market is also non-compliant. Page 4 of 5 Environmental Assessment: Denial of this project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per California Code of Regulations, title 14, Section 15270 (“CEQA Guidelines), applying to projects which are disapproved. See also Public Resources code § 21080(b)(5). Other Department/Agency Review: The City’s Public Works Department, Building Department, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department reviewed the project and have no objections. Public Noticing and Outreach The following table is a brief summary of the noticing done for this project: Public Notice Agenda Site Signage (14 days prior to the hearing) Legal ad placed in newspaper (at least 10 days prior to the hearing) 730 public hearing notices mailed to property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site (10 days prior to the hearing) Posted on the City’s official notice bulletin board (one week prior to the hearing) Posted on the City of Cupertino’s website (one week prior to the hearing) No public comments have been received as of the date of production of this staff report (September 18, 2019). Permit Streamlining Act This project is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 – 65964). The City has complied with the deadlines found in the Permit Streamlining Act. Project Resubmission: June 20, 2019; Deemed Incomplete: July 12, 2019 Project Resubmission: July 29, 2019; Deemed Complete: August 22, 2019 The City has 60 days (until October 22, 2019) to make a decision on the project. Conclusion The City reviews whetherany business locating within a shopping center, or similar retail development, has adequate parking provided on the site consistent with CMC Chapter 19.124: Parking Regulations. Due to the unpermitted off-site commercial parking being conducted on the site, coupled with the potential limitations of future tenanting, and violation of existing uses on the site, staff is unable to make the findings required in Section 19.156.040 to approve the Use Permit application and recommends denial of this permit application. Page 5 of 5 Next Steps The Planning Commission’s decision on this project is final unless an appeal is filed within 14 calendar days of the date of the mailing of the decision, on September 24, 2019. Prepared by: Gian Paolo Martire, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Piu Ghosh, Planning Manager Approved by: Benjamin Fu, Director of Community Development ATTACHMENTS: 1 – Draft Resolution for U-2019-05 2 – Justification Statement CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE COMMERCIAL PARKING AND STORAGE OF VEHICLES IN THE PARKING LOT OF AN EXISTING RETAIL CENTER (THE OAKS) LOCATED AT 21269 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD, APN: 326-27-042, -043 SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.:U-2019-05 Applicant:Patrick Bumb (Stonebrook Asset Management) Location:21269 Stevens Creek Blvd.; APN: 326-27-042, -043) SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: WHEREAS, the application (“Project”) consists of a Use Permit to allow the commercial parking and storage of vehicles in the parking lot of an existing retail center (The Oaks) located at 21269 Stevens Creek Blvd.; APN: 326-27-042, -043; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”), together with the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) (hereinafter, "CEQA Guidelines"), the City staff has independently studied the proposed Project and has determined that the denial of the Project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the exemption in CEQA Guidelines section 15270 for the reasons set forth in the staff report dated September 24, 2019 and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, on September 24, 2019, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive public testimony on the Project, including the CEQA exemption in CEQA Guidelines section 15270, and has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the staff report pertaining to the Project, all other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received by the Planning Commission at or prior to the public hearing; and Draft Resolution (denial)U-2019-05 September 24, 2019 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino is the decision-making body for this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds as follows with regard to this application: 1. The proposed development and/or use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. The proposed parking of vehicles onsite from the Auto Nation Dealership Group are within existing parking stalls. Although no public right-of-way, fire lanes, or approved accessible routes pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act are being interrupted by the location of the cars in the parking lot, their siting forces a Farmer’s Market authorized to operate on the site to relocate to a portion of the site where it is not authorized to operate from, which causes disruption to the flow of vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic within the public Right-of-Way. The parking deficiency of about 173 spaces for a better part of Sunday mornings and early afternoons causes customers to turn and drop off passengers in unsafe areas on Mary Avenue. Furthermore, vendors’ trucks are forced to park in parking spaces along Mary Avenue, and block public parking stalls and access to the sidewalk adjacent to the shopping center, causing pedestrians to have to walk in the street. 2.The proposed development and/or use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan, underlying zoning regulations, and the purpose of this title and complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of Cupertino’s Municipal Code Chapter 19.124: Parking Regulations, ordains specific standards for commercial uses within retail developments. Combining the demand of the shopping center with the offsite parking of the vehicles would create a parking deficiency at the Oaks Shopping Center and thus conflict with the Cupertino’s Municipal Code Chapter 19.124. Therefore the project cannot be found to be located and conducted in accord with the City of Cupertino’s zoning regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission takes the following actions: 1. Exercises its independent judgment and determines that the denial of this project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per California Code of Regulations, title 14, Section 15270 (“CEQA Guidelines), applying to projects which are disapproved. See also Public Resources code § 21080(b)(5). Draft Resolution (denial)U-2019-05 September 24, 2019 2. Denies the application for a Use Permit, Application no. U-2019-05. The conclusions and subconclusions upon which the findings specified in this resolution are based, including those contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application no. U- 2019-05 as set forth in the Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of September 24, 2019, are hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are included herein by reference as findings. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of September, 2019, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES:COMMISSIONERS: NOES:COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN:COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT:COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST:APPROVED: _________________ Benjamin Fu R Wang Director, Community Development Chair, Planning Commission