PC Re3so 1347 4
81,003.23
SOLUTION NO. 1347
THE PLANNING COMISSION OF TFIF CITY OF CUPERTI11O
r„ THE FOLLOWING SUGGESTED N'ODIFIC,i.TIONS TO
a.:
tHE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVED VALLEY FLOOR
t j)iFI'LT.NG GENERAL PLAN LABELED EXHIBIT B AND B-1.
0100
q4 General Policy Three on Page 10 of Exhibit B-1 is modified to read,
as follows:
°.% ►t •
z1 Undeveloped lots within recorded residential subdivisions shall reflect
the dwelling unit type and intensity of developed properties within the
subdivision. Properties designated for high intensity residential uses
sit • can. be zoned to a less intense residential use if the change will not
alter the residential character of the immediate neighborhood.
sw A 2. The last sentence of the second paragraph of the Policy Statement for
the Old Monta Vista General Plan section of Exhibit B-1 (page 11) is
1.4 modified, as follows:
"The 1974 Amendment additionally proposes that the quadrant of land
north of Stevens Creek between Route 85 Freeway and Peninsula Drive
to the east and west and University Avenue to the north be redesignated
; ,:'' from a duplex density to Planned Development commercial and a flexible
residential density range of between 4.4 to 7.7 units per gross acre.
The commercially-orientated properties shall be designated Planned
• ,sty Development with a commercial intent to give the City additional
control ever site design and activities. Additionally, individual
: properties can be developed individually and no access can be
gained for commercial uses through Santa Clara Avenue."
=y 3. The policy statement for Area 21A on Page 17 of B-1 is modified,
as follows:
.,m � Area21A: Northwest Quadrant Quaadrant. of the Intersection of Stevens Creek
het
Boulevard end Foothill Boulevard
11V = "The subject area is partially designated by a residential land use
intensity range of 4.4-7.7 dwelling units per gross acre with the
k e
.ti t remaining area designated Planne'l Development with professional
office/commercial intent and/or residential use with an intensity
range of 4.4-7.7 dwelling units per gross acre. The professional
office/commercial land uses shall be low intensity in nature and
access to Silver Oak Way shall be limited."
-1-
81,003.23
• Planning Comm. Resolution 1347 (continued)
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of September, . 197A, at a regular meeting
of the Planning Comissien of the City of Cupertino, State of California,
by the folloc,l.n` roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Adams, Cooper, Gatto, Woodward, Chairman O'Keefe
NAYS: None
ABSTAINING: None
; ABSENT: None
APPROVED:
Daniel P. O'Keefe, Chairman
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
QV al ,d)
• . „4 ?c,
James 11. Sisk
Planning Director
•
-2-
•
,4. .
.
CITY OF CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM
DESCRIPTION AND STANDARDS OF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
WITHIN TUE INFILLINC OF TIIE VALLEY FLOOR AREA
EXHIBIT B-1 •
•
This exhibit accompanies the map labelled Exhibit B which is the approved
General Plan map describing land use types and intensities for the geographical
area of the City known as "Infilling of the Valley Flooi ." The Infilling, of
the Valley Floor area comprises that portion of the City of Cupertino's sphere
of influence excluding the central core and foothills. Figure 1 describes the
boundary of the valley floor iilfilling and the other three geographical areas
of the sphere. of influence- which have been or will be evaluated separately in
the City's General Plan program. Figure 2 defines the boundaries of properties
that were studied in detail in the Core and the Valley Floor Infilling plans.
• The numbered and alphabetical designations delineate specific undeveloped or
semi-developed properties or groups of properties.
•
•
CLASSIFICATION T OF LAND ;^.E1S EVALUATED'I?D AS A PART OF TIIE VALLEY FLUO^ IN FILLING
SEGMENT n;' THE GENERAL PLAN P!RO �? -i
Properties within the Valley Floor Infilling segment of the General Plan.
were classified into three categories based upon. their degree of urbanization. •
• Existing Development
This category pertains to properties that are presently developed and
zoned in a manner either consistent- or inconsistent with the 1964 General Plan.
Exhibit B reaffirms existing zoning and development which is consistent with
the 1964 Plan and recognizes existin development and zoning of certain prop-
• erties that arc inconsistent with t-LO 1964 Plan. Inconsistently zoned and
•
• •
•
developed properties are reflected on the 1974 Infilling Amendment if the
• properties are substantially developed with uses that are in conformance with
• current zoning regulations (setbacks, parking, etc.) and building code stand-
ards. Undeveloped recorded lots within subdivisions that are zoned inconsist-
ently with the 1964 General Plan are designated on the 1974 Infilling Plan
(Exhibit B) in a manner to reflect the land use type and intensity of developed
lots within the same subdivision. A specific example of an inconsistently
zoned and developed subdivision that is recognized by the 1974 Infilling Amend-
rient is the 16 dwelling unit per acre La Cresta subdivision served by Alpine
Drive and Salem Drive.
•
Undeveloped and Unimproved Properties
This category is described on Figure 2 by numerical designations. These-
properties represent areas in which there are viable development alternatives
and, as such, these areas were subjected to a greater degree of inquiry
• relative to potential impacts resulting from alternative land uses. In some
cases the zoning of properties in this category are inconsistent with the 1964
General Plan. •
•
t •
Semi-Developed Properties
This classification is. designated by letters on Figure 2. The semi-
developed properties are areas of the sphere of influence in which the land •
use type is primarily established; however, the intensity of development is
not established. This designation primarily reflects residential areas within
County jurisdiction in the western portion of the community.
EVALUATION FACTORS
Each of the properties or groups of properties in the undeveloped numeri-
• cally designated study area; and the semi-developed alphaLetically d signated
•
-2-
areas were evaluated based upon a number of factors. The developed portion
of the residential infilling area of the General Plan was not evaluated in
• terms of alternative land uses but the land uses and intensity of land uses
within the already developed portions were utilized in base information
relative to traffic and population projections.
Two separate geographical sub-areas within the Valley Floor Infilling
area of the General Plan warranted special consideration. The two areas are
. Old Monte Vista as defined by the "Old. Nonta Vista General Plan" and the
Stevens Creek Flood Plain from Stevens Creek Reservoir to Stevens Creek. The
Old Monta Vista Plan deserved special consideration because'the area is
presently regulated by a very specific plan, and the area has a special sense
of community in which people strongly identify..
The Stevens Creek natural flood plain received special attention during
the hearings because of the potential of flooding risk for existing and
• potential residents and because of its environmental resource value.
Seven community development and environmental resource and constraint
factors were utilized to evaluate alternative land uses for undeveloped and
semi-developed properties within the Valley Floor. Infilling segment of the
General Plan. The community development factors were:
1. Fiscal Impact
2. Traffic Impact
• 3. Housing Choice
4. Neighborhood and Community Park Needs
• 5. Commercial Land Use Need .
The environmental resource and constraint factors were:
1. Natural Resource Conservation
2. Protection from Flood Risk •
•
-3-
Community Develop cent Factors
• 1. Fiscal Impact
• The term fiscal impact relates to an analysis of governmental costs
and revenues that-would result from alternative land uses involving the
developed and semi-developed areas within the.Valley Floor Infilling element
of the General Plan. The fiscal impact was evaluated based upon the total
tax effort involving the following jurisdictions:
City of Cupertino
• Cupertino Union High School District
Fremont High School District •
Foothill Community College District
Central Fire District
Cupertino Sanitary District •
There are other taxation districts within the City of Cupertino's
sphere of influence; however, the tax effort from the other jurisdictions is "
• insignificant. The Commission found_ that development resulting from the
implementation of the infilling plan would result in the construction of
appro;amately 950 to 1210 additional dwelling units, raising the existing
dwelling unit base in the infilling area from 10,780 units to between 11,730
and 11,990 units. The present population is approximately 34 ,500 persons (based
on 1970 household size) . The infilling will add between 3,000 to 4,000 persons.
. The Commission found that the develoment of the undeveloped and semi-developed
properties within the residential infilling would not have a significant impact
. on government costs and revenues on the abovementioned jurisdictions.
2. Traffic. Impact
• The Commission finds that based upon traffic generation data supplied
• by the consulting firm of JI?K Associates that the additional construction of
between 950 and 1210 units will not adversely affect the major traffic
•
-4- .
•
arterials such as Stevens _Creek Boulevard, Foothill Boulevard/Stevens Canyon
Road and Bollinger Road and collector streets serving specific residential
neighborhoods.
410•
3. Housing Choice •
In 1972 the City of Cupertino adopted a Housing Element which included a
basic objective of providing housing choice for all economic, racial and ethnic
segments of the community. Beginning in 1972 several Federal housing programs
• have come under review by the present administration. A moratorium, in effect,
has been established on existing ongoing programs. The. moratorium in combina-
tion with inflationary pressures has raised the cost of housing to the point
where the City of Cupertino is in a relatively worse position to,provide housing -
. for the full range of economic and ethnic groups within the community. The
Housing Element contains a. goal by which the City of Cupertino would strive
to ensure that relatively large developments provide a -housing mix as part. of
the overall development approval. TIn effect, then, the private developer
• would to a certain. degree subsidize- a limited percentage of buyers within the
development.
The Commission finds that there are no properties within the residential
infilling segment of the General Plan which are large enough to support a pri-
vate subsidy program; however, the Commission finds that in certain areas a
housing range can be established which will allow greater density than that
• within the surrounding neighborhood if the developer can show that he can
implement a community-wide social goal.
4. Neighborhood and Community Park Needs
• The 1972 Open Space and -Conservation Element contains a policy setting
forth a park land to population ratio of 5-1/2 acres of neighborhood and community
park land per 1,000 persons. On March 4, 1974, the. Cupertino City Council
adopted a Park Dedication Ordinance which requires a residential subdivider
'4:o dedicate 3 acres per .thousand copulation generated by a subdivision or.
•
•
-5-
•
• ' pay a fee in lieu thereof. .The enactment of this ordinance will insure
410 that future residential development in the Valley Floor Infilling area of
the General Plan.will provide its own neighborhood park acquisition needs. •
Community park needs for new residential development will be provided by •
the community a a whole.
The City is currently studying the feasibility of joint school-
ground/park usage with appropriate school district officials. Based upon
• a tentative analysis, if a joint school/park use plan can be negotiated,
the City will satisfy its total park needs for the community.
•
.Because of the existing development pattern, the eastern section
of the City may be somewhat deficient in terms of the neighborhocd park
standard. A detailed quantitative and qualitative analysis will be avail
• able later this year and will be discussed in later hearings involving the
general plan amendment. •
5. Commercial Land Use Need • •
The Planning,Commission studied the commercial needs for the
residential infilling portion of the community and determined that exist-
ing neighborhood convenience centers within the City will adequately satisfy
the daily needs of the residents of the community. The Commission finds
that no new neighborhood Centers may be constructed west of the Route 85
Freeway right of way and further that the existing commercial center within
Old PSonta Vista be strengthened to provide a neighborhood and community
range of services for residents within the western portion of the community.
•
•
•
• -6- • •
- ••
Environmental Resource and Constraint Factors •
1. Natural Resource Protection
411
The Planning Commission has evaluated each of the specific study
areas within the undeveloped and semi-developed areas of the infilling
portion of the General Plan in terms of the potential for agricultural use
and the potential for ground water recharge. The Commission finds that
although the majority of the study areas are characterized by having Class
One or Two soils, the small size of the individual properties or group of
properties restrict the economic viability of agricultural use in the long
run. The Commission, however, encourages the use of existing agricultural •
land uses. •
The Santa Clara Valley Water District conducted a general review
of the potential of certain properties to serve as percolation ponds to
recharge ground water. •
A large area in the western section of Cupertino, more precisely
the De Anza College, West Valley Industrial Park and Montebello residential
- area, is ideally suited for ground water recharge use because of geologic
conditions and the proximity of the West Valley Western Pipeline which para-
llels the Southern Pacific Railroad spur. Figure 7 describes the location
of specific sites that have been evaluated by the District. The District •
has acquired the Billawala property designated on Figure 7. ,
The Santa Clara Valley will face a serious shortage of water by
1978 assuming that the current growthrend will continue. Unless new
sources of water can be developed either through waste water reclamation
or via the San Felipe Project, the ground water basin will be used to a
greater degree which will result in continued ground subsidence.
-� Although additional percolation basins are needed to supply
water to the ground water basin, the Flood Control. District has no •
-7-
•
_ "::••::• �. :i ! :� •..
•1 ? • 1• : 1 i • • !.` -r a T,; - `• :._`rii• • . r - .1
•
•
• •• •• :� • 1 •4.. •e'n •. : 1 I o••_ ...I • r 1,rIT1-' ...- - .. f, 2•..... ..
•
...2...1........../%"-----&...:---.-................ •:.„ • .
j--. . _• • . •...
4: 1 ' l••�• ,.••„I• .- MARY .r•V1. - ;� - ;• ' 3� • •--• : I - j' -w
�� _f.• f • `a . .;re v� SITE •� _". -_- z. .• 1'
•
•
• n�.• /�—_.1 •,+.C.••,- .. I +� `,�<' �•=i Tl'�., t .. 1 lean;- -•-_.' • •1 iJ
. • •• •
" ` . I ~
• • r r : : : . • •i• .N. F."' Iz • 1`. / a ., ' CJ4• 14 • Cl.)4001-t.i41c)? • ,
I 1 n jI ; .
.a• aa•: •
-y • .,_'yC:c`..' ..+•1,'_ ,,--.•r'vr gm am';-4 1 ••' ii.•:1 p
11U11tc�. )blc. 1 s%.c'nI.L1:1:F: ,••It •
H.C.M. H E N R•'( -- :J •, i• — 1 c : Cf c `, >�
U.sl?Ls3 so: J - .. ... . t(f:c- t � DE ANLA Y. - I'--i:
SITE i1�
• - o i� COLLEGE :: n :=:i ; ►:�•
-'' ' `z - .r;l 1 • SITE 1 • ..
+ 1
jr _ \•
. .y .•.. •t. •_ • ! , 1• .,.. . i3,1 `C_CIFLLAI�. .. _— n E -.I
•
.\.e •�••' •-a .U•_ ..-h •1 •,I1. 1 .__.. — .4 ' •1 • T�-••• ' •
r.
'��� •<•:i ' • ' I' i ~� •' ;.
A .1�`A , l • ' i• ;•, • I ' .,', ^ s' N. BILI_A1''IILA - _ •{;•• '1 '••.r
Z . '! i, c �o 1r •
•
•
•' r. i' Ala• •14• s,'•. •'! •• 4« ��: T' s� • .11 . • ... c (•• zr_ _:�.r i i i..
•• t.
( yr� q:� 1 . • • i ..�:; •M1'.•.
\ �% '.}.1•.� 7 . ,il ."- 2-i: ..-:. -fir.. 1• " • .__- • 1''a-• r - :i Fc
\7 , • � /\ •
. •� ''�!' •,•''I�.�+ 1� -: i'•.' t •....,1.'; .__1_y • • - .� + Ur.Yr,•h.b
•
el.
't t • .31•• 4•St -1 'ra t•:4, '_ _~ ,!•� T • �' G�- ',..��.:.• --- - <t.y:r..'''' •• •• .•a. - li
! • \ 1.:
• fJ.� ,� , ` —:j -. c ,. •ct, L--.z,•�. Ct., c ..;.:: (` t�
•..' - �/ V,... C� • 'r,� 1«- a , i kwrnlr t. •1•:....r `•. 3 ram_ ,e
• i. ,� ?�.1-T ;•Cf..,�` / lei _-•�'--?; -eh% ! '• �:• :=_---Z •• '
S u (11 , ! •'..:•.fl�:�;• I '� ..ono '•• ":. :I-_• ---��:i..••
• •�• .3sa. avr
•
• 1( ' •• 4... .1 1 ' 1 .• '—• . • 1.....-1 ' • ! . • .'•-•1! •• -- ;. ... •, '.. I .1.:.:-.•:-.1....., --..-. .,- . :
%
` fr:
_ { ' '•t ter:; atr3a c • N; • . ,
�• `ib 1,' 1LR 7'',l ! 'l` :• `'-J. �-: /.�!:Rs�l • �` .••`--a,.c1.^� '• ••-`:r —f-:` ' fS'.1l
••••,..21.4:.:: ".,,,y••• . ti , . 1,./.. .. .. s,„..t.,... • . • -1.••-t. ,
• ` 6 • •
r ` -7 HIJ • .
` . � , .
I --,...,.....;•fnr,w••• ::•••
I.
•
� . -a
r
scale - !1'=2000' •
-
C.i. = �o' POS5L L_E PE :;`OLA•rlON
•
•
•
FACILrITY SITES
• SOURCE: 'Draft: Environmental Impact Report
•
on propos.dd McC1cJ,1an ':cad Percolation
Pond. FICUItE 7
• Santa Clara Valley Warcr D:.strict •
. -s-
•
1
specific plans to acquire additional properties in the Cupertino area at
this time.
2. Protection from Fieod Risk
In a series of three meetings, the Planning Commission reviewed a
Flood Plain Management Program in conjunction with representatives from the
Santa Clara Valley Water District. More specifically, the Planning Commission
evaluated the reach of Stevens Creek between the Stevens Creek Reservoir and
Stevens Creek Boulevard. The Commission found that a 'and use regulation in
the form of an ordinance should be prepared to restrict urban development
. within the natural flood plain for the abovementioned reach of Stevens Creek.
•
The natural flood plain concept which is based upon the 100-year flood
frequency event has the primary benefit of protecting existing and future •
residents from flood risk and the elimination of the potential for excessive
governmental expenditures to protect.citizens •and property from flood risk
• and to retain the ground water percol.atlon capacity of the Creek. A secondary
benefit of the natural flood plain concept will be to retain the natural
• character of the Old Monte Vista segment of the City of Cupertino. In this
case, the Stevens Creek environs serves as an "urban shaper" which helps
define and restrict intensive urban development and enhance community identity.
Methodology for Evaluating., Individual Properties and the Aggregate Total of
the Properties within the Inill.ling Secment.
The Planning Commission evaluated the individual developed and semi-developed
described properties on Figure 2 based upon the community development and
environmental resource factors defined above. The analysis was made initially
on an area by area basis with the primary intent to evaluate the properties
based upon its local neighborhood impact. Upon completion of an individual
evaluation the Commission evaluated the impact of •the aggregate individual
•
•
• '
•
-9-
' . • decisions made by the Commission and determined that the aggregate impact of
development on individual properties would not have an adverse impact on the
community, in terms of its ability to serve existing and future residents and
• • in terms of its environment.
GENERAL POLICIES FOR THE VALLEY FLOOR INFILLING . SEGMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
• The general policies listed below pertain to the Valley Floor Infilling
segment of the General' Plan. The geographical boundary of the Valley Floor
Infilling segment is described on Figure 1 of the document labeled "Geographic
Subareas". General findings for the Core Area are contained in City Council
• Resolution No. 3592 enacted in conjunction with the adoption of the Core Area Plan.
1. Dwelling unit density ranges are set forth for land areas designated for
residential use . The greatest density within a given range shall not be approved
as a matter of right.
Specific densities for specific properties shall be established during
the zoning map preparation stage of the general plan process. The Planning
411 Commission and City Council shall evaluate individual zoning requests based upon
.
community development criteria such as "neighborhood character", public services
and local traffic and environmental resource and constraint criteria such as
• geologic stability and protection from flood risk.
2. Residential development in the Valley Floor Infilling area of the
General Plan may include densities which exceed present City maximums if such
.development meets a special community-wide social goal and the increase in density •
.will not adversely affect the traffic-carrying capacity of local streets or the
capacity of other public services nor adversely alter the neighborhood character.
• ( 3-Th Undeveloped lots within recorded residential, subdivisions shall reflect
mod` •
the dwelling unit type and intensity of developed properties within the subdivision.
Properties designated for high intensity residential uses can be zoned to a less
intense residential use if the change will not alter the residential character
• of the immediate neighborhood. •
•
-10 •
•
-
•
•
e.
•
4. Residential units constructed adjacent to major arterials shall be
• isolated from "unacceptable" noise levels by appropriate means as may be
determined by an acoustical engineer.
5. Public and quasi-public land uses can be initiated without amending •
the General Plan. The introduction of said uses shall require appropriate
zoning changes. — ——
6. The land use designations described on Exhibit B shall not preclude
the construction of percolation ponds and the retention of-agricultural uses
on lands which are appropriately zoned for said uses.
Policy Statement for the Old i•lonta Vista General Plan
•
The 1964 General Flan proposed a massive redevelopment program for Monte
Vista vis-a-vis the development of industrial uses. The specific boundary of
the redevelopment area was Stevens Creek Boulevard, Byrne, Avenue, McClellan
Road and Imperial Avenue. In 1968 and 1969 the City of Cupertino in conjunction
with the County Planning Department and the residents of Old Monta Vista
developed a new plan which recognizes the unique character of the area. The
•
1969 plan which was adopted in March of 1969 restricted industrial development
to lands immediately adjacent to Imperial Avenue and drastically curtailed the
extent of commercial land use on Pasadena Avenue from the southerly terminus of
Pasadena to Granada Avenue. The balance of the Old Monta Vista area south of
Stevens Creek was redesignated for low density single-family purposes . The
purpose of the revision was to strengthen the residential character of Old
• Monta Vista and preserve its housing stock.
• The 1974 Valley Floor Infilling Plan Amendment (Exhibit B) reaffirms •
the 1969 plan amendment with - the exception that the northeast quadrant of
the interjection of Orange Avenue and McClellan Road is redesignated from
single-familyresi.dential 4.44 to a residential density range of 4. 4 to 10.
•
-11-
The 1974 Amendment additionally proposes that the quadrant of land north of
Stevens Creek between Route 85 Freeway and Peninsula Drive to the east and west '
i
and University Avenue to the north be redesignated from a duplex density to
Planned Development commercial and a flexible residential density range of
between 4.4 to 7.7 units per gross acre.
The commercially-orientated properties shall be designated Planned Develop-
ment with a commercial intent to give the City additional control over site design
• and activities. Additionally, individual properties can be developed individually
and no access can be gained for commercial uses through Santa Clara Avenue.
' Upon completion of the lower and upper foothill segments of the General
. Plan the City will re-initiL:re plan line hearings for Stevens Creek Boulevard
to consider a slight realignment and the need for additional widening of the
road. If after public hearings it is determined that Stevens Creek Boulevard
should be widened and realigned slightly , the Old Manta Vista area of the 1974
. • Infilling Plan Amendment shall be re-evaluated to assess the possible impact of .
the road alignment and the widening on land uses fronting on Stevens Creek
Boulevard. •
(
•
•
•
•
•
• r)L-
Written Policy, Statements to Elaborate on Land Use Designations for Specific
Study Areas •
• The following policy statements apply to properties and groups of properties
that were studied in detail for the Valley Floor Infilling Segment of the
General Plan review. The study areas are defined on Figure 2 of this document.
Undeveloped Areas .
Area 1: Adjacent to and westerly of Finch Avenue.
The study area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity in range of 4 to 10 units per gross acre.
Area 2: Adjacent to and Easterly and Westerly of. Blaney Avenue, south of
Price Avenue and Rcdrirues Avenue
The subject- area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling
•
unit intensity range of 4.4 to 7.6 units per gross acre.
• Area. 3: Adjacent to and Easterly and Westerly of Tula Lane .
The subject area is designated as a residential area with a dwelling
• unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre.
Area 4: Adjacent to and Westerly of the Terminus of Mary Avenue
:The subject area is designated for a quasi-public use. A public service
oriented use compatible with the adjacent residential are such as a mini-
•
' storehouse facility would be an appropriate use for the property assuming
that it were developed under a Planned Development approach.
Area 5: Adjacent to and Northerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Easterly of.
. the Intersection of Stevens Creekl;nu1.vard and 1'har Lap Drive .
The subject area is designated as a residential use with a dwelling unit
intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross .acre. •
All
.-13- '
• Area 6: Uorthea;t Quadrant o1 the lnter.sectlon ol: tic_1:1e11an Konc1 ano orange
. Avenue
The subject property is designated for residential use with a dwelling
1 1 ..
unit intensity range of 4 .4 to 10 units per gross acre. .
•
Area 9 : Adjacent to and Southerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard bordered by
Scenic Boulevard to the liest and Stevens Creek to the East
The subject area is influenced directly by Stevens Creek and as such', 'the
land use policies for the subject property are contained within the Stevens
Creek Flood Plain Policy• section of this document.
Area 10: Easterly Terminus of Scenic Boulevard Immediately North of the
Horse Ranch :iunicioal Park
. The subject area is influenced directly by Stevens Creek and as such, the
land use policies for the subject property are contained within the Stevens
Creek Flood Plain Policy section of this document. .
Area 20: Southeast Quadrant of the Intersection of Bubb Road and McClellan
Road
411 The subject property is owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
The land use designation is Public Facilities . •
Area 21A: Northwest Quadrant of the Intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard
rd FeoZhill Boulcvard
The subject area is partially designated by a residential land use intensity
xange of 4.4 to 7.7 dwelling units per gross acre with the remaining area
designated Planned Development with professional office/commercial intent and/or
residential use with an intensity range of 4.4 to 7.7 dwelling units per gross
acre. The professional office/commercial land uses shall be low intensity in
nature and access to Silver•Oak Way shall be limited. -
Area 21B: Southeast Quadrant of the Intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard
• and Foothill Youlcvard .
• The subject area is designated as residential land use with a dwelling
IIIunit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre. The existing Mobil Oil
station site is designated as Planned Development with general commercial :intent . •
-14- .
Area 22; The Northeast and Southeast Corners of the Intersection of McClellan
Road and Foothill Boulevard
The subject properties are designated residentially with a dwelling unit
• • intensity range of 4.4 to 7.6 units per gross acre. •
•
Area 28: Southeast Quadrant of the Intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard .
and Lockwood Drive
The study. area is designated as a residential area with a dwelling unit
intensity range of 0 to 4:4 units per gross acre. The eastern half of the
•
study area, which is in church ownership shall have a quasi-public overlay
with the intent being that should the church choose not to develop the
• southern part of its ownership that the property be developed with a' residential
use at 0 to 4.4 units per acre. •
- Area 24: Adjacent to Mary Avenue and Southerly of the City Corporation Yard •
The study area is designated for a residential use with a dwelling unit
intensity of 4.4 to 10 units per gross acre.
Area 25: Adjacent to Stelling Road Immediately Northerly of the Faria
Elementary School
The subject area is designated for a residential use with a dwelling
unit intensity of 4.4 to 10 units per gross acre.
Area 26: Adjacent to Blaney Avenue Immediately Southerly of Route 280 Freeway
The subject area. is designated as a residential use with a dwelling unit • •
intensity range of 4 to 7.6 units per gross acre with aquasi-public overlay
designation that would permit the utilization of the property for a mini-
storage facility.
SEMI-DEVELOPED AREAS
Area B: The Ncrtheast quadrant of the Intersection of Foothill. Boulevard and
Stevens Creek Boulevard Includin<; t-1:': Land Arens Served b" •Crescent Road and
• llillcrest Road
The subject• area is designated as a residential. use with a dwelling unit
• intensity of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre.
•
-15-
, Arch C: An Area Rounded by Alcaldc • Road, Foothill Boulevard and Santa Lucia
The subject area is divided into three land use types. The existing •
commercial land uses directly opposite McClellan Road area designated commercial.
• The lots beginning northerly of the commercial designation and continuing north
to Alcalde Road and thence west to Merriman Road shall be designated as a
•
residential use with a. dwelling unit intensity range of 4.4 to 7.6 units
per gross acre. The balance of the study area shall be designated as a
- ' residential land. use type with a dwelling unit intensity range of 0 to 3.5
. units per gross acre. •
•
. Area D: ' South of McClellan Road and East and West of Rae Lane
. The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling unit
of0 to 4.4 units per' gross acre. •
intensityrange P g
• Area E: Westerly of and Adjacent to Linda Vista Drive, Mid-block between
Hyannisport and Columbus Avenues
Ill'. The subject designated is desi nated as a 'residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre. •
•
. Area F: ' Northerly of and Adjacent to Lindy Lane and Westerly of Terra Bella
Drive
• The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 0 to 2 units per gross acre.
Area G: An Area Bounded bv- Stevens Creek Boulevard, Scenic Boulevarc?, Janice
Avenue, and Palo Vista Road
The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a duelling
•
•
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre.
. Area 11: An Area Bounded by Janice Avenue, Riviera Road /Monta Vista,
McClellan Road and Foothill Boulevard
The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling_
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre. •
• .
• 1'
-1G- •
1
r
. '
OTHER AREAS •
•
St. Joseph Church: Southerly of and Adjacent to the Future ENtension of Forest
Drive Apnreximate:ly 600 feet Easterly from the Intersection of Saratora-Sunnyvale
Road and Forest Avenue Extension
The subject area containing approximately. 5 acres is designated with a
residential dwelling unit intensity range of 4.4 to 10 units per gross acre.
The development standard stipulated in the Core Area general Plan Amendment
'for the "Easterly side of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road between existing Quasi-
• Public church site and Interstate Freeway Route 280" shall apply.
Kester Property: McClellan Road "Hairpin" 0uuosite the Intersection of
McClellan Road and Mira Vista Drive
The subject area is designated Planned Development with General
Commercial intent. The intent of the land use designation is to promote
a specialized corimeruial use that• is compatible with the adjacent residential
•
neighborhood and natural. environment of the Stevens Creek Flood Plain.
411 • .Southwest Quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard
The subject area consists of 4 lots. The two northerlymost lots , which
are currently occupied by a market, are designated Planned Development, with
a General Commercial intent. The two southerlymost parcels are designated
-Residential, with a permitted intensity of 0 to 4.4 dwelling units per gross
• acre. •
'
•
• Kirwin Lane
The subject area consists of two lots currently zoned for multiple family .
use but developed as single-family dwellings. The area is designated Residen-
tial, with a permitted intensity of 0 to .4.4 dwelling units per gross acre.
•
410 •
•
•
..1 -17-
81,003.23
81,010.1
RESOLUTION NO. 1379 80,035.11
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE STEVENS CREEK FLOOD
•
PLAIN LAND USE AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN AS
DESCRIBED ON EXHIBITS D AND D-1 DATED DECEMBER 11,
1974 WITH THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS:
5y
•
1. That Exhibit P-1 clarify the role of the Santa Clara Valley Water
District in the planning effort by explaining that the 100-year flood
plain boundary shall be defined by the City based upon hydrologic data
developed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
2. That the following sentence be added to the last paragraph on page 1
of Exhibit D-1:
1p,
"Said changes will be accomplished upon zoning of the flood
plain by the City of Cupertino."
3. That Section 3.b) be revised to include an additional policy
stipulating that the maximum density range for land lying outside
of the flood plain shall be six (6) dwelling units per acre when
said land Is developed in conjunction with the land that falls
within the flood plain of a property under one ownership.
4. That Section 3.c) be amended to describe the Stevens Creek trail
system and residential access points to said trail system as a
• potential system rather than an existing approved system. The amended
section shall also state that the trail system shall be evaluated
separately at a later date.
5. That the followingspecific
p policy shall be added to ensure that
public, quasi-public, and agricultural uses shall be permitted in
the flood plain.
"The land uses designations described on Exhibit D shall not
preclude public and quasi-public land uses and agricultural
land uses on lands zoned for said uses. The appropriateness
of each use will be determined in conjunction with specific
zoning and/or use permit applications."
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of December, 1974, at an adjourned regular
meeting of the Planning Commission, City of Cupertino, State of California, by
the following roll call vote:
AYES : Commissioners Cooper, Gatto, Woodward
NAYS: Commissioner O'Keefe •
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Adams
ATTEST: APPROVED:
•
James H. Sisk Daniel P. O'Keefe, Chairman
Planning Director Planning Commission•
-1
Community Development Factors
- 1. Fiscal Impact
The term fiscal impact relates to an analysis of governmental costs
and revenues that would result from alternative land uses involving the
developed and semi-developed areas within the Valley Floor Infilling element
of the General Plan. The fiscal impact was evaluated based upon the total
tax effort involving the following jurisdictions:
City of Cupertino
Cupertino Union High School District
Fremont High School District •
Foothill Community College District
Central Fire District
Cupertino Sanitary District
There are other taxation districts within the City of Cupertino's
sphere of influence; however, the tax effort from the other jurisdictions is
•
insignificant. The Commission found_ that development resulting from the
implementation of the infilling plan would result in the construction of
approximately 950 to 1210 additional dwelling units, raising the existing
dwelling unit base in the infilling area from 10,780 units to between 11,730
and 11,990 units. The present population is approximately 34,500 persons (bas.ed
on 1970 household size) . The infilling will add between 3,000 to 4,000 persons .
. The Commission found that the development of the undeveloped and semi-developed
properties within the residential infilling would not have a significant impact
on government costs and revenues on the abovementioned jurisdictions .
2. Traffic Impact •
• The Commission, finds that based upon traffic generation data supplied
• by the consulting firm of Jill( Associates that the additional construction of
between 950 -.and 1.21.0 units will not adversely affect the major traffic
-4-.
arterials such as Stevens Creek Boulevard, Foothill Boulevard/Stevens Canyon
Road and Bollinger Road and collector streets serving specific residential
neighborhoods.
• 3. Housing Choice
In 1972 the City of Cupertino adopted a Housing Element which included a
basic objective of providing housing choice for all economic, racial and ethnic
segments of the community. Beginning in 1972 several Federal housing programs
have come under review by the present administration. A moratorium, in effect,
has been established on existing ongoing programs. The moratorium in combina-
tion with inflationary pressures has raised the cost of housing to the point
-- . where the City of Cupertino is in a relatively worse position to,provide housing
•
for the full range of economic and ethnic groups within the community. The
Housing Element contains a goal by which the City of Cupertino would strive
to ensure that relatively large developments provide a -housing mix as part_ of
the overall development approval. In effect, then, the private developer
• would to a certain, degree subsidize a limited percentage of buyers within the
development.
. . The Commission finds that there are no properties within the residential
infilling segment of the General Plan which are large enough to support a pri-
vate subsidy program; however, the Commission finds that in certain areas a
housing range can be established which will allow greater density than that
within the surrounding neighborhood if the developer can show that he can
implement a community-wide social goal.
•
4. Neighborhood and Community Park Needs •
The 1972 Open Space and Conservation Element contains a policy setting
forth a park land to population ratio of 5-1/2 acres of neighborhood and community
park land per 1,O00 persons. On March 4, 1974, the. Cupertino City Council
• adopted a Park Dedication Ordinance which requires a residential subdivider
to dedicate 3 acres per thousand population generated by a subdivision or.
•
-5-
pay a fee in lieu thereof. .The enactment of this ordinance will insure
• that future residential development in the Valley Floor Infilling area of
the General Plan will provide its own neighborhood park acquisition needs. •
Community park needs for new .residential development will be provided by
the community as a whole.
The City is currently studying the feasibility of joint school-
ground/park usage with appropriate school district officials. Based upon
a tentative analysis, if a joint school/park use plan can be negotiated,
the City will satisfy its total park needs for the community.
.Because of the existing development pattern, the eastern section
of the City may be somewhat deficient in terms of the neighborhood park
standard. A detailed quantitative and qualitative analysis will be avail
able later this year and will be discussed in later hearings involving the
general plan amendment.
•
5. Commercial Land Use Need
The Planning,Commission studied the commercial needs for the
residential infilling portion of the community and determined that exist-
ing neighborhood convenience centers within the City will adequately satisfy
the daily needs of the residents of the community. The Commission finds
that no new neighborhood centers may be constructed west of the Route 85
Freeway right of way and further that the existing commercial center within
Old Monta Vista be strengthened to provide a neighborhood and community
range of services for residents within the western portion of the community.
•
• -6-
Environmental. Resource and Constraint. Factors •
1. Natural Resource Protection
• The Planning Commission has evaluated each of the specific study
areas within the undeveloped and semi-developed areas of the infilling
portion of the General Plan in terms of the potential for agricultural use •
and the potential for ground water recharge. The Commission finds that
although the majority of the study areas are characterized by having Class
One or Two soils, the small size of the individual pro_erties or group of
properties restrict the economic viability of agricultural use in the long
run. The Commission, however, encourages the use of existing agricultural
land uses.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District conducted a general review
of the potential of certain properties to serve as percolation ponds to
recharge ground water. •
• A large area in the western section of Cupertino, more precisely
the De Anza College, West Valley Industrial Park and Montebello residential
area, is ideally suited for ground water recharge use because of geologic
conditions and the proximity of the West Valley Western Pipeline which pare-
,
llels the Southern Pacific Railroad spur. Figure 7 describes the location
of specific sites that have been evaluated by the District. The District •
has acquired the Billawala property designated on Figure 7.
The Santa Clara Valley will face a serious shortage of water by
1978 assuming that the current growth trend will continue. Unless new
sources of water can be developed either through waste water reclamation
or via the San Felipe Project, the ground water basin will be used to a
greater degree which will result in continued ground subsidence.
• Although additional percolation basins are needed to supply
water to the ground water basin, the Flood Control District has no
-7-
• . •• ` i + vs, .'i •! `• I : : , ,,`..•, r • MIr� . , .`.. . ,
••
r .r- 'h bw• •• •• _:.._ .4 • I . ! I c..4 .. • c.Ut'1TY-' _ •.
'•• .•• • % i '4•:"u.3:I:44i.r �••r a. .-t_sue__'...'._yam.,ar.•.�•7^-.-...�.• .�. "•••..:t. •--••
• ;,� ., .% _ ._-;-: ..,•
..• 7- — • ' Sr •I-. ,i:It :.'� -
:• w : • \,1 } ,., l•......fir. ,• f •• _
✓ , tt•.;-,• ..: 'I , I - t . �} •.• .t s.t.:.r..•'r, •t- 1
• Z'•. _ : _\ ;•-y•. .: �- L •I !'.•'.•r � i _ 1� A-� ..� ��` ;��
• . .•
•-\ ��_.: .�_.=-) is! • t 1 •,• • •
• `•y• , -• • �• 7 •• _ _ i s ip kit 2,
of ` /• . .. : I, r,, two, •..�
a: ;/ • MARY• LV E. - I; F-I - L. — d 1 _ ``� ` R
_� :.,a •�� I T E •> --`t0-4L_=•=.-_—a .. ---'�-I> .° •'• i�
•
* ): i s ,\ (1� I t0 t�:, -� •-; 1 . 4. etJ'w•1.4. •. .
• ` -'111��� , ••••` .�V .4 �32 C •11 •Y _ t •. a.• 1 •° .i • 7.�is..�i: .
C
•�•' •
.'•ut t" ...ec,.i' _ •• i•1.;• / I1:J1' 2 a pp J., a .114 . •• i . ( S• =.. .. .•
•
.`•..I • y�••.•• • �.�.r�•.'-'�,'.•i.._ y/.F..+•R t ' .T_•!/!r•1.7 -4. -.mil l ?, -.Or OM ,.J'tY ..+4 TAR •'4•.
•
•
ir.
•r -tC:—` •—t om_:l Y •:i I ,•1.1:i\'l..\ �l!:.r•:a •Q S. .. �••-• i
i • w. -. • lloilta N lsta' h :. `� • .. •• —• t'n1.l.Fa:F: �,�N .
:s. r i E_ I. t7 =
'• - _. ..****"‘• : H.C.M. HENRY — :J �' 1• -- -I• tIt r am -= t -4 a I. -
t�' - SITE i +,, �� OE ANLA Q,% •1 N
�i>• . r ' L ..a Ijl • COLLEGE is a. 'O
t. • M •. al I. 414.4' , '•i3.1 `C Cl_ELIA�_ .. • Ai,;aC r,. .b:�
- :,... -a, .•--::• �_ . •, t •i-••_.�, •-..••'• i '1("• ..4' • "use=t-c'f-C- s- ?d'. . .... •
�t
1 •Y• • eta• •I••
1} -� * •1
. -:. �1 so L.— St-h' • •4•.~:1 ; -.• —.
•
•
�,: t \t•'':..;• '• t �.. �; S 't t \ • s' N. 811.LA1ur:►LA ..._ 'o;,l`. :
111,5100"i` Ns.... .•,.:.• •A 4 •• f -1 t 0• , c I'v
• -!'', ' = --. • . - t • 1 • i . ' _ e .. ►,s.,:.._
•
•
25
�a !• • • •A �--fir vI tom•!. ' is L 3',•' --{•r'-•!^_... f St •y • r''r "'l. ,ly
• 'J 1. ` wi ,1 t, %\ / - •
• . �00 ✓ i• { . \ I " t'Rren\rt. V• :'`_ :. • •
•
'...�_17.. --••_L —.; ... � , _ •• ;.r,}, Bt:l3A Rr' \q •—•: •-- - - _. - PP. _sue.• �r
. tDbs, - • I, •_•.._.._:.. .. — i��.. t•
•
i � �'. !i' '�',r r • ,-1 v• �`` t•..`!:efst\, 1\-1. '.�. 1 7 tir'i- _} • •' ... -
M� • -,:1 f L _Z. ... K-. • . • • Z•\1• •
r---.usTa1- •� ••ems•
•
W �,�) ! •. 1. '%=a•• t arcs-; 1 S S .:r. �+e►wr.:wa_N
- .•.:N. e`. • -.-C:r ( till • ._• - ='.`•. .-•" w:.0" •'A .'. .::'1`' ' ' —\`'" ...4,-.,• ZL: ...r
•
scale — i": 2000' - . - A -
C.I.• = aor
P0SSIb;LE rE ;;C.20L ;;i0iti
• ,
• FACILITY SITES
• SOURCE: Draft Environmental L act Report
P Rcport
proposed 1:cC1c1,1an Road Percolation •
Pond. - FIGURE 7
Santa Clara Valley Linter District •
• —8— _
• specific plans to acquire additional properties in the Cupertino area at
this time.
•
2. Protection from Flood Risk
In a series of three meetings, the Planning Commission reviewed a
Flood Plain Management Program in conjunction with representatives from the
Santa Clara Valley Water District. More specifically, the Planning Commission
evaluated the reach of Stevens Creek between the Stevens Creek Reservoir and
Stevens Creek Boulevard. The Commission found that a land use regulation in
the form of an ordinance should be prepared to restrict urban development
within the natural flood plain for the abovementioned reach of Stevens Creek.
•
The natural flood plain concept which is based upon the 100-year flood
frequency event has the primary benefit of protecting existing and future
residents from flood risk and the elimination of the potential for excessive
governmental expenditures to protect citizens and property from flood risk
• and to retain the ground water percolation capacity of the Creek. A secondary
benefit of the natural flood plain concept will be to retain the natural
character of the Old Monte Vista segment of the City of Cupertino. In this
„
environs serves as an urban shaper" which helps
case, the Stevens Creek nvir ns r s p
P
define and restrict intensive urban development and enhance community identity.
Methodology for Evaluating Individual Properties and the Aggregate Total of
the Properties within the Infilling Segment
The Planning Commission evaluated the individual developed and semi-developed
described properties on Figure 2 based upon the community development and
• environmental resource factors defined above. The analysis was made initially
on an area by area basis with the primary intent to evaluate the properties
based upon its local neighborhood impact. Upon completion of an individual
• evaluation the Commission evaluated the impact of the aggregate individual
-9-
decisions made by the Commission and determined that the aggregate impact of
development on individual properties would not have an adverse impact on the
community, in terms of its ability to serve existing and future residents and
• in terms of its environment.
GENERAL POLICIES FOR THE VALLEY FLOOR INFILLING. SEGN%NT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
• The general policies listed below pertain to the Valley Floor Infilling
segment of the General Plan. The geographical boundary of the Valley Floor
Infilling segment is described on Figure 1 of the document labeled "Geographic
Subareas". General findings for the Core Area are contained in City Council
Resolution No. 3592 enacted in conjunction with the • adoption of the Core Area Plan.
1. Dwelling unit density ranges are set forth for land areas designated for
• residential use. The greatest density within a given range shall not be approved
as a matter of right.
Specific densities for specific properties shall be established during
the zoning map preparation stage of the general plan process. The Planning
• Commission and City Council shall evaluate individual zoning requests based upon
community development criteria such as "neighborhood character", public services
and local traffic and environmental resource and constraint criteria such as
geologic stability and protection from flood risk.
2. Residential development in the Valley Floor Infilling area of the
General Plan may include densities which exceed present City maximums if such
development meets a special community-wide social goal and the increase in density .
will not adversely affect the traffic-carrying capacity of local streets or the
capacity of other public services nor adversely alter the neighborhood character.
• 3. Undeveloped lots within recorded residential, subdivisions shall reflect
• the dwelling unit type and intensity of developed properties within the subdivision.
Properties designated for high intensity residential uses can be zoned to a less
• intense residential use if the change will not alter the residential character
of the immediate neighborhood.
•
-10-
•
•
•
•
4. Residential units constructed adjacent to major arterials shall be
• isolated from "unacceptable" noise levels by appropriate means as may be
determined by an acoustical engineer.
5. Public and quasi-public land uses can be initiated without amending
the General Plan. The introduction of said uses shall require appropriate
zoning changes .
6. The land use designations described on Exhibit B shall not preclude
the construction of percolation ponds and the retention of--agricultural uses
on lands which are appropriately zoned for said uses.
Policy Statement for the Old Monta Vista General Plan
The 1964 General Plan proposed a massive redevelopment program for Monta
Vista vis-a-vis the development of industrial uses . The specific boundary of
the redevelopment area was Stevens Creek Boulevard, Byrne Avenue, McClellan
• Road and Imperial Avenue. In 1968 and 1969 the City of Cupertino in conjunction
with the County Planning Department and the residents of Old Monta Vista
developed a new plan which recognizes the unique character of the area. The
1969 plan which was adopted in March of 1969 restricted industrial development
to lands immediately adjacent to Imperial Avenue and drastically curtailed the
extent of commercial land use on Pasadena Avenue from the southerly terminus of
Pasadena to Granada Avenue. The balance of the Old Monta Vista area south of
Stevens Creek was redesignated for low density single-family purposes . The
purpose of the revision was to strengthen the residential .character of Old
• Monta Vista and preserve its housing stock.
The 1974 Valley Floor Infilling Plan Amendment (Exhibit B) reaffirms •
the 1969 plan amendment with the exception that the northeast quadrant of
• the intersection of Orange Avenue and McClellan Road is redesignated from
single-family residential 4.4 to a residential density range of 4. 4 to 10 .
-11-
The 1974 Amendment additionally proposes that the quadrant of land north of
Stevens Creek between Route 85Freeway and Peninsula Drive to the east and west
•. and University Avenue to the north be redesignated from a duplex density to
Planned Development commercial and a flexible residential density range of
between 4.4 to 7.7 units per gross acre.
The commercially-orientated properties shall be designated Planned Develop-
ment with a commercial intent to give the City additional control over site design
and activities . Additionally , individual properties can be developed individually
and no access can be gained for commercial uses through Santa Clara Avenue.
Upon completion of the lower and upper foothill segments of the General
Plan the City will re-initite plan line hearings for Stevens Creek Boulevard
to consider a slight realignment and the need for additional widening of the
• road. If after public hearings it is determined that Stevens Creek Boulevard
should be widened and realigned slightly , the Old Monta Vista area of the 1974
• Infilling Plan Amendment shall be re-evaluated to assess the possible impact of
the road alignment and the widening on land uses fronting on Stevens Creek
Boulevard.
•
•
•
•
-32-
Written Policy Statements to Elaborate on Land Use Designations for Specific
Study Areas
• The following policy statements apply to properties and groups of properties
that were studied in detail for the Valley Floor Infilling Segment of the
General Plan review. The study areas are defined on Figure 2 of this document.
Undeveloped Areas
Area 1: Adjacent to and westerly of Finch Avenue.
The study area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity in range of 4 to 10 units per gross acre.
Area 2: Adjacent to and Easterly and Westerly of Blaney Avenue, south of
Price Avenue and Rodrigues Avenue
The subject area is designated as a reisdential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 4.4 to 7.6 units per gross acre.
• Area. 3: Adjacent to and Easterly and Westerly of Tula Lane
The subject area is designated as a residential area with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre.
•
Area 4 : Adjacent to and Westerly of the Terminus of Mary Avenue
The subject area is designated for a quasi-public use. A public service
oriented use compatible with the adjacent residential are such as a mini-
storehouse facility would be an appropriate use for the property assuming
that it were developed under a Planned Development approach.
Area 5: Adjacent to and Northerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Easterly of
•
the Intersection of Stevens Creek ;Inulev:lyd and Phar Lap Drive
The subject area is designated as a residential use with a dwelling unit
intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross..acre. •
41!
.-13-
t1Lt1 U . IVVJ LI1t.L1:iL l.<L<1ULcLl1L VI LIIL: LILLI.L' LI.AVl1 V1_ 1'1L..l,lel/alL L\LI.:IU LLItU VLULL?41..
Avenue
The subject property is designated for residential use with a dwelling
•
. unit intensity range of 4 .4 t9 10 units per gross acre.
Area 9 : Adjacent to and Southerly.
of Stevens Creek Boulevard bordered by
Scenic Boulevard to the West and Stevens Creek to the East
The subject area is influenced directly by Stevens Creek and as such', the
land use policies for the subject property are contained within the Stevens
Creek Flood Plain Policy section of this document.
Area 10 : Easterly Terminus of. Scenic Boulevard Immediately North of the
Horse Ranch :1unicioal Park
. The subject area is influenced directly by Stevens Creek and as such, the
land use policies for the subject property are contained within the Stevens
Creek Flood Plain Policy section of this document.
- • -Area 20: Southeast Quadrant of the Intersection of Bubb Road and McClellan •
Road
• The subject property is owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District .
The land use designation is Public Facilities .
•
• Area 21A: Northwest Quadrant of the Intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard
and Foothill Boulevard
The subject area is partially designated by a residential land use intensity
range of 4.4 to 7.7 dwelling units per gross acre with the remaining area
designated Planned Development with professional office/commercial intent and/or
residential use with an intensity range of 4.4 to 7. 7 dwelling units per gross
acre. The professional office/commercial land uses shall be low intensity in
nature and access to Silver•Oak Way shall be limited.
Area 21B: Southeast Quadrant ,of the Intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard
• and Foothill Boulevard
The subject area is designated as residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre. The existing Mobil Oil
station site is designated as Planned Development with general commercial intent .
_i4_ •
Area 22; The Northeast and Southeast Corners of the Intersection of McClellan
Road and Foothill Boulevard -
The subject properties are designated residentially with a dwelling unit
• intensity range of 4.4 to 7.6 units per gross acre.
Area 23: Southeast Quadrant of the Intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard
and Lockwood Drive
The study area is designated as a residential area with a dwelling unit
intensity range of 0 to 4:4 units per gross acre. The eastern half of the
study area, which is in church ownership shall have a quasi-public overlay
with the intent being that should the church choose not to develop the
southern part of its ownership that the property be developed with a residential
use at 0 to 4.4 units per acre.
- Area 24: Adjacent to Mary Avenue and Southerly of the City Corporation Yard
The study area is designated for a residential use with a dwelling unit
intensity of 4.4 to 10 units per gross acre.
•
Area 25: Adiacent to Stelling Road Irm:ediately Northerly of the Faria
Elementary School
The subject area is designated for a residential use with a dwelling
unit intensity of 4.4 to 10 units per gross acre.
Area 26: Adiacent to Blaney Avenue Immediately Southerly of Route 280 Freeway.
•
The subject area is designated as a residential use with a dwelling unit
•
intensity range of 4 to 7.6 units per gross acre with a quasi-public overlay
designation that would permit the utilization of the property for a mini-
storage facility.
SEMI-DEVELOPED AREAS
Area B: The Northeast Quadrant of the Intersection of Foothill Boulevard and
• Stevens Creek '.-eulevard Including t;,.<: Land Areas Served by -Crescent Road and
Hill.crest Road
The subject- area is designated as a residential use with a dwelling unit
intensity of 0 to 4.4 units per groc acre.
-15-
Area C: An Area Bounded by Alcalde Road, Foothill Boulevard and Santa Lucia
The subject area is divided into three land use types. The existing •
• commercial land uses directly opposite McClellan Road area designated commercial.
The lots beginning northerly of the commercial designation and continuing north
to Alcalde Road and thence west to Merriman Road shall be designated as a
•
residential use with a• dwelling unit intensity range of 4.4 to 7.6 units
per gross acre. The balance of the study area shall be designated as a
residential land use type with a dwelling unit intensity range of 0 to 3.5
units per gross acre. •
Area D: ' South of McClellan Road and East and West of Rae Lane
The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling unit
intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre. •
Area E: Westerly of and Adjacent to Linda \iista Drive, Mid-block between
Hyannisport and Columbus Avenues
• The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre.
Area F: Northerly of and Adjacent to Lindy Lane and Westerly of Terra Bella
• Drive
• The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 0 to 2 units per gross acre.
Area G: An Area Bounded by. Stevens Creek Boulevard, Scenic Boulevard, Ja. i,ce
Avenue, and Palo Vista Road
•
•
• The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre.
Area U: An Area Bounded by Janice Avenue, Riviera Road /Monte Vista,
McClellan Road and Foothill Boulevard
The subject area is designated as a residential land use with a dwelling,
unit intensity range of 0 to 4.4 units per gross acre. •
•
fill
•
-16-
•
OTHER AREAS
St. Joseph Church: Southerly of and Adjacent to the Future Extension of Forest
11110 Drive Approximately 600 feet Easterly from the Intersection of Saratoga-Sunnyvale
Road and Forest Avenue Extension
The subject area containing approximately 5 acres is designated with a
residential dwelling unit intensity range of 4.4 to 10 units per gross acre.
The development standard stipulated in the Core Area General Plan Amendment
•
. . `for the "Easterly side of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road between existing Quasi-
• Public church site and Ihhterstate Freeway Route 280" shall apply. •
Kester Property: McClellan Road "Hairpin" Opposite the Intersection of
McClellan Road and Mira Vista Drive
The subject area is designated Planned Development with General
•
Commercial intent. The intent of the land use designation is to promote
a specialized commercial use that is compatible with the adjacent residential
neighborhood and natural environment of the Stevens Creek Flood Plain.
' Southwest Quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard
The subject area consists of 4 lots. The two northerlymost lots , which
are currently occupied by a market, are designated Planned Development, with
a General Commercial intent. The two southerlymost parcels are designated
Residential, with a permitted intensity of 0 to 4.4 dwelling units per gross
• acre.
• Kirwin Lane
The subject area consists of two lots currently zoned for multiple family
use but developed as single-family dwellings. The area is designated Residen-
. tial, with a permitted intensity of 0 to 4.4 dwelling units per gross acre.
•
•
!II!il
-17-