Loading...
PC 05-22-67 � 10300 Torre Ave., Cupertino, Calif., 95D1� Phone 25�-�505 ---------------------------------------------------------------- PC-11 80,000.� C I T Y 0 F C U P E R T I N 0 California MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 1g67 8 :00 PM Held in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California I SALUTE TO THE FLAG II RO�L CALL Comm, present: Bryson, Frolich, Hirshon, Horgan, Buthenuth Comm, absent: None Staff present: City Attorney, Sam Anderson Director of Flanning, Adde Laurin City Engineer, Bob Shook Assistant Planner, Jim Nuzum . Recording Secretary, Lois Inwards III MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING, May 8, 1967 Moved by Comm. Hor�an, seconded by Comm. Bryson, to approve the Minutes of May 8, 1967 as recorded. Motion carried, 5-0 IV ANNOUNCEMENT OF POSTPONEMENTS, etc. A. Upon the �oint request of the applicant and the Planning Director, it was moved by Comm. Hirshon, seconded by Comm. Frolich, to continue applications 10-U-67 and �+-TM-67 until the next regular meeting. Motion carried, 5-0 B. Upon request of the applicant, it was moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to con- tinue application 11-u-67 to the next regular meeting. Motion carried, 5-0 V WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS There were none. � -1- PC-11 Minutes of the 5/22/67 Planning Commission Meeting ----------------------------------------------------------------- VI VER�AL COMMUrTICATIONS A. The Planning Director stated the County Planning Commission has requested a joint meeting with the Cupertino Planning Commission for eitk�er June 27, 28 or 29, with regard to the stud3r they have made of the old Monta Vista area. They would also like to take up again the matter of the Foothill Blvd, area. Comm. Fxolich suggested that, since the last meetirg was held in the County Offiees, perhaps they would like to come to our new Ci�y Hall for this meeting, The Planning Director was asked to invite the County Planning Commission to the Cupertino City Hall at 8:00 P.M. on Tuesday, June 27th, for a�oint meeting. VII HEARINGS SCHEDULID: 5-Z-67 A. FRIaNKLIN-WINDSOR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY: REZONING from Resident�al Single-fam3ly (R1-7.5) to Administrative and Professional Offices (OA), Lot 1, Tract 2551, located at NW corner of Clifden and Bollinger. First Hearing. Mr. Don Bahl, of FranklinTBah1 Development Company, re- iterated esse�tia.11y the same reasons as stated a year � aga for this rezoning application. He stated that the character of Bollin�er Road has changed in recent years, and this lot no longer is suitable for a residence of any size or price. He cited the Shell Service Station on the corner of Highway 85 and Bollinger, the duplex ad�jacent to this lot, the commercial nursery and 2-story apartments across the street. Going east on Bollinger, there are some homes, a church, and a shopping center. Mr. $ahl said the use they are asking for would not be detrimental to the single-family homes in the area. They feel the OA Ordinance was created to take care of ,just such a transitional situation as this; it is de- s�gned to divide R1 from CG. Anothex point he brought up is that there are not too many locations anymore where a small businessman can buy and build his own bui�.ding on his own property. Mr. Bahl said that two years ago, a study was done of Bollinger Road and it was found that 9250 cars used Bollinger Road each day. Cupertino's papulation is 12,0�43 (in 1966) In the Real Estate Section of last Sunday's newspaper, it was indicated there are 3.9 persons per household in the Cupertino-Monta Vista P1,anning Area. He did not feel it would be good plan- niMg to build a single-family home on such a busy s�reet, w3.th the possibility of small children in the household. He said they feel the best zoning for �his lo� is �ldministrative and Professional Offices. -2- PC-11 Minutes ofl the 5/22/67 Plannin� Cc�mmission Meeting Comm. Hirshon asked if there has been a material change in the application. Mr. Bahl said there has no�. The City Attorney advised that Cupertino has no Ordinance requiring a material change beflore an application can be reviewed within one year. The question is what is the best use for this lot. Mr. Bah� said the Planning Commission ruled in favor of this application a year ago, but the City Council denied it. The Planning Director summarized the proceedings of a year ago on this application. Mr. Jack Bumgardner, 20352 Gillick Way, Cupertino, said that this application has come up three times now, and the residents have come forward three times to protest it. He presented a petition with sixty names of residents living on �illick Way, Clifden Way, Michael Court, and Martinw6od Way. He asked that the Commission consider this application carefully because if it is rezoned it w�ll probably trigger more rezoning applications along Bollinger Road. The only residents in favor of this application are next door to it and across the street from it. Mr. Bill Timbers, 203�3 Gillick Way, Cupertino, said the residents in the area are asking that a home be built on this lot, as was indicated on the map when they purchased their homes. This rezoning would com- promise the area. As to the possibility of a dangerous situation for any children who might liye in this home, he asked: "What about the children who already live on the block?`� The residents do not want an invasion of a commercial enterprise in the�.r� r,eighborhood. Moved by Comm. Bryson, second.ed by Comm. Hirshon, to close the Public Hearings. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Horgan, that application 5-Z-67 be denied. AYES: Comm. Bryson, Frolich, Horgan NAYS: Comm. Hirshon, Buthenuth Motion carried, 3-2 The applicant was advised of his right to appeal. 2-TM-67 B. SAICH BROS.: TENTATIVE MA P for proposed Light Industrial Park. 35 acres located N. of Univer- sity Way and E. of Southern Pacific Railroad. First Hearing continued. -3- PC-11 Minutes of the 5/22/67 Planning Commission Meeting ----------------------------------------------------------------- Civil Engineer George Somps said that at the last meet- ing, it was discussed at great length the possibility of extending the cul de sac to the end of the property. They also discussed University Avenue. He said he pre- ferred the ori$inal Tentative Map, but would go along with the proposal of extending the cul de sac. There will be a f ire lane around the perimeter of the property. Mr. Somps said they do not intend to use University Avenue but will dedicate 15' and buffer their property adjacent to it. They propose a 55' right-of-way on Peninsula Avenue, with the center moving lane having traffic going into the industrial park in the mornings and coming out of it in the evenings. They estimate about 1000 em ployees, with 800 vehicles. A three-phase signal system could handle 1700 cars per hour. Mr. Somps said the capacity problem will not exist on Peninsula Avenue, but rather at the signal on Stevens Creek Blvd. In regard to the extension of Peninsula Avenue to the north, the Planning Director said that the Tentative Map would have to be revised if and when the State property is annexed and �oined to the pro�ect. This is true whether his proposed revision or the applicant's original version is approved, but the original version will cause complications if the State property forms one or more separate lots. Comm. Frolich asked what their position is as to the moving of the homes on Peninsula Avenue onto University Avenue. The City Attorney said an exchange of property could only be accomplished on a voluntary basis since you can't make an owner take another lot instead of cash, in a case of eminent domain. The Planning Director confirmed that a voluntary exchange was proposed, but if this did not work and condemnation would be necessary, the County or the City could at least recoup some expense by going through with the exchange. The conditions proposed by the Planning Director in his memo of May 18 1967 were reviewed, one by one. It was decided that the Standard Conditions 1-12 would not have , to be included, as they already were covered by the Rezoning Ordinance. Condition.l8 was rejected; as a consequence, the alternative wording of Conditions 19, 20 and 21 submitted by the Planning Director was chosen. The wording of certain other conditions was adjusted. Resulting conditions are stated in Planning Commission Resolution �25, enclosed as Exhibit A. � -�- PC-�1 Minutes of the 5/22/67 Planning Commission Meeting ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Krausz announced that, due to rezoning delays, the Memorex Corporation, which was going to occupy the upper 18 acres and employ 120 people, has decided to lease a building in Sunnyvale for 18 months. He asked if the Planning Commission would prefer at this point to have only that portion of the �en�ative Map contain- ing Parcels 2 and 3 under consideration at this time. He said that if the property exchange on Peninsula Avenue and University Avenue must be one of the condi- tions he would prefer the Tentative Map was denied. He added that Southern Pacific has now cleared the way for the easement. Chairman Buthenuth asked about the traffic pattern. The Planning Director said the 55' width is not adequate for access to a�3-acre industrial development, parti- cularly as the road also has direct access to residential � lots. Mr. Somps said the original proposal for the three lanes with a reversible center lane is his pre- ference. If this did not work, the curb parking could be eliminated. He said the County did not ob�ect to this. As to the last condition proposed by the Planning Director in his memo, dated May 18, 1967, the City Engineer said Vallco Park has contributed to the sig- nalization; this is normal procedure. Mr. Krausz would - prefer to leave out the "1��+" requirement because he would like to negotiate on this. Comm. Frolich noted the Tentative Map, as submitted, should be altered to agree with the Conditions. • Moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to close the Public Hearings. ' Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Horgan, tha.t application 2-TM-67 be recommended for approval, sub- ,ject to the 9 conditions outlined above. AYES: Comm. Bryson, Frolich, Hirshon, Horgan, Buthenuth NAYS : None � Motion carried, 5-0 Chairman Buthenuth called for a recess at 9:50 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 10:00 P.M. _5_ PC-11 Minutes of the 5�22�67 Planning Commission Meeting 10-U-67 C. STONESON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: USE PERMIT and �- TM-67 TENTATIVE MA P to permit development of a Multiple Unit Comp3ex on 1�.5 acres located north side of Stevens Creek Blvd., east of Mary Avenue, west of City of Cupertino park site. Seco nd Hearing. Continued to next regular meeting. 11-U-67 D. STEVENS CREEK GARDEN CENTER, INC.: USE PERMIT to mix and sell concrete in small amounts. 19300 Stevens Creek Blvd. First Hearing. Postponed_to next regular meeting. 9=Z-67 E. NELLIE MILJARAK, et al: REZONING from Agricultural- Residential Single-family 1-acre lots (A1-�3) to Residential Single-family 2-acre lots (R1-22), approximately 1 acre located west side of Mount Crest Drive, south of Linda Vista Drive. First Hearing. Nellie Mil�arak, 255 San Tomas Road, Campbell, the owner of the property, said this property is ad�acent to Ward Crump's subdivision. Comm, Frolich asked about access. Mrs. Mil�arak said it would be from Mount Crest Road. The City Attorney asked, since no street improvements are required, whether a Record of Survey would suffice. The City Engineer said this was true, but a Tentative Map would be required " when this is recorded. The applicant has asked for a mutual easement to allow a common roadway for the two lots. The Planning Director had no ob,jections, He suggested a policy be established for 1�2-acre lots as�a transition between one-acre lots and 7500 sq. ft. lots. The City Attorney did not believe approval of this applicat.ion could be called "spot zoning" since the entire neighborhood would have single-family dwellings. The City Engineer said that immediately to the northeast, at the Baywood Terrace Subdivision, there is a cut bank of 50'. It is conceivable, due to this conditi on, that there may be problems involved. Mr. Neil Chase, representative for the applicant, said the property is 1-1�8 acre on the side of a hill. It has been engineered by MacKay and Somps and a Tentative Map will be presented, showing the grades and cuts for those two 1/2-acre lots. -6- PC-11 Minutes of the 5/22/67 Planning Commission Meeting ----------------------------------------------------------------- Moved by Comm. Hirshon, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to - close the Public Hearings. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Hirshon, seconded by Comm. Horgan, that application 9-Z-67 be approved with the necessary standard conditions. AYES: Comm. Frolich, Hirshon, Horgan, Buthenuth NAYS: None ABSTAINED: Comm. Bryson Motion carried, �-0 81,00� F. ORDINANCE 220(i) regulating Light Industrial (ML) Zones. First Hearing. Both Comm. Brysori and Comm. Horgan had to leave the meeting�at this point. Moved by Comm. Horgan, seconded by Comm. Frolich, to continue Ordinance 220(i) to the next regular meeting. Motion carried, 5-0 VIIT UNFINISHED BUSINESS , 81,00�.12 A. Upon request of the Planning Commission, the staff commented on the status of the Sign Ordinance. The Planning Director stated the Council held the First Reading of Ordinance 353 with the stipulation that two areas of concern are to be resolved at the Second Reading or as an Amendment: Signs along the freeways (Sec. 6.031); and Ground Signs (Sec. 6.0�41). The main bone of contention on Sec. 6.0�1 is the 210 lineal feet minimum to qualify for a ground sign. Chairman Buthenuth said the State has a requirement that cities adopt an Ordinance controlling signs along freeways. Mr. Walter Ward said Cupertino has adopted this anti-billboard Ordinance, and that it is included in the proposed Ordinance 353. He added that the fence line is already back quite a way from the moving lanes. Vallco believes signs such as Johnson & Johnson in Menlo Park are in good taste. The Planning Director noted that all signs require Architectural and Site Control. -7 - PC-11 Minutes of the 5�22�67 Planning Commission Meeting Moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Hirshon, that the section of the Sign Ordinance relating to freeways - remain as is. Motion carried, 3-0 It was noted the City Council is still considering Section 6.0�1. Comm. Frolich was then in favor of Palo Alto's version for controlling ground signs. Chairman Buthenuth said that perhaps a setback as well as lineal frontage should be considered: 210' lineal frontage except in cases where the building is set back 50' minimum, in which case each lot still v� uld be entitled to one ground sign, independent of frontage. Moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Hirshon, that Section 6.0�1 of the Sign Ordinance have the addition of: "except where the setback is 50' or greater; in which case one ground sign will be allowed." Motion carried, 3-0. Mr. Walter Ward, speaking for the Chamber,of Commerce, asked for a reduction of the 210' and the following added to Section 6.0�7: "Any sign that had been erected under the old Ordinance and under Permit should be allowed to remain." The Planning Director felt that the transition clause is generous: two years after enactment of the Ordinance or five years after erection of the sign, whichever time is longer A very few exceptions could be taken care of under the Exception claus�. TX NEW BUSINESS A. COMMISSIONER FROLICH: Report on April 27 meeting of the Planning Policy Committee of Santa Clara County. Comm. Frolich said he was unable to attend the meeting because he did not receive the notice of it in time. He asked that the staff open any mail directed to him at City Hall and telephone him about imminent matters. The Planning Director offered to check with the County on Comm. Frolich's change of address. B. MEMOS FROM THE STAFF Comm. Hirshon suggested copies of these memos be made available to the applicant prior to the meeting. The Planning Director said this has not been the policy, but that he usually has sent staff inemos to the applicant in controversial cases. Mailing, etc., takes very much staff time, and the situation is rather critical, but he would try to accommodate all applicants. -8- PC-11 Minutes of the 5/22/67 Planning Commission Meeting ----------------------------------------------------------------- X ADJOURNMENT � Moved by Comm. Hirshon, seconded by Comm. Frolich, to adjourn the meeting at 10:�+5 P.M, Motion carried, 3-0 A PPROVED: � � /sL John Buthenuth Chairman ATTEST: a�� �, Adde Laurin, Planning Director i f -9-