Loading...
PC 11-28-66 10300 Torre Aver_ue 80,000.� Cupertino, California Phone: 252 -�505 ---------------------------------------------------------------- PC-R22 C I T Y O F C U P E R T I N O California MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION N�vember 28, 1g66 7:30 P.M. Held in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California I SA�:�UTE TO THE FLAG II PAGE PRaPERTIES, INC.: Demonstration of slides, etc., from existing and planned Cluster Developments. 9-Z-66 Messrs. Reese and Mittelman showed colored slides of 15-U-66 examples of the type environment they wish to create in their proposed Park Place Development on the Nathanson property. Mr. Mittelman said future develop- ments tia�ll be d�rected toward the "total neighborhood" concept rather than the stereotyped tract layouts initiated in the County in 1910. He cited the disad- vantages of the �ndividual lot concept; e.g., useless side yards, small back yards that are fenced in which force the children to play together in the street in the front, utility poles in the rear yards. Mr Mittelman said his corporation has spent over a year and an immense sum of money in planning the pre- viously proposed College Park, featuring open space and recreational facilities which would be maintained by a homeowners' association. To insure that the building exteriors, front yards and common areas are maintained, a lien can be placed on each property within the complex. Mr. Mittelman displayed a picture taken in the apartment development of Woodlake, San Mateo, stating that the factor of density can be misleading; Woodlake combines a good design with 35 dwelling units per net acre, or 31 dwelling units per gross acre. He emphasized the willingness of the public off icials in San Mateo to be receptive to this imaginative approach, and the fact that this will draw other developers of this caliber 'co San Mateo. Another cluster development is a one-family development, ; The Knoll, in Peacock Gap, San Rafael, where the density is 10 units per acre. These units are 2 and 3 stories with garages underneath. Ea,ch owner gets a deed to his lot and, in addition, he is part owner of the common areas. -1- PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The maintenance is assured through a homeowners' associa- tion. If this is deficient, a lien is placed against all the owners. The density in West Park, �an Bruno, is 10 dwelling units per gross acre. A school site is in the center of the com- plex, along side the park area. These units run �27,000 to $36,000. Fencing, plantings, exterior colors, repairs and anything exposed to the street are all maintained by the homeowners' association. Park Place, Menlo Park (adjacent to Atherton) has kept the existing mature trees. Utilities are all underground. These units run $50,000 to $53,000. Los Altos Square has 12.5 dwelling units per gross acre. Units run �36,000 to �39,000. College Park site plan was discussed next. The Park Place site plan was displayed. Mr. Mittelman remarked that it is adjacent to College Park and will tie in compatibly. III ROLL CALL (8:00 P.M.): Minutes of previous meeting, 11/1�/66 Comm. present: Buthenuth, Frolich, Horgan, Hirshon Comm, absent: Bryson Chairman Hirshon explained that Comm. Bryson has had a heart attack, but that, hopefully, he will be well enough to attend the next meeting. Staff present: �ity Attorney, Sam Anderson Director of Planning, Adde La.urin Director of Public Works, Frank Finney Assistant Planner, Jim Nuzum Recording Secretary, Lois Inwards The Planning Director emphasized the fact that it was announced at the last meeting (11�1��66 Minutes, page 8, last paragraph) that this evening's meeting was to start with a demonstration of slides at 7:30 P.M. Moved by Comm. Buthenuth, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to approve the Minutes of November l�- 1g66 Motion carried, �-0 IV ANNOUNCEMENT OF POSTPONEMENTS, ETC. There were none. -2- 'i ; 1 � PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 � � � � � � � �� � � � � � � � � r � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � r � � r � r � � � � � � � � � r � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � V WRITTIIJ COMMUNICATIONS j , 80,002.61 1. Letter asking a member of the Planning Commission be i �� appointed to the County Planning Policy Committee. ; Comm. Frolich volunteered, seconded by Comm. Horgan. : � Motion carried, �-0 � VI VERBAL COMMUIVICATIONS i ' 1. Comm. Frolich asked for a copy of the annual report. � VII HEARINGS SCHF.�ULID: ' 10-Z A . J. MARCHESE &; SON: Rezoning of approx. 20 acres from A1-�3 to Planned Development (P) with � Planned Industrial Park (MP) use, located at � intersection of Pruneridge Road and Tantau Avenue � extenaions, west of Westwood Oaks subdivision. � First Hearing. i � The Assistant Planner reported that this item was I covered in his memo of November 9th. Since this is a ' logical extension of the Vallco Industrial Park, the Planning Department has no ob�ections. It is suggested, � however, that Conditions 13 and 1� be imposed. I i Mr. Louis Fasquinelli, Attorney for Mr. Marchese, I explained that the applicant was ill and he was present in his behalf. The only residential area bordering this property is in the City of Santa Clara. He had no ob- �ections to the above-stated conditions. Comm. Buthenuth asked to see an overall plan of this area. Tentative Map 3-TM- was studied by the Commissioners. Mr, Walter Ward, Vallco Park General Manager, said this is part of the overall. planning concept for the Vallco- Varian Industrial Park. He suggested the Commissioners also cons3der the Inter�:City Agreement with Santa Clara. At the time the Vallco �nd Craft properties were zoned an agreement was made to the effect that only single- story buildings would be considered for the 150' buffer bordering Westwood Oaks unless the Santa Clara City Council agreed to any modifications of this. � Moved by Comm. Buthenuth, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to close the Public Hearings. Motion carried, �-0 i � � _3_ ?�-; ��2 � l�,ri:�ing Cor;�r.:issic�� :�i�..tinJ Niru oi 11/28/66 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Cornm. Horgar: commer.ted that the ground work has been ade- quately laid here. T�Ioved by Comm. Buthenuth, seconded by Comm. Horgan, that . application 10-Z-66 be approved with the following ccnditions: � i-12 Standard Conditio:�s �� 13, The use shall conforr.� with the Planned Industrial Park (MP) Ordinance, within a Planned Development (P) Zone. '� 1�. The extensions of Tantau and•Pruneridge Avenues to be as shown on 3-iM-6b. 15. The Inter-City Agreeme�t with the City of Santa Clara, as pertains to heights of buildings and buf�erirlg wi�hin 150 feet of residential property,�, sr�a11 be followed. (See Appendix A of Resolution ���; AYES: Comm. Buthenuth, Frolich, Horgan, Hirshon NAYS: None •� ABSENT: Comm. Bryson . Motion carried, �--0 � 11-Z B . WILLIAM NORTON: Rezoning of approx. one acre from � A1-�3 to Light Industrial (ML), located on the east side of Blaney Avenue,:approx 36o feet south of Homestead Road. Second Hearing. The Planning Director referred to his memo�of 11/11/66. T�Zr. David McKenzie, Vice-President of Foothill Printing and Publishing, said they are in agreement with the stipulations. The property is now in the hands of Foothill Printir�g and Fublications, of which Mr. Norton -.is President. Comm. Buthenuth is concerned what might go in here if the . applicant does not develop. The Planning Director feels Condition 13 takes care of' this. Comm. Frolich and Horgan were in agreement with the proposal. Moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to close the Public Hearings. � Motion carried, �-0 -�- PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11j28/66 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to approve applic�-tion 11-Z-66, subject to: 1-12 Standard ����ditions 7.3 Loading, u�:loading and parking of delivery vehicles shall be located in the rear of the building. The building shall extend over the entire width of the lot, except for one drive- way or gateway no wider than necessary, This Condita�on 13 shall be stated in an appendix to the Zaning Map of the City of Cupertino under the heading "fa"; and reference to the appendix shall be made on the Zoning Map itself by the lower case letters "fa''; as set forth in Ordinance 220(f), section 55.2. AYES: Comm. Buthenuth, Frolich, Horgan, Hirshon NAYS: Nnne ABSENT: Comm. Bryson Motion carried, � -0 12-Z-66 C� RICHARD J, KEHRIG: Rezoning of approx, two acres from A1-�-3 to General Commercial (CG), located southeast corner of Homestead Road and Blaney Avenue. Second Hearing. The Planning Director referred to his memos of Nov. 11 and 23, in which he recommended against this rezoning because the City of Cupertino already has too much commercial property and too little light industrial for service industries. He noted a correction in that of the �+0 acre undeveloped property across Blaney Avenue only 7.8 acres are zoned commercial. If the application were granted, the following conditions should be added: Condition 13 to take care of the possibility of future widening of Homestead Road to 110'; Condition l�, which limits the entrances and exits onto Homestead Road; and Condition 15, which facilitates revision of the zoning if not used within two years. Comm. Horgan asked the Director of Public Works if the ingress and egress are now the way he wants them. It was pointed out that Condition l�+ states that ingress and egress are to be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Mr. Kehrig felt the Planning DireciGOr had loosened up somewhat on his objection to this rezoning because of the attractive development planned. The Planning Director answered that he had not said so, but that Condition 15 might make him a little less reluctant. -5- 1 PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 I ------------------------------------------------------------------ ' Mr. Kehrig noted that this would not be surplus commercial land, but would be developed shortly. He is willing to cooperate on the conditions suggested by the Planning Director. He has revised his plan for more ease of ingress and egress. He has set back on-site improvements to allow for widening of Homestead Road. It would be agreeable that there would be no break in the median. He is in favor of the retraction of the Zoning within two years, if this is legal. Mr. Kehrig is not aware of any opposition to this proposal. He added that this is a first-class development of a rustic nature. The Director of Public Works was asked by Comm. Buthenuth if Blaney would be widened here. The Director stated the �+0' street is on a 60� right of way. Comm. Buthenuth then asked the applicant if he is ready to come before the Planning Commission for a Use Permit for a service � station. Mr. Kehrig said he is. When asked, Mr. Kehrig said it is conceivable that if he does not get the Use Permit for the service station the whole development might � not go through. Comm. Buthenuth asked the City Attorney if Condition 15 ' would be legal. The City Attorney ob,jects to automatic termination of Zoning because our Zoning Map would no longer be correct. He was not against the situation where the City Council would pass a Resolution stating intent � to revise the Zoning, with subsequent Public Hearings and a specific Ordinance changing the Zoning. � Moved by Comm. Buthenuth, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to close the Public Hearings. Motion carried, �-0 The Director of Public Works had no objection to the loca- tion of driveways as shown on the display, but he recom- mended against a separate set of curb returns because of the need for extra drain pipes and the inherent disad- vantages to foot traffic. Comm. Horgan is in favor of commercial zoning here, but is concerned that the v�hole development is contingent upon the obi:aining of a Use Permit for a service station. Comm. Buthenuth agreed. Chairman Hirshon feels this land should be retained for light industrial use; the Com- mission has just approved ML Zoning on the ad�acent lot. � Comm. Buthenuth questioned whether we should hold this � property for light industrial use which might never come about. -6-- ,� PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 Moved by Comm. Horgan, seconded by Comm. }3uthenuth, to approve applic�tion 12-Z-66 with: 1-12 Standard Conditions 13 Lot area within fifty-five (55) feet from the center line of Homestead Road shall be landscaped or otherwise reserved in such a way that it does not present an obstacle to a possible future ; widening of Homestead Road to 110 feet. l� There shall be only one entrance from and one exit to Homestead Road., in locations and with stan- dards approved by the Director of Public Works; except that another entrance or exit may be ap- proved through a Use Permit procedure, if a Use Permit were granted for an automobile service station on the corner lot. It is underst�'od that if a median divider is constructed in Homestead Road there will be no break in front of subject property. 15 In case no development has taken �lace on subject propert,y within twenty�four (2�+) months from the granting of this Rezoning, the City may initiate Rezoning procedures upon proper no'cice. 16 The designation of the zone shall be CG-rb, and it sha.11 be so indicated on the Zoning Map, Ordinance 220(f) of the City of Cupertino shall be amended by �dding: "rb - All conditions and ' findings in Resolution No. ..... of �he Planning�� Commission of the City of Cupertino shall apply. ' � AYES: Comm. Buthenuth, Horgan ' NAYS: Comm. Frolich, Hirshon ' ABSENT: Comm. Bryson Motion tied, 2-2 The City Attox�ney recommended this application be car- ried over until we have five votes. The Assistant Planner said Comm. Bryson plans to come to the next regular meet- ing, and the staff has been mailing h�m all the informa- tion on the applications. Mr. Kehrig asked, if he came in and asked for industrial ; zoning whether or not he would be permitted to develop his property in accordance with the now-existing Light ; Industrial Ordinance or the revised Ordinance that may be ' adopted between the time he gets his rezoning and the ; time he is prepared to go ahead. -7-- PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The City Attorney said there is no property right in zoning until it is used, and that the applicant must conform to the Ordinances in effect at the time he applies for a building permit. The applicant went along with the two-week delay in order to get 5 votes, Moved by Comm. Horgan, seconded by Comm. Buthenuth, to continue application 12-Z-66 to the next regular meeting. Motion carried, �-0 9-Z- D, PAGE PROPERTIES, INC.: Rezoning of approx. 3� acres 15-U-66 from R1-10 to Planned Development (P); and Use Permit to allow R1C use with overall density of not to exceed seven dwelling units per gross acre; located south of Junipero Serra Freeway between Mary Avenue and Garden Gate School. First Hearing continued. The Planning Director called attention to his memos of November 11, 23 and 28. The last of these memos explained I , the situation if the Use Permit in the adjacent College Park area expires. The City Attorney said that it does not necessarily expire after one year; the specific pro- visions in City Council Resolution 121� may prevail over the general provisions in Ordinance 002(a), Sec. 5.1. The Planning Director stated that: 1� We don't have the pressure here of an existing Zoning with higher density on this property and, 2) He agrees that a very pleasant environment can be developed with the proposed density, but it depends very much on how it is done. He feels a �, development plan, including street system and lot design, should be required in conformance with City Ordinances. The City Attorney does not feel we should start with the density and work backwards. The kind of development they ! want to build on this property should be of paramount consideration, ; � Mr. Mittelman said a site plan was presented for the College Park project on the Stoneson property, of which they made 39 studies. Seven units to the acre was finally approved. All the changes to College Park are incor- porated into the present application. It is now a ques- tion of the Planning Commission giving an indication of their receptiveness to this proposal, whether or not he � should proceed further. � -8- i ,I PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 The City Attorney feels the developer must come in with a ; complete presentation for the Planning Commission to pass a decision on. The Commission should not give informal, intermediate opinions. ; Mr. Mittelman said the architecture, floor plans, roof lines, drainage, etc., are the same as College Park. The City Attorney asked the applicant if he could work within Ordinance 002(0) The Planning Director said the development plans need to be more detailed before intelli- gent opinions can be formed. Comm. Frolich questioned Whether Ordinance R2C wouldntt be more applic�.ble here. Mr. Mittelman wondered if "P" or "R1C" would be more appropriate. He said they must have a development plan and a Tentative Map before they can go ahead with the plan. He said they will be happy to come in with the topography, etc., but tonight they would like an informal indication from the Planning Commission whether or not they are receptive to this plan. He was again reminded that this would be in violation of t;he Brown Act o Re,cess was called at 10:10 P.M. Meeting reconvened at 10;20 P.M. Mr. Mittelman wan'ced to give one very good reason why this development should be zoned Planned Development with a Use Permit. He said the R1C zaning itself is insufficient in the eyes of FHA and the loan��s. With a Use Permit, Page Properties wou.ld have something precise enough f,o satisfy them. Chairman Hirshon said he hasntt seen enough to give an interim opinion on the density. He would like to see more of the overall development plan, as the Ordinance requires. Mr. Mittelman asked if there we.re any ob- jeations to this street pattern. Comm. Horgan did not feel the Plann�.ng Commission should give any indication of approval of the plan; he reserved the right to ob- ject. He would like the applicant to comply with Section �-.1 of the Planned Development Ordinance 002(0) for the next meeting. The City rlttorney advised the Planning Commission should rely on staff reports on the street _ pattern, etc. The Planning Director discussed problems about the Ntreet pattern, referred to in f ive paragraphs ' of his November llth memo. , Comm. Frolich referred to Item 15(e), page 6, of City Council Resolution 121�- for College Park. He said there is quite a bit of difference in wording from the Cluster Ordinance, Sec. 39, and he would like the Planning Direc- tor to check the Weed Abatement Ordinance for comparison. -9- PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 �----------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Mittelman wanted �o know whether the Nathanson property will still have access to Mary Avenue, as this could make a difference to Mr. Nathanson. The City Attorney said the applicant is entitled to present a street plan to the Planning Commission. The Director of Public Works and Director of Planning have discussed this and they are in accord as to access and street widths. Moved by Comm. Horgan, seconded by Comm. Frolich, to close the First Hearing. Motion carried, �-0 81,00�.12 E. SIGN ORDINANCE N0 350 Revision of Sign Ordinance No. 89. First Hearing continued. The Planning Director read a memo from the Chief Building Inspector, stating that the 2� in Section 8.61 is lenient for computing the sign surface. A table entitled "Service Station �urvey" and two photographs were also submitted by the Chief Building Inspector. The Planning Director also relayed a message from P.G. & E, offering two addi- tional paragraphs; he agrees with them. Following are the decisions made on the Sign Ordinance by the Planning Commissioners at this meeting, section by section: �.10 Approved ALts version. �.12 Approved Frolich's version. �.1� Add '�and any spectacle, display or advertising statuary". Delete sub-section b and change sub- section c to b. �.22 Add words: `�plastic" and "vehicle". �.�� Wor�ing'�f�_c�efini�ion wil�odepend on regulations in other sections. �-.3�+ Approved Frolich's version. �.3�+1 Further study is needed. �. Approved Frolichts version. 5.01 Chairman Hirshon feels this should be expanded �o include other than public areas; further study is needed. 5.02 Approved Chamber's version. -10- I - PC-R22 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of 11/28/66 � . 5.03 Approved AL's version for a, b, c, d, e, f. , 5.0� Approved AL'� version, except delete the following: ; "in the opinion of the Building Official". The ' Director is to prepare a"Building Official" � paragraph. ' 5.06 Add the following between the words "surface" and "other": `�except subdivision directional signs as specified in Sec. 6 ,083 ." Delete words "point in a tt � 5.061 Further study is needed of a section to deal with Subdivision Directional Signs in built-up resi- dential zones. 5.07 Approved AL�s version. 5.08 Add the word "permanent" at the end of first line. 5.09 Further study is needed. Moved by Comm. Buthenuth, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to , continue review of the Sign Ordinance, starting with � Section 6, Motion carried, �-0 VIII UNFITTISHID BUSINESS -- There was none, , IX NEfni BUSINESS -- There was none. X ADJOURNMENT , Moved by Comm. Buthenuth, seconded by Comm. Horgan, to adjourn the meeting at 11:50 P.M. APPROVED: 1s/ ' ' Ja'ck' �iirshon I Chairman ATTEST: ' �-�C �� �M ' " " Ad e La.urin ' Director of Planning i ; -11-