Loading...
PC 11-13-72 � CI'TY OF CUPERTIi�1U, STATE Or CALTFORNTA PC-75 1030� Torre Avenue, Cupertin�, Calif.ornia Page 1 Tel.ephone : 2.52 MINUTES OF THE REiULAF� MEETIivG OF T��E PLAiQNIrIG CO?'�1ISSIUN HELD ON NOVEii�ER 13, 1972 IN TiiE COUNCIL .".�T��13ER, CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Chairman Buthenuth called the �eeting to order �t 7:33 P.M, with the Salute ta the Flag. ROLL CALL Coitu-r.. present: Adams, Gatto, Nellis, 0'Keefe, Chairman Buthenuth Com;n. absent: None Staff present : Director of Planning Gnc� Deve1_opL�ent Sisk Assistant City �`ttorney TeYry _ A�sociate Planner Co�aaii Jr. Civil Engineer Huttlir.ger APPP.OVAL OF '�iINUTES : Regular i�ieeting of October 30, 1972. Moved by Co:nm. Nellis, seconded by Co::u;i. Adams to approve the Oct. 30th riinutes of October 30, 1972, as written. � Minutes appro�. = as � u�ri_tten Motion carried, 5-0 POSTFONE��v'TS, etc. -- This will be brougnt up later in the agenda WRITTEN COI�fUNICATIONS Chairman Buthenuth introduced the comm�snication from the Friends of the Foothil.ls regarding the General Plan. This will be discuss d _ later on the agenda. Chairman Buthenuth brought up the letter from Attorney James A. Frost regar.ding precise plan lines for Stevens Creek Blvd. It was noted the staff had received a copy of this letter and it has been included in the Plan Line File. ORAL C0:�IUPIICATIONS Mr. James Small, 19872 Alerritt Drive, asked when the Friends of th � Foothills letter ���ould be discussed. He was told it will come up vnder the Generai P1an D�.scu�sioti. PC-7E� MINUTES OF THE NOVETIBER 13, 1972 PLEINNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 2 The City Attorney said there must be Public Hearings at both the Planning Commission and the Citv Council prior to adoption of the General Plan. , However, since this is not an advertised public hearing, it is up to the discretion of the Chairman tahether or r.ot to include the audience in the discussion at this meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS: l. AmendmPnt to Planned Development zoning ordinances 255 and 256 (Applications 20-Z-63 and 21-Z-63): VALLCO PI�Rn, LTD., request to amend the most currently approved land use maps to change the designation of t�aenty�-three (23) acres located at the southeast quadrant of Interstate Route 280 and �•rolfe Road from Light Industrial to Commercial and Professional Of£ice Use, and the designation of nine (9) acres of Commercial and eleven (11) acres of Professional � Office and related Light IndustriaJ uses located ��iithin the � southeast quadrar.t of Interstate 280 and Pruneridge Avenc�e to a combined twenty (20) acre Con.n.ercial/Professional Office/Li�ht � Industrial use. First Hearir_g. Staff asked ; The Planning Director sa_�.d that, in vieT•� of the . positi_on taken by the ior postpone- � City Council during the Nove�;:ber 9th joint City Council/Dlann�_ng m,ent { Com� meeting, the staff is reco�:�mendin.g t�ze above two applications � be continued for a period of or.e month. T1iis wi_11 give the staff and � Commission time to interpret the intent and scope oi the 1964 General Plan with regar� to classification land use and censzder ar�er�dments. 20-2-63 and 'ieved by Comm. Nellis, seconded by Conm. Adams to continue applications 21-Z-63 20-Z--63 and 21-Z-63 to Dece�ber 11, 1972. contir_ued to Dec. llth � AYES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Nellis, 0'Keefe, Chairman Buthenuth � NOES: None r:otion carried, 5-0 Chairman Buthenuth announced to the audience that the above two applications have been postponed to December 11, 1972 and will not be re-advertised. 2. Application 19-Z-72 of Stephen Gazzera, Jr. for rezoning a�proximatel5� .14+ acre fr.om R1-10 (Re�idential, sin;�le-faT�ilv, 1_O,OQO sq, ft. per dwelli_ng unit) and approximatel.v .36+ acre from R3-2.2 (Residential, multiple, 2,200 s�. ft. per dwelli_:�` unit} to CG (General Commercial}. Said p.roperty is located approxi-nately ]_70 feet southerly of Stevens Creelc Blvd. and ap�roximatel_y 2U0 feet easterly of I�larey Avenue. First Hearing. � , � , , � f MINUTES UF THE NOVE'•i; ER 13, 1972 PLAN:�;I;�]G CQ1�L"�T_SSIO�I P�IEETING � PC-76 � Page 3 � � 3 The Plazining D�rector said the staff is also uski.n� for a one- mont'.� postpone-nent on this appl ication on the bas�s of the same ; reasons as on the preceding a_;enda ite:n. The a��l�_cant said t i � did not object to this. s ! d Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. 0'��eefe to continue �' 19-7-72 application 1°--7-72 to Decernber 11, 1972. f continued t� � Dec. 11th AY�S: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Nellis, 0'Kee�e, Chairrnan r�uthenuth � F NOES: None � i � Motion carried, S-0 � UNFINIS�ED BliSINESS: General P1_an Discussion � : Chairman ��uthenuth first asked ior a definition of the term "General Plan". The P1_aaninQ D Lrector said a ger.erai plan presents general; guidelines related to 1_and use appl=cations. In view o?= the recent Precis� court decision, a lot of cities are loo�cing to t:eir general plans General P1an as a more precise plan. It ���as h�s opinicn that t'^e Cupertino i needed General P]_an is going to have to be a fayrl�� pr2c��e plan. ; The Assistant City Attorney said a gene�al plan sha�l include a 1 statement of population intensity and building intensity. 4 I � Cnairman Buthenuth read the letter from the Friends of the Foot- hills. Next, the Planning Director wanted to ta1�. about the 19b4 General � Plan and gain some direction frori the Planning Ce..�r�,issic�n. There ' follo�aed �onsiderable discussion of the "red dots" on the map and � their significance. � Mr. Jim Small, 19872 Merritt Drive, former Chair:zan of the Plannino Bac:c�roun�' Con�.mission and former ChairMan of the Architectural and Site � information Approval Committee, ex�lained that at the ti� e t:.e City� �•ras forn�ed i on early there �aere no ordinances, so the City Council adopted the County I Cupertino Zoning Ordinances by reference. The firm of 4Jilsey, Ham and B1air was hired in 1962, during the tremendous grotath of Cupertino, to prepare a`laster Plan. Situations change with tir.le. The reason- ing used at the time for the commercial zoning c��as the question of who would build a home facing on a 120' street. rir. Small had two questi.ons at this meeting: Do ��ou now roll back zoning? Do you consider applications for rezonings now or nold � them in abeyance? It was noted the zoning map �aas independent of the general pZan PCH Zonino map. .ir. Small said the PC�i Zoning (with Use Per.mit) was created � philosophy in Cupertino or. large parce_ls to attempt to stop strip com.*�ercial development. � PC-76 MINUTES OF THE NOV�"1BER 13, 1972 PLANNING C0�`1ISSION MEETING ' Page 4 " Discussion of Mr. Jerry Fitzgerald, 10191 North Blaney Avenue, former Mayor, Councilman, "red d�ts" � Planning Commissioner, H-Control Committee Member, said some red dots were � put down to sho�a e�isting commercial and others were put down to indicate :ahere it might be desirable to have commercial some day. He said former City Attorney Sam Anderson used to tell the� that a rezoning did in fact alter the General Plan. Present City Attorney Adams said this is not true. Mr. Fitzgerald's opinion was that tne general plan �oas more of a density map. The big question at hand now is the interpre- tation of those red dots and their significance. Comm. Nellis asked if those red dots in those days spoke to neighborhoods. Mr. Fitzgerald said they did not necessarily do so. Former Councilman Saich was present at this meeting but had no comments to r.iake at this time. �esults of Associate Planner Bob Co�aan has studied all the material at hand regarding research of the original genera' plan. He said it was started around Dece*.-�ber 1962 dccu: at and was adopted in �iarch of 1964. There was the intent of a regional hand i shopping center in Cupertino of aheut the size of Valley Fair, in the � location where High�aay 280 crosses :i�gh�•�ay 9. tti?ith regard to the red �dots, there was the intent to control strip co�:mercial. The plan was � corceptual in nature. The red dots �aere supposed to be resolved �chen ! the zoning map was adopted, but th;s �aas not accomplished. � ��lternatives � The Planning Director said one approach to the proble:n at this tir�e would reviewed � be tnat the Planning Co�-:.�n� ssion could malce a determination as to what ( the red dots mean. Alternatives �•,ould be to adopt an interi:� zone, or recognize map as a conceptual document. He said the City Council feels there are some areas in the City t;�a� should be looked at i�nediately. They have indicated that �ve should consi�er amendments to the existing general plan. Corun. Nellis asked if the April completion date of the ne��r �eneral plan is realistic. lhe Plar.ning Dzrector said the staff is at this point analyzing the data. Mr. Small asked if an application for zoning should be accompanied by an application to a:nend the general plan. The Assistant City Attorney said the law requires the Planning Commission must hear the application of any land owner. i�e advised the Plannin� Commission to philosoohically consider the aspects of the applications. The Planning Director said there will be consultants' reoorts in conjunction t��ith applications. i � � � MTf�'�.i'l'1;� (jj� ';'1:1; NC�Vi:'t:.,I:l.� l:� � 1 �)72 P1.!�,'�i��J�i;: CO'��;_`•SISSI.O:d i'�i:�TI:�C; ( PC:-�75 � ., 1 „ ; c :, � 1 1 , t � Pre� E�r coi Cc;nra. :Ie].l.is bc.lieves t:c r�� � ot:� ;•:e t.af an�l � �c� prc�£_.rs �:e ,<<�.�_ „� '?�flefe agr.eGd. vat:i ,. �:p�r,�-_.'- conscrva��vE: �nter�,ret� tic;n of_ the;�. C�• 0 . ��llii�__iC }ll.�li)_Ili' OIl ��"1� CiE'i1C("�11. ��I.S?: 1?;i5 bC'2i1 S°t f07" 1'�OVE:."t;�'1" Z�L�"1. i'L�lli)_'_1C :1�_:�?I:_.." �l�t1E' t�l-c i�li11i1�� J)�-i CCt:01 ;:�il � u�i?�:'.11Clf�lE'_I1L S �O ti:t' J�:i�:'.T'<i1. F�.<311 � ?��lr�.::l � i: � 27t :, � l CU� 711}' :LI7 ltiC C:^Y('_ c1�C'I: cZll��. ��FilICG Uc1"t� , S}1O11�_C� bn COil`:iCEft_'<1 � � ti3�::i11� l:lt0 COi1:��ClE.'1�7�.1!�I1 ti:.E'. f;i7�,'J_rC1C:^i'.'_i1t Oi: tllc_' c:"E'_c1. � NEt•? 13USI`�E:>S , �ion�. Ri:PORT OF P1.A�t:':,.::G C0:?1.I�SIO`;: I`:one. i P.EPORT v`_r Pi..�i�:+I =�;G D"IR�CTO:? � � After discuss?_on, it -,:a� ciccided coi_or ccd�� rat.h�r ti�ar� sy_:�ois � sizould be usel on tl�e .�ap:. � : E� SLP..Clc3.� :il(?E.'t �I1� �+711-� t7n S°r LtT,? �`.tE:r L�:E' T:�'_�ir YE':�U� 2.Y F� ;:71�i1i1� � COPl":1�E:S�OII iIl:;E't.i.I1� 'LOL ti1C'. �;�i'Y�Q:^ Or Ci1SCll�S�1-T_;� ti:? CiCc^:IS l.C::'.— mitte� .:ep�r�. i CO:'!:".. �'`: �I.1S �?S:`EG� t:(:2 St;"tlt ; O� 1f[lE' 1C�2 G� ti~:E'. � � C�%i�l_^.?Lti. I °_. , _ � T�1L'. t � cz:.11�2;� 1)11 ;,'C�Or S21G 5�1G111.Ci t�2:.� �1"r]"i t� 't� -� C::1:r01 :� �_ _i7c Y'c �� '•_i—CC:1i=T'O.L �'v _. ai7� r�:E'_ Ceuilcil_ �,il.l t��f:i.i i�?'.:C' �1 ClE,'L:r':'=Ll72t1�;12. 'I I 1 AL`JvI1�.r,^�E�T rioved b}' Co:r:Tu. 0'?:ee{e, seconded by Co^::�. G,�tto to adjourn the c��etind at 9 :27 P .:1. . . iiotion carried, S-0 APPROVED: /s/ John W. Buthenuth Chairman ATTEST: /s/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk