Reso 1220 18TU�73
RESOLUTION N0. 1220
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CU�ERTINO
RECOMMENDING DENTAL OF APPLICATION 18 U-73 TO MODIFX�
THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE STETIENS CREEK
CENTER �22 U-72� TO INCLUDE A BANK WITH A DRIVE-LTP
WINDOW. �
APPLICANT: S.H.A.R.E., INC. I
ADDRESS: 730-A Distel Drive, Los Altos, Calif. 94022
SUBMITTED: September 28, 1973
LOCATION: Between Stevens Creek Blvd. and Alves Drive approximately
150 feet westerly of Saich Way .
ZONE: P(Planned Development with professional office �and commercial
. intent)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINDINGS:
1. That the driveway break on Stevens Creek Boulevard serving the'
proposed bank drive-up window conflicts with the City's general
policy of limiting curb breaks on major boulevards and further
that the driveway break conf licts with the approved planned
development plan for the property which internalized ingress and
egress points for buildings to a central private street.
2. That the proposed building setback reduction from 30 feet to 20
feet and the driveway area would hinder future City efforts to
develop a comprehensive street landscaping program for Stevens
Creek Boulevard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November, 1973, at a regular meeting of
the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Adams, Buthenuth, Gatto, Nellis, 0'Keefe
NAYS: None
ABSTAINING: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
� �� � / . J �� s %� Daniel �. 0'Kee£e, Chairman
.� �lanning Commission
James H. Sisk � �
Planning Director
_�- .
� C{ T Y 0 f� C U�' 'i R T I Id 0
C i ty Ha 1 1, 10300 Tc,� re Avenue
� Cupertino, California 95014
• 7elephane: (408) 252
RESOLUT I ON OF TtiE PL/1NN I NG COP1M I SS i�N OF THE C i TY OF CUPERT I NO
DENYI ���G A USE PERt�II T.
WHEREAS thc Planning Commissior� of the City of Cupertino re-
ceived �n application for a Use Per;»it, �s stated on Page 2;and
WHEREAS the applicant has NOT met the burden of proof required
to support his said application; and
WHEftEAS the Planning Commissic�� finds that the application
does NOT meet all of the follo�ving requirements:
a. Encourages the most appreFriate use of land,
b. Conserves and stabilizes the value of property,
c. Provides for acequate open spaces for light
and a i r,
d. Permits adequate control of�fires,
e. Promotes the health, safety and publ;c welfare,
� f. Provides for the orderly develo�ment of the City,
and
g. Is adcantageo:�s to Lhe �roFer.ty a�d improvement�
in the zoning dis�; and neighborhood in which
the property i s loc�ated;
NObJ, THEREFORE, BE 11' RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits and
other evidence subrnitted in this matter, the application for
the USE PERMIT be, and the same is hereby denied; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: �
That the finds quoted above and on pa,e ta�o be approved and
adopted, and that the Se.cretary be, and is hereby directed
to notify the parties af�ected by this decision.
�(Continued on page 2)
-1-