PC 05-24-71 d '14
_I 1.•.ip ti �Y 2M yJ ,f!dl,;R'1 N7 Mrd I b 1�, h. ff 'A h�' 7� 0.••
• t a` l-.V• { '',J'� �• !,�, `.tr rM1t'N y�+' 4eu9 r�v •a i a '
'RS
'i'�5�' •`hs�+�•
r r{i
nrT• 1h . 4', r �c c;".,. b1r '.O a�furrlt' ' C
P 34vjo
�R.ia,hyf J
CITY OF CUPERTINQ"'State':oi'`California" t
® 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 4` ;a �Y, � tiy, •
Telephone: 252-4505
;rr ,,': 7ci ..,- rrj!"" �.'.: i AIL.?F•'�ir7);.r �J:� h ,.
i+V�'ia�
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR'?iLETING OF'THE PLANNING COMMISSION
May 24, 1971 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL,
CUPERTINO, CALIFOR141A
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
Chairman Irwin opened the meeting at •8::04'P.M`, faith 'tlie}Salute to
the Flag., a,.u.i a ,•r sa .
RCLL CALL r,
Commissioners Present : Buthenuth (8 :1.5) Meyers, Puetz,, Chairman,_,_
Irvin
Commissioner Absent. H.irshon
Staff. Present: Planning Director' Sisk
City Attorney' Adams
Civil Engineer Akers
Assistant Planner Cowan
Recording Secretary Lois`Inwards .
Commissioner Buthenuth was called awa.y.from�'the meeting; said''he
would return as soon as possible.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes' of May'1.0, 1971`'t
Commissioner :Myers had two corrections': Page 2,: third' paragr'aph,' t.
from the bottom; Commissioner Puetz rather' 'than Commissioner`Meyers
asked the width of the driveway. Page i2, first paragraph;
alt;iough a lot of talking takes place at these meetings, it is
called :13AG rather than AGAR.
Commissioner Puetz noted-that approval of the April 26, 1971
minutes was passed 4-0 rather than 5-0 because one Commissioner'
was absent.
Moved by Commissioner Puetz, seconded by Commissioner Meyers to '` t Minutes
approve. the `finutes o: :tay 10, 1971 as amended. i approved
corrections
yi
Motion carri.ell , 3-0
r
�t
r
d
.,{ .. t "1 Y 9 .,y�!' Vii- s Yet .)j •,S],eIl, Ijt
' } LA - 1� �; �� � ��'• 'I .___ `ri.: _fia�S Z"'� {.FF'Y��°.}L". S�'_17Y✓` .f"uLL�..,.,'.�.i''j _ _�__.__ _.._. ... _____—. _ _
c�_'E rt y Sl�yi'�r•� .zi. ,}^'fit;�'t' 'r �r�,,..�,.r,! .R t S",lS�y t .��� A.
a�,h]',.k,, i� � � 'dt•�i'�'rr +�� .,�, xr`� nk�t�'� � Z$ t,�,,�r i. rry �y,�, ���r„�;
' , :tY ! ;, .`;I �r0. !,y e!Kl.�t:•{;"a 1 .2y t�s-i•+ t•t,�fFt�' e v�•�U' ",3zt�.i �i �Sly, l x' ' �4z4,!{�,
x , , , �`f,yx/,♦a , 7w ,Li r..S�-,4W p � �.c�. ta4 yy,,,,�!_ �v/�.� P !• to
.}: r S�dl�4ti dJG d raw
• ,. - t F f� �49�r i s't t��,! FC?��f,.M3�i
1n5�j�
PC-34 Minutes of the May 44� 1471 Planning Commissiou.;Meeti
Page two t„i;'l!' I :} :rfx i !,:.l: '`' ;(1'r?l� � f. �•
POSTPONEMENTS, ETC. -- There were none.
WRITTEN CO;LMNNICATIONS ,,There,iwere,ntone..t. ;, •..,,..
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -- There• wexe none.
PUBLIC HEARI14GS �• !;:
1. Application 11-U-71 of Skaggs Payless Drug, Stores for. Use,.Permitr•
n
to allow construction and operation of •a Goodyear Appliance and
Service Center. Said property is located westerly of atid'adjla- '
cent to Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, southerly of Homestead Road and
adjacent to Skaggs, Payless Drug Store, in a CG (General-Commercial)
zone. First Hearing continued.
The Planning Director said' at' the previous�"meet.ing there was some
concern about the traffic pattern. ThE!. applicant has; submitted, a .., .
revised plan which was exhibited on tl'e-screen•. 'Tti`is plan has the
approval of the City Traffic Planaing. Department and the, applicant!s
architect.
Commissioner Meyers said- this .plIn p,re,t:t:y.well meets the intent. p
Ample back-out space (30, feet.), from the planter is indicated.
Chairman Irwin asked the applicant about the intent, of the tree at
the north end of the center row of parking. He,:'was .told, 'it is a
mulberry tree and can be trimmed sb theere is an unobstructed view.
Chairman Irwin asked. for comments-from. the,.audience. .There.were•,none.
Y
Moved by Commi-ssicner Puetz., seconded by Commissioner Meyers to.,-.
close tha Public Hearing. .: '
iA
Motion carried, 3 1-0
:loved by Commi:sioner PueLz , seconded by Commissioner Meyers to
approve application 11-U-71 with the 14 Standard H-Control Conditions '
and: ,
15. 'lhe Use Permit is
.grarnted for the land as described in the
application and any f:ttaChmentS clie:ceto, and as shown on the
plot plan labeled "Exhibit A-3rd .Rev:ision".
16. Twelve additional parking spaces shall be provided to the rear
of the existing Payless/PW faCillti.l'_:i,
i
' ::' �t -���. -k°,a.Yi'.s��"'t ,;zr�x7�.•�'v�j'. ti' r u 'S`cj; v M r M .- , N
�, ,a�i, .a, t tf rn,'!��" '4.t}�'r;��r.�•r� � " t r !��E z ,E� r S-
' r 'Y r t. 3' � 'y1u'i3, �' , J" r �f�}� r�y.,.���4 y�Y. ,� +, Sri r�t�� k ^�•� t f�-�riJ•.,
t''Wi.` +Nt
}-.-'i• Aw14t}ai.. ¢C
, , ffi�c i a� I ?C y + in N ir.
Minutes of the' May,;24_,;.J.9..7,1,;,Plunning;,Ct�cam 'ssiun Meeting�� ns��i`S�rrtrr; CPC 534 ;" aµ�t
17.; All;.work; shall.be Performed .within;,,thel.structure,;,;,outdoo rrwork
shall be. Prohibited. !u 1•
•,1 .. ., 1 7"'. !• , .. ::h:Yl l .. :}:?�• li .1 lrry t,�i.�� bit,�,7d � ' {
18. Outdoor display of: merchandise;,shal.l. :be,,prohibited y�
• t " ' iJY r. f: !:1t 7 , 1 rf f..'f: ;i.i J''? .. :1 1 ° ti )J a y�sL,
19. The•,used: tire storage area shall, 4 ,•completely :enclosed .to•..trr..,m
insure, screening, from the view .of,:E;eneralr:public.; :4 tr;1 ; r'c;; a`
AYES: Commissioners Meyers, Puetz,• Chairman, IrWill_ ;approvFd
NOES. . .None
ABSENT: Commissioners Buthenuth,+ Hirshon conditions
Motion carried, 3-0 r•. ;,,.,-;
MIh;UTE ORDER
i i
Moved by Commissioner- Puetz., seconded by. Commissioner.Meyers,::,in;; r
reference to application .11-U--71'1, ,to modify;, condiLion;.l'�;.of••:
Planning Commission••Rcsolution: No,.,.•79.5_,;making; the .approval�.pf,p;;
Variance application 4-V--70 permanent rather than temporary.
AYES: Commissioners Meyers,:.Puetz, 'Chairman Irwin ,,' ;, ,;Sr(,; ;,, 4-V-70
NOES: . None i n: , ! made
ABSENT Commissioners Buthenuth', .Hirsho;n permanent
.11otion• carried,. .3-'J:
Commissioner Buthenuth:returned to the' meeting at ,8:15
2. As prov.idee by Section 5.3 of Ordinance OG2(a),,Revis,ed;,;of;•,,th_e;t
City of Cupertino, consideration is to be .given to the
possibility of revoking Use Permit :?5-U-68 .of •the•,Gulf ,Oil';
Company for a service station proposed to •b_e lo,.ated,,a.t
southeast corner of Homestead and Stelling Roads-,;,in, a.;CG
(General Commercial) zone. First .Hearing.
, :.•:,; I:, ;,
Director Sisk had a ser_es of site plans and renderings of the,
proposed shopping center placed on the bulletin board.. A conditio
of the Tentative Map was made: "that no building permit is. t,o•be ;
issued for a service station until construction has been started .,
on the two major buildings as propo_ed." The City Council has r
shown concern about construction on the property other than the;.;.
major buildings.
Mr. ;Tom Olson, 560 Independent F'.)ad, Oakland, said he represented
Gulf Oil in this matter. lie reviewed the previous Hearings by the;
various bodies of the City. All of the times lie was present there]
k.
s
I
r
x
fi
k
t•
,;'t s;;i ' >�ir!y rfKy���i>jat�t�'�y��?apt a�SG, k!},X�i �G� 1 . ,. - �'� G xQQ33''r� S l"';, •,-
,.t� ,,,� ,..,1'. s d ;t..,Nt� ?l., t� fiSy �t�d�.1�,, `^t•n r 5 x G S<Y 1 t > t
• 'r• t v ':� t A•� ``�",�1�.u'r �f fi� G}'��q,l+a�y�1 5��'a .+a'Y 3. ..
'�! �FYtaf�GPt't•fir�,rt�+fr���ax�� 7i?�'�� t A�b�Y
,
PC-34 ' ' Minutes of the Ma 24'i .1971'•Plannin GDmin ssion' Me®ting�a t' ' }+i��t ` ��, �
i y ) g _''e A"arlj1�?+}� i' �i '$t Sul
Page f otur . .
.was this concert}+tabout:,thei development!'of`'the 'rest"of•, the'proper'tj►r. i<{� ' t
Gulf Oil's :Ha felt he was just the' bystander to their probllema `� The plan vast,{h ;R;'t�t J F
position ;firat put before them as s part of a commercial deve•lopmcnC They T,YrS a� „try 'y
proceeded to- get''their,Use. G'ermitr f'orf-fit set'v ce:stati'onx:ap'proved iby '
the staff, the Planning Commission and the•City Couucil'•in which%no
mention was made of this^conditibn 'Hell said• they -di'd!at`vt:',btiyr e
property until the developer was 'able -i_o' perform' on''the' condition
placed on the Tentati°ve Map. 'At that f_ime the City Council had
lifted the condition originally. 'placed 'on" the Tentritiv 'llMap.
Gulf Oil's plans were filed and the staff was making their'3 check:)'1
Gulf was then told the City Council Thad. reinstated'`the'tco6di't 'on''``
By then the property was already split,: He said Gulf now owns the
property, specifically for 'the •purpose; of building a service station
and then they found out they could not obtain a building permit and .
that the City is planning to revoke their Use Permit. Mr. Olson
asked the Commissioners to look at his side of the problem"-and,aC`.
leant give him a little m,)re time to try to help Albertson's or
someone get their development going. All previous 11en'r'ings• were,
at the request of Sur-rer. Hill. Why shovild •the''other%property•'owners t
be penalized because the super market cannot develop' at:!'this'•t-:.me+?'
Chairman Irwin said the intent is ?t to make Gulf Oil ,the villain
in this case but the developer .has- riot• -ab{ d 'by',*hl,'s:+commi,.tmetitsi' A
Mr. Olson asked why they are being victimized, not or.ly'fto` be -Seidl
up by r.he developer but further to ,have then -Use�'Perml!t`Gfrevoked.
Commissioner Meyers asked when Gulf purchased the property. Mr.
Olson said it was in July 1969; during- r_he "tiine the condition to
the Tentative Map was not in effect.
In answer -to a question by the Commiss _on',' Mr. •Olson'.said-;?-in 'the--
last analysis, he would not be against the condition to have a
major part of the development in progress before they could develop,
L-ut would like very much to retain the Use Permit.'
Tile City .Attorney advised the Use Permit could be 'conditioned:-';the
same as the Tentative Map. Normally, you'do not condition•a'Tentative
Map. The Planning 'Director added that we now have the opportunity to.
prepare a•vel;icle to condition the Use 1'ermit.
Mr. Olson said no one wants ':o :Find out: whether or not the condition
attached to the Tentative Map is valid;; they did not want to•get -1'; '
involved in.a court case. lie said he would accept Chairman Irwiri s
proposal.
Chairman Irwin asked for comments from the audience.
There were none.
s
r
a
01 E
'
hx .•�F �4#�+ �i 4YV +..*}r��y�tr4M� ,11 r,`��Y� . , ��y ��4�`�33 �' P -
' '. {`e'ti s1( 7� 7lf b {'�� p ,^t f� '1'�'1''�� f}lyk�'� rt t {�� ��k •.1.. �y i q
''{•' r y P., c 1,r S + � �.1jX��k 1.{+`�? Z� �'Pt L4O �
Minutes of *_he�May''24' 1971 'Plauning7}(omrvseinri`Meet:inga ')c :t2rJrrG � PC-34t < E
� Pajg�e 4 f iv
- :t'. . . " "•7 •: �.�,ff�:: �I!t'r! i :��'1. t�:7YF1;3i4'.[.,f} afh:,,?.r } riiJ`.'in P `�t��er °���u a
i•
Director Si's read'`'t conditions:-t,4 ie.co.mmended fbef.piaced:on+the„f � ',t�,F�,1 ;1•,
Use Permit in add'i r`ion' to' the' 14` Standard Cond^..tons.
1. All conditions as enumerated in Pls,nr,ing Commission Resolution :' � • ' ^
619'shall remainin effect.;
• �'. 'r .., Al: .• Ycf] lS:. ' !
,,:!
2. The'Use Permit' is granted for the- land,,as['^dbscribe&,,in'?the..l.Ct.!
application' and an y attachments thereto'"and•:as•:shown 7:oiv.�:the,.f'.
plot plan submitted labeled' Exhibit;A. :r;,'?:•,, , '(C`f:1
3. The location of all build ings;!-fences,%;roadways',';parking-area
s, r
landscaping and otlier' f.aci.lities or"fea ures'.-shall' be:;located.::+;
substantially as shown on Exhibit A except unless otherwise
indicated therein. : �;• .,':,_. ..,.,...t_i. .ri: '
4. The granting of the Use Permit shall in no way, be' ;con'strued 'as,
approving the architectural design of the building, any signs.
that may be 'indicated on -Exhibit A,' or any!types '-1nd •'siz,e'Oftri'=
plant materials tc be installed in the landscaped`'.rsrea5:�.fa.ssn:,,'_'
5. The exterior lighting of the facility shall be indirect in .
nature. :eitii the•;rajority of 'the'lig lit ing"D•�ing''•'desigti:
part o-' the canopy and maznstruct.ure. . Any,freesti{nd.i'ng,l ;i
lightir.0 shall be low profile in nature wid:'iYathef desig"y
Aft standard subject to approval of t'ie Archit,actural. and:Site
Approval Cc-gmittee. T?>.e use' cf icon ver,tio:n'al -Long'%'arm 111ghting'
standards shall be prohibi;.ed: . "''r'• • :7r ei`' s
6. Gittdoor display merc}iandise such as tire racks, stacks of
tires, vending marine , etc.',• shall not be •pe.rmitted. .'--- :,;4"
7. Outdoor servicing 'of autoiinobiles ot her• than ithe dispensing of_;
gasoline and oil and the replacement of minor. parts °such:ds.,r ,
water hoses, fan belts , et(-..-, is no:,'- permitted:
!9 ..
8. The granting ui this Use Permit is. conditional°,upon
const<nt upkeep and maintenance of -hc!' landscaped:
9. The building permit for the .service station will- not be.:issued
until Albertson's market and other adjoining markst a•rc.under'
cons ruction.
10. This Us,F! Permit sl,al.l be revl:ewed one year from the date .of,
approval.
Director Si.:;k said if there is a Chang•• ii,. the area the Use Permit
can be brought back in [or review of thr: conditions. 'There was
some discussion of delaying; the ri_velopment of the service station.
until a certain percentage of the ether buildings were in progress
i
:
1
J. f.ea� r'}l,a�.i'i !:. w•
..r: 9 'x1
�,p.,r•�'\4,�Y.;,.v yl�`i 2�\trt 4'+ t t ,� :�,u r�' w'.W �f &. � L '^!� x \' r y`iP f�S $
<<t�: .$'• ,Z f J}t •�Z t"n'7 .�J 'A. >,• }t2n \ Sd1r 1�,1 CS �1 R , i`i'i, tiik? \ i F.. v-L 9 '4 t..�`;i,.\ •Y
..Y�1 - � er'� {fyj'f��,� 7..5� w t •,, t �f.,1{rR a r r� d i ,-,•!,.� !4 -, � v��f7,+ +� , ", x 1 s a�y \, r
PC-34 i Minutes of the rMay,124t,!19711;Planning•,C:oacnissionr Meetic}�
Page six
Commissionc'c Buthenuth asked what would happe'n.if .Sutter. Hill:developed•. ,
a convenience:market :and;;;the :balanr•e;i.n..apartments , Dirac to,T-j-§
le '
said the intenL:.,is; not•:to have service, stations; that,;cloaei
apartment complexes.
:! -i '! r tr•f.:Lyl t: r. :r' tii l :li-<. '(} ;tt:,i f j A i'
1fr. Olson said no one wants Co see a• service. station; on• ay co,rt{er
all by itself. He asked what was wrong with the original Sutter. f
Hill proposal, the liquor;•store;and,the,other .shop-,,all:having;•one.
basic•design and when.,the,,other! large,property_.,develop! ;,_qe ,�ty
can insist they conform to-,the;existing,development.;, Her,saidjacts'
dictate that property at that location will develop. If you can
get a partial. development, now,,what,,is,wrongt with; it,AA):you ,know k:
you can get. the other.,developers,,to conform,..;-.!;,. , . ,, ,, ;, .•�.
Chairman Irwin suggested.conditioning the Use ,P,eFmit, on, dev,elnpment
of a minimum of 25,0:00 square feet end extending the Use Permit for
one additional year.
The City Attorney said the Ordinance does not automatically;-.,,,f i r
terminate a Use Permit after one year. ;You: could„extend; .it,for -a
certain amount of time with revocation at. a certain time.
Commissioner Puetz said the whole. thing .is;based,notjgi revocation
of the Use Permit but before the.building;permit:.is.,issuedithe
market should be started.,,
AIN
<:
Mr. Olson asked if the ,Cormnission was giving atone-year extension
for the Use Permit and 25,000 square •feet•,of.•d•evelopment,-beford
the service station can develop.
The City Attorney said at the present time we-have the.,condition
imposed on the Tentative. Map. The saD,e ve:-bage should be used on
the Use Permit so the conditions'imposed by the;City.:Council,,,and
the Planning -Commission don't conflict: . - ; ,•; „•;.;•
u
Elie Planning Directs;:' said that although a search of the tapes
indicate the Council actually specified Albertson's Market,.;,the
written condition reads: "No building permit is to be,issued.,for a
service station until cons,-ruction has been started on the two j
major buildings as proposed.” The two buildings refr_rred tn.;in
the condition were a proposed ;caper market (Albertsc.n's) and.a
drug store.
Moved by Commissioner Puetz, seconded 'by Comma-s,ioner Mevers,;- to:
close the Public hearings.
Motion carried , 4-0 : r
ar�i fs q L ti��Rrii
w�
4
s :.
•1.
Y 3''(i.• I'l�'a tlni F�`�'.�i�`+L ,•,}� , i i s� ! ,}f• J 3 y � ,i y
c ,,,� .x.I•.z 33 .yr w! r +rF,� ,Yiyl�� i1 t�,� 4p; +zt`l ,v+, t + ' �i , .-t'`
n _,�v,R��t 4'j i4z`�',$��•"�{•a '} c �� " , �i lµ+,4+�,t �'�
Rr'�L t + i4 �a�� i'�`� pia,,`Ct•P �,F k't't+T {°„F?2: 1
a 3,
Minutes of the. May. 240,. 1971 Planning Crmtalssion Meet in '' t 't� k `'PC 34a;' ' '
Ah
o
' ..,� Page aseyen
S x zi
Moved by Commissioner Puetz, seconded by Commissioner Mgyers,.�'to \!
extend Ilse Permit 25-U-63 for one year with the conditions"'AS i 25-LIq.;68 .'
stipulated on Tentative Map. 1-TM-69. `; ',extended. with
t• , :.;', 1• F , o` > ; ;conditions
AYES: Commissioners Buthenuth, Meyers,' ?uetz, Chairman' Irin'
NOES; None
ABSENT: Co:nmi.ssioner Hirshon
Motion' carried`; :4-0'
3. Applications 8-Z-71 and '2-V-71,'of Robert S'ai.ch `and''P.al.ph' Saich'
for rezoning of approximately 1?_.48 'ac-res' 'fram"R1`10 and
R1-10ag (Residential Single-family and Residential Single- '''' 'r'
family with agricultural use ,permitted), to P (Planned Develop-.
ment) with commercial use intended; and variance' 'to 'reduce
the acreage requirement of P (Planned 'Development') fr6 ' -15.'"'" '•
acres to 12,48 acres. Said property is located at
west corner of Stevens Creek. Loulevard and St_elling Road.
First Hearing
Moved by Commissioner Puetz, seconded by Commissioner"Mty'er's' to`'s"' '
review applications 8-7.-71 and 2-V-71 simultaneously.
Motion carried, 4-0 :
i, t': f
Mr. Don Bandley, 21490 South Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Cupertino, � 8-'Z-71 and
said he Understood there was a letter ''o?l file`r�questici :tfiis ' '� 2-V-71
mattes be -discussed at `.he end of• the agenda since'`the! epreseiita= owed to end
tive would not be able to be present until later in'c-h-e'tveni'ng."' of ,agenda
Director Sisk confirmed this.
Moved by Commissioner Buthenuth, seconded by Commissioner Pue:tz,
to put applications 3-Z-71 and 2-V-71 at the end of the agenda.- ':'
Motion carried, 4-1J r'
UNFINISH",r1 BUSINESS
There was' none.
. r
,t
� a
Ji h/
- �-�-� -- — - ,&€ -�i+.����:a�t'�'�#.�S*i`� n��" - '�."_' - N `°• emu'
2
ti
7 is
,.�� "k'`,}•,{,".r, ,:'''' nF rs�}if;`;. ,.+•a4`tyu'` j°` �Jk 5jp rat' j 1 Gi , ` .SX'1 +t�,th'M1 7 G 'k•' t ''. J. 't fji:i•
AM
i1 re 5. ,, ;yt ,i i 'ri`t yam. .t.?��.� fir; ,•'..,k eJ"` t i'4µit �' .:i `t�?R �• M+ 1 '�C r I -,� +
•,; ."....• � .,Tt, •r �,..pr:i't.!•:! � r;1{ �,` ".R�'r 'i,d'� ,'h�J','� i�irtt'" ,'� ,� - .
.PC-34 Minutes of the May 24, 1971•Planning c:cni'sei'on' Me�eiirg ` 1
Page eight
?:; _
NEW BUSINESS: , : a
,4 . Review of proposed prezoning of• southwest corner of' Stelling and: ;.1.••„
Homestead Roads - DISCUSSION
a1• t'1'.
The Planning Director reviewed the Char.tier .application wherein the
Planning Commission recommended denial and the City Council :rleferred
it back to the Planning Commission .witii the instruction that the
staff should look into the possibility of prezoning the entire 14.73
acres. P. prezoning study was placed on the bulletin board. The t'
first map showed existing zoning; -the second `map ,,showedllexisting
land use; and the third showed the. General Plan superimpos•ed .on the
area.
Commissioner Puctz asked if a traffic study has been generated. on 2
this area. Mr. Sisx said a traffic study of the general area-has
Lean done. Stelling Road will function as a major arter,iah
The first proposal was to zone 6.07 acres commercial including r
existing service. sta't;ion and existing orchard, with 6.29 acres
zoned multiple.
The second proposal -aas only the existing service station to be
zoned commercial with the remaining. 6.29, acre3s zoned multiple and
7.92 acres zoned BQ.
The third proposal was the front rectangle zoned:commercial and the
rear section zoned BQ with one commercial lot in the rear,,adjacent!
to the freeway.
The fourth proposal was R3 in the front :rectangle and BQ in the rear.
Commissioner Moyers asked if there were any discussionsiwith ,the,, . a
people in the area. The Planning Director said this has "not been
uone yet.
,i
s
Chairman Irwin felt the church property and on south should be BQ.
The County commercial zoning commitment.was discussed next. There
Iwas also some discussion about living next door to the P.G. & E.
facility being objectionable. The general feeling of the City,
S
Council was that since the County already has commercial zoning on
this property, effort should be directed toward rezoning the entire
area to make possible a •larger shoppinL (_enter. Commissioner
Suthenuth reminded the Ccalmissioners about all the undeveloped
commercial property in Cupertino.
1
1
L
r �
J 1 r 6�••:t iS rl.$�ity,' yt li It
11111
NMI
s,.p.7 .._sir-�i 't:K'..}f+✓rytittrnl+:?;,, .y::•S.<tY'� f . 1 °n'' 4�C^t'l�• Y +3�' '.a " Y ,Ti�{1
}� .. "n � i. v.,'aS�Fr^J�ii.°^"7 2'."''{ijEq-.:i.,kYi� L � S lt� jl�s9 f{,y i 4 :. - '• t' irif"'`e,
5h4r3
•. .., .' t.,._. t i��+iLs'�'43 � �q;i„x2�+���� fr•i�r�`�'h� ��.i '
Minutes of :het May:;-2G ,t•197.1F<plannYn]�...Commi'ssipn Meeti�ig '? 3�, G.'V}^iurzr! �trPC-Y34
liPaie' nine:t;7,.G;
® Y•, ,
The City Attorney :sa1.dctthere: is.the. possibility;aframending the t.t7 Kid �r'; :;:,;;
t,,�yo .
Ordinance to permit smaller acreage for Planned-:Developm.ent.,,;'i•HC , ti,rys,vs,
did not like to see the Variance sec tion.imsed:excepta,:in:i:a.i:,'case,,,,:of+�
hardship,
Commissioner Meyers felt that section fronting on Homestead Road
must be all zoned the same, either <tll R3 or all commercial.
The Y'.could go ;r•i ht _ahead and :build ;in the:County lssi.v.l•.
Planned Development the City could, exercise,-more i contr;ol over;-;the,:;
development. lie added that we want to straighten out the boundar-
ies of Cupertino: • .He;f.elt•there ,shc,uld be some capability for
zoning smaller acreages to Planned. Development.
Commissioner!Puetz said if they zone:..i.t:residencial;ahey;;,gar ;-Alway
change it, but it would ;be hard 'to rchange,r,it.,from commer•cial;,to Rl
Commissioner. Buthenuth -said the City:has -initiated annexat_io.n,.
proceedings and wonder--.d how:long that -takes. The,Planning,.,, ,,
Director estimated three-months. ..,He. questioned whether;...the:,County,
would stop all building permits,,on.,:this area -for••that,.dength,of
time.
Mr. Jason Chartier said;he. is che• owner of, the:. p.roperty..••--,,Hersaid-
they could go to.,the, County, right notw;and';getr,a :bu lding•,perrLit.;Y;'
Instead, he is going ahead with the Cityls wishes. . He.:is eagersto.
get started with :his development.
The City Attorney instructed the. Commission that they !should.keep.,
~� in mind they ..re not prezoning •at •this time..,!,All• that.;is asked•,. :.•
of them at this. time is a recommendai:ion of ,what .to .publish-;for; .,
the Public: Hearing. :t'.. a?:: :sus.::•
• - Farr ... - ..
Commissioner Puetz recommended, with the exception_,ofrthe service. :
station property, that the northerly section he zoned R3 and the
southerly portion be quasi public. , Commissioner Meyers did,¢not..;;.;
agree. . Chairman Irwin felt the property should be;commercial:,,:;,,,_r w
Moved by Cormmissioner Meyers, seconded by Chairman Irwin-to•.; ?
instruct the Planning Director to advertise this property.,as
commercial on the northerly portion of the property as.shown,on.•
Exhibit 3, except BO on the southerly portion. �•
AYES: Commissioner Meyers_, Chairman. Irwin '
NOES:. Commissioners Buthenuth, Puetz
ABSENT: Commissioner H.irshon
Motion tied, 2-2 }
The City Attorney said nothing has been •passed; all that i.1 asked;
is how this should be published. Another vote- was requested, pn.-th .
same motion by Commissioner Buthenuth,
MORONI
mmtrn
t}
n.
f
�•PV�,aG t*_��..,fir'f�yi.i ff� ,f 4,,'ti�� �� '�, t�t,d?'r.y�_� ,M1 !� h`i�r11,l�S.��eGt r � � t i�• �. s ``'��'i Y
7 �,.:, ,l ,'Y `ai.�"'^t�'1 tf•�''A.: �.p tYa+r�?.,s{ Sti1 tat}:A+-. �6 StR r b'Pr .•: �Fr r{, 1.s 9�� 4,
;� ,i Via. 2 ry y 4 ¢ 't [� i '{•?�z �r,n t• .}t.t v.,
e �' r � r' Yµf ma`N.'i St -•t�aT 1m# t t l• `fit .
t i t i •+ .. 'M•�'' ,t J p � 2.R t 2 7 tt •, ei
.. .i52 t ^4, s?4y'^�a dt iJ>+�t s,9•fir}'��L t
r to t pni ti v"!2t
PC-34 inures of theiMay 24,i:197.1•,Planning �:omsai'ssiod':Meeting:
i. < 2
Page ten
:lotion to YES: Commissioners~Buth�nuth,� Meyex's;r.Chai'rman .Insinr;�l,. a FC;fc+ is ;r.;.
advertise OES: Commissioner Puetz?. •,• :• , , ?' cf t;,:i .,, ,r r f'.i. ;
passed NBSENT: Commissioner Hirshon ;:7: ,.l t jqr,
Motion carried, 3-1
Moved by Commissioner' Puetz, seconded -by Commissioner'Meyers,to.;:,:iT
return tc PUBL'IC HEARINGS. Item
2;otion'carried, :4-p
3. Applications 8-L-71 and 2-V-71 of Robert Saich and •Ralph.-Saich
foe rezoning of 'apprcximately '12:48 acres7from:Rl-10,and :Rl-10ag
(Residential Single-family and Residential Single-family with
agricultural use permitted) to P,ii:Planned =Development),iwith+t=`
commercial use intended; 'and variance to'reduce:,the;,acreage,,,,,t
requirement of P (Planned Developnient) 'from 15'.'acres'-"tw'•12;48'?
acres. Said property' is located at':t.�he.-morthwestfcornet
Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road. First Hearing.:):''•=
The Planning Director-said the basic difference in'thEi=newonlan••'�ff
involves reorientation of building''lor.ations:j"and !aoreduct ion
=
building square footage from 2C1,000• to 159 260�;square' feet;:,`::It-'!
is noted that the plan denotes a floor':area,and+•off-streettparking
summary which indicates that the off-street parking requirement is
satisfied with no extra parking Spaces- to spare; yet °both corner,'-i
satellite buildings are labeled 'restaurant or bank-and shops or
(re.-taurant. ' The off-street parking re:quflrements; are' different for
{each use. With regard to off-street parking, both;-the';CityiTra.f<fic-
(Enoineer and Fire Marshal would like to see internal traffic
circulation lanes modified.
Mr. Robert Dempster, local attorney, thanked the commission for• '.
putt E_ng him at the end of the agenda since it' was impossible.:for;;,". .
him to get there earlier. Ile pointed out that he does not agree
wit'n tile. Planning Directors report ore. all points. lie:said:
he:
feels this would be .good zoning for this property. ' He •felt,�that'1
just because we have h amount of undeveloped commercial in- the;City-
does not preclude the fact that there are other areas in the'.Cityi ..
which wculd be excellent locations for commercial. With that thinking
he felt the City would be protecting those people who now:have'
i' :':
lcommercial property and enable them to command a higher price.'::(::;
They would have it made, and could sit back and watch *_he1 v.alue;•of
their property grow.
Mr. Dempster said he was submitting renderings of the .ciie-roofed
buildings with wood exterior similar to the Town and Cuuntry
architecture. This is a prelimi.tary plan. .
r;
a
• �TAT i,i ;
�c
t� t,°,i 4 °r7''�� 'r`i �1'y "�nKj: �r �ry;.'•, <y •,._;$,�" a?°s t� Y•'�` i F�u`rF. e,. y yJT t °ffJ '
�,y..,��1 a ht:?�.^i� t`5.u�•7,:� }��,�it i, b!R"�md °r"��,�+ ".��.' w y ro� �i�! R !Gtsef(y+j��,�+ rs�&
� *' '�u j 1•�a �',��; ,� •,•.° ,,d
ro
Minutes of the,ray, 24„,197.x;Planning ii ommissi�n'Meati,ng no, a `;',Y rPt l 4P,C 34��t d�_D) ,
eleven'
Y 3
Mr. ,Dempster asked,-,the Planning si:a;ion tor.consider this d8v-
elopme"nt. „ lie, said the applicant �ndt 1.andowner„dedi*aEed
roadway on Stevens Creek Boulevard, ana Stelling Road-becausP_.the
City•requested this, ,There is- 4ucl- cnncern about. the,,traffict'to: i
t c .! ,3.. r .., i ri
be•generated by the Flint •Center. .He, did,.not„believe this would
..
be a good• atca for,.residetttial.,,; lie sfrzd,.,this ,area is equal to any.
commercial property,'
,as f.az. as,,traffic:.,generated,is.iconcerned
He felt the applicant;is,willing tolcooperate with r.ther;City,inr,the
development of this property. ,,..Sooner,.or, later,, ,this,land will rbe”
used for Planned Development.,of some t:ype,. ,,,Mr.,,Dempster,saied.,they
now have users for the property.. They feel' this proposal is com-
patible with the area.• he.added_ ,that,with,PD zoning. the.,City_can...
make the applicant adhere to the type of building ,standards,and,” }
architecture they want for this area. Commissioner Meyers,.fe.lt�,y.r
the quality of the business that goes in under those ai1e roofs•
was important, too. ia rac;r:?:; i
Commissioner Meyers asked what percent would be developed right ( Percentage to
away. Mr. Dempster said he has discussed this with the buyer who be developed
is going to purchase the whole parcel. His„intention .is.:_tor:..,a 'J now.
develop in excess of 75%.of this. property.;,, They will complete the
whole project if •they .get the zoning..; • They„ are, waiting to” seer
what happens as far as the City is 'concerned. The 'conditions
placed on this property have not been ,placed; on, any,. ,other, property
ASA
in the City of Cupertino. .
Commissioner. Meyers wanted •to discuss traffic, ;; A ;commercial `shop Traffic
ping center of• this size could generate, 13,,4,00; twoT•way trips, "per., discussion
day, according to the City Engineer. If this were developed as
multiple, 1600 - 1800 trips per,day would ,be generated;. .,:Mr,.,;
Dempster noted that both Stevens Creek.Boul,evard.and Stelling, Road
are major arteries.
Chairman Irwin asked for comments from. the,audience. :..
Mr. Bert Avery, Avery Construction Company of Mountain,Niew, •, Glenbrook
(developer of the adults-only apartment complex .to the.rearor, ; , developer
subject property) said his .position remains the same;,.however, he "comments
• does like the architecture and the lay,�ut .looks mechanical. ;, He.,;.
said he has a heavy vested interest on Mary Avenue, Half a. block
from this spot. His development is ger.ting National recognition•, s
If the proposed development can come up to these standards.we ;will.1
have an excellent development. .F .
i
Mr. Dempster said this rendering will he a part of. the application
The same structure. in design will be as is being proposed at this• !
meeting. *The! reason for PD zoning is every time the applicant f
comes in with a Use Permit he, must come before the Planning Com-
mission and the City Council. The. Planning Director agreed that
with PD zoning the applicant can develop a portion at a tinie, butt ,
must bring in their: plans for approval , r
i
r
rr
4
i.
'a � •+t`"• � *•err-, ry+t *t''�,4 L"a. £ � S: '�•..�ry F-'�"->" ,�`{�,.... r:.K ,.,,, .¢:
..y t'..na -•.y trl gg�,,'{1v�rl ",'Mir 4 s J•ata y }ra 9N V.' ppr1 h V_ _ r
k t
,s
� 1.��tl lk.tt ~s£}�,"',�'+,d'{ ij` iCr'ky�l�j t} �ij..gvL {x'�Ctl"+7•-�s
Rti
vt t tt < f tti ,
' ,. -. .••i •�.>:`1iy,:ry�ss'3vi��SS�r•�-}ras :�'�t�' r(sr{'1 t
PC-34 'Minutes of the'Mai 24';:'1971"-Plarini•fig"I'xrinissiin Meeting
Page twelve
Aft
` 4yrl
Citizens' Mr. Avery'was 'concerned :ihether7'or riol`.' this proposalPw'As'irealistie.
comments lie said` Foothill College '-has-also expre sed cQncern•'araut Chis.<>I y,
Mr. R. Kocnitzer, °1006001Phar•,Lapr`Driire` '`Cupertino said'•'we- are'•>>'"
always presented�with'aiguments: ""Bec:ause'�3oe got it last 1'year,�r .�,.
why can't I g.et it,this•'yearV' "' He J said we''have' lots I ofhunused`�'i
commercial property 'now.''"We'have to make�a• decision'• thait"We"are%:�
going to stop` zoning commercial': The prbpertytowner,has'�had{ this`"
property for some' time'and*he'will`-mak:e'money';on; it when'1he'lsells':
Mr. Koeritzer- again requested this pros oral be•'deriied:l `t V,d
Mr. Dempster' pointed 'out`'that' these plans and this'requested •ioning
are the same type as presently located. on Mary Avenue' in• front`of"
residential property. Referring' to Mr-. Koenitzer, ir. •Dempsteri,�'
said in order to please: him', everything should- stay residential:-"• "
Economics should not be a part of planning. He said they have
always felt, in view ot., the way the City is laid -out and the
location of this property, it dictates a commercial 'use•.
Commissioner Meyers commented that there' does not seem to be` much'
landscaping. Mr. Dempster. said 'that is''what PD zoning' is' for
you get the right to check' each aspect of the••de'velopment'•i .7
Commissioner Meyers observed that if this' rendering is to:'be''•a,r
part of the PD zoning, he felt there were .too"many' b'uild'ings"on-';J
the property. Mr. Dempster said that with greenery surrounding
the property, all. buildings and in areas in-the' parking' ldt•`theyr:>.
will be compatible with any other commercial property' i'ri' fhe area.
.raf f i.c Commissioner Buthenuth'.asked if' this plan alas been discussed %with'
the buyer. Mr. Dempster said lie' told tha buyer'he' would have•%to`t
live witli the architecture spelled out in the PD 'zoning. `�Commi•s=
sinner Buthenuth said this looked like a sea of asphalt. He also
noted that with the opening of tlie"'fre,away,' 'qui'te'a'bitlofi'•through s
traffic will go down Stevens Creek Boulevard and there will be a
traffic jam between the-Freeway and Highway 9. 'Engineer Akers -said,
the information given his department was based on Santa Clara_' "'•'
County study clone lasr. year. highway 9, with •four lanes', can handle 1
30,000 cars per day. Stevens Creek Boulevard in this area' could ,
handle arOund. 50,000 cars per day. * Corvnissi.oner Buthenuth feels
this will, create a monumental traffic _jam• Mr. Dempster said he
couldn't understand his thinking, when a few months ago they passed
the ,lariani development plan.
Commissioier Puctz said hc has not changed his opinioc.
ki
Wl
I
g*
•F� _ ,,, '^z t. Y,: {.^.6�d,". •zr r7;�t v 4 ,d� 4 i `� 91•.rL9^57"c�1 ''L.463a:a_. .1'vadiY.:':
} •7�it EL
• y.:,'•. _l,3:•�aP'`4�i�a'fS�9�!G -t.'�,��' � ��,�,��.5. ,.� p,, y,� ?rs ,. � - P
�.t, ,.r"`"` i��i"r"}Y•n ��t..( #.-i•T4i� M ` fY4 1i •r°j+.saM �`''�, ,. '�
. • 1-11 `;+nN � ' Al -Y !I'�` •V�tall f
2$a2. ay: t>s'
�`��t�tL�R`4S�•`SSi�r, `')"7�T r y<itt,� �•'�,+.. t k
Minutes of the.i May:•:24•-J 19.71:;P.lanning kCoruaigsion.Mee Gin&
+'thirteen
F ..,Yfi a'K rig r a rr {°I ul,y
� 4.7
Commissioner Meyers: f.elt:ia•�planned•;development•here would probablyf,�
be necessary. lie was ;not.:at,;the,ttwp.,gf�;Lhis_megtinl willirlg,tof
see commercial, here., lieiwas trying,;to;;rcor•.sider ,the_,ef�fects�+ofrjljig
density multiples on the local school district. He agreed; that
'
looking at -the, plan;, there'.appears;•to:,be,�a sea,;:of .asphalt:':.The„i,_i ,
20 feet of landscaping out ,front•could he,,,donci,very nieely_and.ti; rfl
perhaps screen all those cars. lie would be willing to go to "Pb”'
on th i's•,area', but no,t with this,,plan.. . ..
Chairman Irwin said all the basic facto,rs,,have not_ ,changedF:`:•the ,,; Basic' factors
impact on traffic, the central park, the existing residential, and unchanged
the college. Nothing has basically-changed excep� the renderings',
which are very attractive.
Mr. Dempster asked what Chairman Irwin proposed they should pre-
sent to please the Planning Comm.tssion•.•, Chairman,•Irwin!rsaid ;,:••
economics enter in whether we want them to or not. With Lhz pre-
vailing economic situation, lie questioned whether it was a,:good ;
time to develop this property.
Commissioner Meyers asked if it was the applicaut'•s .,underst;aiiding ;
that this plan-would •be" a part of the approval. *fr.,,.Dcupster.said,
that in addition, each building -and the landscaping plans have to.'
come before the,Plan_�ing 'Comrmis,sion for approval. he.,,repeated _
that what was presented at this meeting coas merely a preliminary
plan, 'r
Moved by Commissioner Buthenuth, seconded by.Commissioner,,Meyers
to close the Public Hearings.
Motion carried, ,4-0 rrr
Moved by Commissioner Buthenuth, .seconded .,by. Commissioner.Meyers 8-Z-71
to rec:.,tmend denial of application 8-Z-71. denied
F
AYES: Commissioners Buthenuth, Meyers, Chairman, Irwin 1`. •
NOBS: Commissioner Puetz
ABSEINT: Commissioner Fiirshon ,
Motion carried, 3-1
Moved by Commissioner Buthenuth to deny application 2-V-71,.. Com_
missioner Meyers said the applicant had 15 acres prior to the Y
roadway dcdi.caLion. Commissioner Buthenuth withdrew his motion, t.
Adfflk
i
i
c
n
Y
e
a
,t jis+s`tiws w:�y',tiC.'� Tti v tt naal.`u• Y"'' `" ,y, ,.1� N
n tl >; '`t`tt'{i+�• N1, i�. .x ,S T�y t t
F
,.i°r. 4 y rh.. �`� A f, ��X 1.1z�•�"'''i� ��$�J �'��6 �rytlT ate..' �4,;A•Y . t
�n �•,;! Gj'�i�,�y�,,c ti�i�'•'d" ,`z�,,.,� i tdv.i'i xt,�t k'�nr+S'§�`� t'�t�€'�•4�r�j '�,Y ' ��TA iMytt y '�c w,"�w'f`4�it�, t ifit, ��t� �Yy,, v4s ��_::�±"4
"}%t«r�+. , •.'..� -r ri;",. t !. :a i,, y A�¢riM ..,t ttt r•',wk`.�y,.Httfj`t7 y"t4 .-1 Snty'� y'�i", 'J`4 �,',Y' , +''. 'N.",y�4�[ ,7 v S �+,{ .8'�"+ }ftrt
. v•. ..� ����ur�ev?:'��'et�t�.`}11� r'i� Sl�aG ''t d
PC-34 Minutes of the May'24" i.1971'Planning ttC:ommiasion EiMeetimg 1;+ �7, },tt, dfpy ti,,
Page fourteen '?
Moved'by' Comm i's sioner ;Meyers, seconded!byr:Commissioner'.Buthenuthrto
grant application 2-V--71', 'a !reduction of ,the:-:acreage requirement,,f
2-V-71 PD' (Planned 'Development)' frorn 15' acres to 121:48.acres i
granted
The City Attorney'said`, based son°our•;Crd"iance. andlwhat we';have;done ,
in the past; we could grant this variance. :-
AYES: Commissioners Buthenuth,; Meyers; Puetz', Chairmant-Irwin j :,c>
NOES: None j
ABSZNT: Commissioner Hirshon• i •+,
Motion carried;::4-0:
REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
5. Study Sessions
Commissioner Puetz wanted to discuss the anticipated planning
sessions. He said it would be difficult to have-al.l:.projects
presented at one time. He proposed each Commissioner,•by, the:
chairman of a sub-committee, with the staff to work' along..with:all
sub-committees. This proposal was not well-'received. ;
Service Commissioner Buthenuth felt there should be one study session.on,.a
station study night other than a Planning Commission meeting every other month.
June 17th It was decided the first adjourned•meeting: (study' session)-.:would•;be
on Thursday, June 17 ; subject: service station study.•.!'The•:City.. t
Attorney.said he was aware of a forthcoming service station study
and has prepared an analysis on" that' subject.
Commissioner Puetz asked if anybody would object to a commercial
zoning study next. No 'one objected, No date was set.,
Planning 6. Planning Policy Committee
Policy
Committee Commissioner Meyers ;said the•Planning Director and members of the ;
Meeting Planning Policy Committee had met the previous Wednesday.
The Planning Director said 35 people showed up to say that they
would testify. An economic mix was discussed. }le said they are
now waiting for citizen input regarding uses , etc. Federal funds
are involved here.
i •
4 A
n,..
P
i
• t�•I y;`.� r L)al:. � .r.sss 5 ^5 tR.�` s� '•.y�z'r yA•'7' � C, :.r5• v m..l'bd '. 2� ly t
• h ; ,,7;(:, t n:�7"L�a>ti t {�tN4 kt°"4�tYLf'��`�r'�'}� v . :?:,�` ° +d K n ar�£"�{sc
� 4 .1 � .i' ��\h• v r h,yf(, r{�� �{Sr'�t'ryr wut,�� � "� s.,�
Minutes of :he May 24, 1971 Planning _Commission Meeting +� ��i_`,„�oY�?�"I�pPG34`
:r '4S a(�"Page.`f if teen
�t ,.
AIML
REPORT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR
. •v 1, �{': "F,1•:'>,:1,�, 'r:
7. Legal notices _;r, •,..;,.
Director Sisk said he has made arrangements to mail legal notices
at a cost of less than $10 each. It costs $13.60 for each Public
Hearing to be adver-tised in the newspaper.
ADJOU%NMENT
Moved by Coiwn.i.ssioner Puetz , seconded by Commissioner $uthenuth
to adjourn the meeting at 11:13 P.M.
Motioo. carried, 4-1)
APPROVED:
• Y
1
Chairman
ATTEST:
City erk
i
' S
3
}}
"11,47 D^y