PC 02-22-71 l
I ! I
.•,. r ,Y,1'Cf••"i7 ar{�"d`r''i{�fr K'�.f'�`''Rav lyh+t 9r ' �� � ` �+ t '
i- n7'y
"6�4
! n
CITY OF CUPERTINO, 5Cateoof .California r,,; ,;►;rr.r.•,- :i� { la , rT oC g � t•�
10300 Torre Avenue, rCupertino.,.-Ca'liforrii':i'''
Tel c hone: 252-4505 t,)i 1,-j ,.u( .1•.33 1a. :
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 'OF 'THE'dPLANNING' C0mMISSION''HELD
FEBRUARY 22',' 197'1' IN THE'`COUNCIL`CHAMBER; 'CITY HALLi
CUPERTINO,' CALIFORNIA ' ;
Chairman Puetz called 'the meeting to order' at 8:05"p'.m. and led, 'the
'' ' ;
salute to the flag.
Roll Call
Commissioners in attendance: Btrthenuth, lIirshon, Irwin, Meyers and 1 ,,:; roll call
Chairman I'uetz. There were no Commissioners absent from the meeting. 1
Also attending: City Attorney Adams, Planning Director Sisk, Assistant.
Planner Cowan and Assistant Cit hn ineer Vi.skovi�ch.' ', i, ,i ten
Approval of Minutes I
It was moved by Commissioner Meyers, seconded by.Commissioner'fliirshon Minutes
and passed unanimously that the Minutes of the meeting held February 8, aPP
roved
1971 be approved as written. : "
Postponemen_t.s, etc.
Planning Director Sisk indicated that a letter had •beern'•receivedfrom postponement
the applicant requesting that the hearing on Applications 17-TM-70 and requested h-
3-U-71 of Franchise Realty"ln' erstate 'Corpo'ration be postponed- t6`.`chte`y1,-- f
meeting of ?larch 8, 3.971. (Items 1' 'and 2 on the agenda)
a, postponement
Planning Director Sisk further i.ndicateId. that a letter hac been•'received requested
from the applicant requesting that •Appli.cations 4-Z=71 and' 3-TM 71 of. ; q
Vincent and Domenica Maggio and Louis' F. Bonacich •(Item 4 on the' agenda)' ! t
be postponed to the meeting of March 8, 1971.
;
It was moved by Commissioner Buthenuth, seconded by Commissioner` Ir�oin, 17-T`t-70 and y
an(! passed unanimously that Applications 17--TM-70 and 3-U-71 of Franchis 3-U-71' 4`
Realty Interstate Corporation be .postpo:�ed for hearing to the meetirig''of: postponed ' E
March 8, 1971.
4-Z-71 and '
It was moved by Commissioner i3uthenuth, seconded by Commissioner Irwin> : 3-1�r_71
and passed unanimously that Applications 4-Z-71 and 3-TM-71 of Vincent' ! postponed
Maggio and Louis F. !3onacich be postponed for hearing to the meeting -; a
s
of March 22, 1971. ;( ,i:' ;
Written Communications
There were no written communications at this time. s
1:1111 131111
11111 101 p
F
}
, ,. ,.{ 'J .•l�tn't�12 �t•�4r aY''t�6t415 ���'��„li�`�i��`y��j��?�4�i F�i�i.�tl� �}�"�' t t'°��'�h•� � r �,}b �+ �z�. eF;` ��}, � a
. ;7t'�e �Y c JJ ,n.�t� "#` ^'q,Jn♦ Lr � �L�.'i • qty�r
J
• , ,�wt1S1?• t\,L:ytl� `0Cxfr`4• '!^
1 vrk, '>n't'�"�l,+Y��lH{a1t,,t���.�YrT� 1S•y t';., :s
Page 2 Minutes of the Planning Commission,;;)?ebruary;,22, 1971 :,rn ✓,�, ex r'CF � c�8
f'��f'.p,^r�C?_' .rbl i`11 C31�:).•l..'S_�l�
Oral Communications �' f
Chairman Puetz,suggeated; that, the ,P;l:rnning ,Currm iss ian;;suppotlt,�,the'IYPiCA t
Membership Drive, by: endorsing ;the: pzoclamntion that the�'we+ek;.of, February?
22, 1.971 he known as YMCA WFPK ,;When; askedtby,;the Commission as 'to the `
regularity of the proposed endorsement City Attorney Adams stated that
there is nothing in the City ordinances which would preclude the Com-
Proclama- mission• from making such,.a, resolution,) of,,,proclamation,.i 1 r;:., , y, '.r .;t;rn_: t;1d",
tion of
Y`1CA Week It was moved by Commissioner Irwin, seconded by Commissioner Meyers, and
passed unanimously that a Minute Order be adopted endorsing the .weekjof,;F
February 22, 1971 as YMCA WEEK. " a'
Public Hearings
nfA r
1. Application 17-TM-70 of Franchise Realty. ;Inters tate,Corporation:j
Tentative Map to divide 4.7 acres into two parcels. Property is
located at the southwest corner of Stevens Creek,Boulevard arid.,,;.
Portal Avenue in a CG (General Commercial) zone.--• Firs t"Hear'ing'-
continued.
,. r •{ ir:, ?r .,. :�:' .,sirs
2. ' Application. 3-U-71 of .Franchise Realty: Interstate. Corporation: nl `L
Use Permit t:o, allow construction: and operation of a McDonald's �
,
carry-out restaurant aC the southwest corner of Stevens ,Creek ,,,,r,
Boulevard and Portal Avenue in a CG (General Commercial)- zone.
First Hearing•
These two application, were• previously postponed under• the,•postponements
portion of the agenda. to March 8, 1971.
16-Z-70 3. Application 16-Z-70 of Falende-r,Homes; gorporat on,:, � Rezoning,.;{:{
21.55 acres from Al-10 •(Agriell tural-Residential):..,to tF .(Planned
Development) with intended, us,; of 140 single-family attached:.,,---i
dwelling units. Said pro ert; is located southerly, of,,-:and ;
s'
adjacent to Voss ?)venue, northerly of and adjacent to Alcalde
Road, and westerly of Lockwood. Drive. First Hearing continued.•
Review by Planning Director Sisk briefly reviewed the applicant's proposalt ,andi,.:_;,
planning tine previous actions .taken by the Commission at the first hearing.;
director Ile explained that the applicant has submitted a revised development
plan depicting 140 units rather than 185 as originally proposed, ..and .
a revised design concept. Mr. Sisk continued his. remarks by. adding.-
that although lie falt that the revisers plan demonstrated outstanding,__
design, the basic concern was the 6.47 DU/acre density of the plan,,. ••
cahicln contradicts the General Plan. lie further explained the recom-
mendations contained in his staff report to the effect that the existing
General Plan serve. as a density guidol.ine until such time as a revised
General .Plan is adopted.
Attorney Sam Anderson, of 14457 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, California,
representing Falender domes Corporation, initiated the a.pplicant's
presentation. lie prefaced his remarks by outlining the previous ::
achievements of Falender Homes and the company's philosophy regarding
;,, . +z x;��i,°_ ?^..'.Kt l�L".3 F` ,7•��;,,",•"•>A+:n.dv,., +S"iN'L3t,.fi.r4.��cr•n,„�,t`*`,a'..�.�l'•�iy-,1'7S1v,r,�. .,,,,.h,�k r y a :i .,.,. .•..., t., ,rFt f )�,:•,�fU r t i 5t.bi"Y�Y Y,.0r�.'�.7'f?t`•'w hV'
,F r ia t t a A .t�
>:•.
H 2 '
Minutes of the Planning Commission, February' 22, 1971 � t PC'28
t ,
Page'
3
e
Public. Hearings (continued)
hillside development. Mr. Anderson emphasized that''the"density�piopose E'
by his client was, lower thar. the surrounding.duplex areas, and that
i , fil Y./ 1lr.tL. 1
unlike other properties,'in the foothill area `all*E utilities are
available.
1
Chairman Puetz opened the f 1po>; to audience• comments, :and, tit thi Lime j
Mr. David Ricci, 10314 F.1 Prado Way, Cupertino,; commented;,that,,he ,would
like to discuss density as relative to a surrounding developed duplexi {
area inasmuch as lie had checked the. Final Map. of .they arettj.and;_had.,fourid .
that the existing duplexes located, nor therly„of.Noss
;Avenue) were, just
about exactly the same density as the proposal being made and were not,
according to his information, at a densit'y,.of, 7,.,69. .lie„further ;express
ed his concern about. the topography of the, area .and, wondered {if_thisi Had
been properly considered stating that in the, area. ot,. the, proposed; ,p,
clubhouse, the property changed grades substantially„ and_,..t ,appeared
that the proposed swimming pool, as indicated on the drawings, would ,
have to be constructed on the side of a hill,,,, ,,;,,;.i •�_ . s; ,
Mr. Lester Schmidt, 10473 Lo�kvood Drive, Cu ertino, indicated„m•ixed< i
feelings regarding the project . He thought;.the p;, .i:;at, to,be.,,bf a.,.g.00d
design, however was concerned with thei c,l�se, proximity ofi, tw.o+story,.r
units to his own home and with future drainage problems which-imiglit,;, #;
occur. Mr. Schmidt expressed concern, relative to maintaini!ng .proper„
distances between the proposed structures , stating that the,_.dup,l_ex ,area
in which lie lived had rather generous :setbacks. He urged the Commission
to ensure that as much naturalness as 1}ossible be maintained, in. the
area inasmuch as tlti.s was the reason that the .m,ajonity, of, the peoplei
had left the more extensively developedturban are:as, and moved. to i audience
Cupertino. i•f.. comments
Mrs. Jackie Mall. , 10629 Baxter Avenue,.Los Altos, indicated, tha`C ,a minor
fault line bisected the property, which could cause destruction in the
event of a major earth tremor. She continued her comments.;by. suggesting
that all applications involving hillside development be accompanied' ,bv
geological- reports. Mrs. }fall suggested that the Ci,ty's; existing, 11111-
side Subdivision Ordinance and Crading Ordinance be analyzed to deter
mine whother they ensure adequate protection against earth failures for
hillside: developmen t
developments. In conclusion, Mrs, Hall indicated she felt that ?
additional. Information •re.l.at:ive to the geological aspects of the prop
e-rty slinuld be provided prior to.. <-ipproval of the zoning, and that this
inforniati.on had not been provided.
Mrs. Nancy ilertert of 22830 San Ji an Toad co-invented on the good design
concept of the project, but directed a duesti.on .to the applicant regard- {
i-ng public 3CC12SS tlffo-6s;ii the piopert%i to Lhe foothills beyond and to '
the lake 'in tlic: north;.:est section of the uroperty.. .Slie' furrher” stated'
that Sh•c had pei:Soil ally gene Lo the different developments which .Falende�
Homes had constructed in Liic Pay Area and had found them to ,be, of exi 1
ccl.lent quality and des J gn. She had also personally contacted the ! 5
planning do partr.!entc of the v -ri,jus jur.:isdis .ions in which Falendur .
)lame ;; had project:: and Liic departments involved nad sLaced that the
• , ,. .. t ,i!, c.. !I!, Li fi.t.t0!'Y lY (7i1 � I
1
'4
i.
d
F
.,. ..r�F'+i,�s ;`''�' �54 sj\'!$t`"t�k t'r "� uan`n`" �t,�.�+? r+ttldrS"�f"w°�l. 7Si�t'' ' a .S ,,�� •r
��;M,�•. ,S .,M1'��a�n �''F t'�t sib tii '� '` �,^�:g; z�.`a ws�,i:� � h��{
• '"r �- 't �,r,Iq-.. '"�5�>��;�irl�ww'r�'--7��d� L'at+`''�'�'',���`-e4�a1 J. , tr{�-
1 .r'1 . `'.� '+;.;!"l4i`t•i .11tr ;'1';: ...� f7;,nCcs' ;i.t1;1
PC-28
Page 4 Minutes of the Planning Commission, February 22 1971 }yj;,, ::•'l ac,.L�IsJ`3
Public llaarir.gs (continued),
;i. W! r, „ .
appl.icaiit' w:3s of"the h ghestcharacter. 'and' had constructed'-e'xceltlentr
projects in tlici`ri'area. She stre's'sed'` the Importarte 7
eo1f'-c 7. . ,
ing public access to hillside areas for hiking and riding, r..!,J:1,v,Fa
•
Mr. cline stated that public' access could' bed possible, and; he"in'dicated
that he would be willing' to work with the' City regard'i�ng' this.J''''
Mrs. llertert further stated that' conslderatioti should'`ber gtveri` to",11.
h
General Plan being up-dated at tis time. r3 ''` '
Mr. J. A. Babcock, the developer 's architect', descr'ibed' the 'future
improvements of the lake and adjacent area,' and briefly rreviewed 'tlle, K
design concept of the proposal, exp.lai-ping the changes that"lia'd beer,
effected over the previous submission.
Mr . R. D. Koenitzer , 10600 Phar L.ap Drive, Cupertino, 'commented that
there are too many basic, unanswered questions rregarding the future .
development of tl:e foothills . Mr'. K.oenitzer i:mphasized' that"until: the
area west of Foothill Boulevard' was th'oro'ughly studied and master-planned
lio further development should be appr'oved.. '.11e further discussed, the
Existing and proposed access to this section of the City, S, be'
upon development of existing zoning, access to the. area would Ue' 't?ta11y
inadequate.
discussion Commissioner Itirslion asked Assistant City Engineer. Viskovich 'if'f the '
project would seriously :impair the traffic circu..ation' in Che'_imriediate
area. Mr. -Viskovich responded that traffic circulation was' a' matter" of
degree as related to the desired level of service, and tllar deve:fopment
of the. pr.operty would affect' traffi'c on Foothill Boulevard , however.,,.
it would not become an impossible situation.
Inasmuch as there were no further audience' comments, Commissioner '
Buthenuth moved to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded
by Commission Irwin and passed unanimously.
Commission Puetz asked for comments and discussion from the Conlmis!Ap' n.
Cormiission Buthenuth discussed the overall design, indicating that lie
liked the proposal, that the density had been reduced by 45 units and
the concept of the plan was in his opinion the best cluster develop'
i
ment to come before the Commission.
Commissioner llirshon .indicated that the project did appear to be a
desirable one, however, his basic concern was related to traffic {
prol)l.ems tlr-.t might be created by the'projer_t and that , inasmuch as'
I:ngilicoring had indicated the project would not overburden the, area;,
lie could not- find a great deal of fault with it,
Commissioner Irwin at this point read a portion of the Planning
Director 's report wherein tine director stated that the 'project was
the best approach to cluster development that had come before the r.
Commission to date but th;.tt, in view of General Plan considerations,
no developments of increased density ehould ?Je considered until the
I rug r .
x
k
t
.T
t ., !"h f•• 1��'• N.Y"�T'�} Jt � R�}t�n'�.,.�K'� �+l l"`f�t �Wt 7' t 1� �' i'f}�$�'�i.t,T,r w IK .t t� � r ..,� l+ T
�'?F� �.x � .� : fit,'•
*,v 'Yj - �•i \S f K ,4
vS?i •` Stn .1. tsv Ft ,g' t
!?• �"Qyfe�
' '. ' 1�1!<.yN�Mf{y4r�' t},'�Yi��,P1�,�Sd lr„�•u,�y�,t sC ajr .
3d �WPE-g O8 Minutes of the Planning Commission, February 22, 1971
t ir;o o cr.f
S�f
Public Hearings (continued)
Plan is resolved. He stated that he saw this as. a plea by• the
department `to'-h' 'this 'a rea'andf'that,�;'if"th'is was
approved, iE could close-t116 door `to proper,planning of'ttie area.
• .. •; ' .. .i3 'ii .0 n._
Commissioner Meyers stated' that he tended• to 'agree with Mr: Irwin'
and, if Development was to be permitted, it shoal&:at'leas[the iii ''' '
accordance with the existing plan.
Planning Director Sisk was asked by the Chairman' to enla.rge,.upon the
report. He 'stated the plan •was;`in`hi.s opinion, -very well'`designed s
and an excellent approach'to the cluster :concept:"'He fadded`ithat"ttie
project could-be built; without dooming the eneral Iatinin r process's
P' 7 ' $ g P J;"P
currently under way, however•, 'if he had the option; 'it kwbuld 'be'
desirable that the density be in accordance with- the existing'plan`;
Commissioner Buthenuth moved -for approval of Application 16-Z-70
subject to the 'conditi.ons 'contained in the staff report`;pl1,s`an,
' '
additional condition stating' that adherence'to a development' plan:,`f" a
labeled "Exhibit B, 1st Rev." shall' be' hereby made apart' of'this f' '
approval. Commissioner Puerz seconded the motion"and"the"fol16ioing'1
vote was taken. 16-Z-70
r•.. r i r,.. , ,. ! ` approved
Ayes: Commissioners Buthenuth, Hirshon'and Chairman'Puetz'''
Noes: Commissioners Irwin and•Mcyeis
Absent : None
4. Applications 4-Z-71 and 3-TI.1--71 'of Vincent 'and Domenica`''` `'
Maggio and Louis F. Bonacich for rezoning •0.3 acre"from""' �
Rl.-7.5 (Residential Single-family 7500 sq. ft. lots) to
R2-4.25 (Residential Duple'x)'-andA.4'acre' from"R1=7':5'" "
(Residential Single-family 7500 sq. ft . lots) to M R3-2'.'2 ''"` 1
(Residential ' ultiple.*Family) ;''and Tentative 'Map�to,,.divide
0.7 acre into two parcels. Said property is located''( 4-Z-71 &
westerly of and adjacent to Blaney Avenue, approximately i 3-TM-71 t
300 feet north of the intersection of Blaney Avenue' and ' previously
La Mar Drive. First Hearing, postponed
F
These two applications were previously postponed under the postpone .i
ments portion of the agenda. y
At this time, the meeting was recessed for ten minutes.
S. Applications 4-TM-71 and I.-U-71. of Mario and Rita
Barbieri for a Tentative Map to divide 4 .7 acres into• !
three parcels , and Use Permit to allow construction of
a gasoline sales/automatic car wash on Parcel One. Said
property is located at the northwest corner of the inter-
section of Stevens Creek Boulevard anal Vista 'Dri.ve, in a
CC (Cenera.l. Commercial) zone. First Hearing.
Planning; Director Sisk briefly discussed the circumstances which 1 4-TM-71 S �
prompted :he filing of. Application.4 7'INI -71, stating tl'rat the 'currenti 1-U-71
application is essentially a refiling .of, �. previou.s• Tentative flap i presentation
M Ki,I MR ,
I �
^t' ,
t
b
I r
,.-. .. i.�,. r:s ,�;S.,e MF�,,,•:y "�fi,�lir,y t'�. �4 i��iY tv'�';t°�t�?E•�'QT{N I�.,�'}r� ,r�••.; I)tit;,µ I S ;,`.�a;� �'� 1...� .��' t � .te t 'i F
't..,+ �.r.J� � �v?i:4'�M1"A�"4 5 1 � � 1 �S 1 r � r?�Y.d�' �' 'r+I �C i u� ' ;••-'�?,i °,.�b
�, tb .L ftLr:�i sv ��'y����t"�!yt4:4,}1 At'�C.i� �.*4ui`y 4•F�h+}�C,gh 't,�,�`i �I�'{vttd•g �j���{1'1. , ,�,a� +i
, ti A' tit � '`�i„";�'�+s��i:'.�"��5���.rq�fi 'ti!�k'�� ���•,r
! 1, •. ' IJ .,...I.,i¢ ;,,""I!:'Iii:}�] "'!;Cl1'i!,i'L 'l f't.) ::G ,,J IIr•IYl iltJ bt' I' a;
Page 6 1 Minutes of the Planning Commission, February 22, 1971 PC-28
Public Hearings (continued)
which was approved by the .City but ratot,.yrep4red,;in;.fLinal
approval by ,the City, for rccordat,il)Ia..,,.r.Itr,was.,explain2d t�at!;,4t:p,lots
' described in the original Tentative Map were subsequently deeded to
separate buyers•without tlie. necess iry,Final,,Parcel Map;,;and.;were,
such, illegal lots.,,
r ,;i;,,,:
Planning Director Sisk stated that the *current Tentative Map was filed
to legalize the three lots. Mr. S .sk ,further commented„that,,,talthough s'
.4
the original Tentative Map was; previously .approved, ,lie.jfelt tliat,;the
staff's present philosophy regarding commercialldevelopTpnt:tiwap to,J•I,;
keep large parcels intact . lie .emphasized that ,the !Cityt,s.t ill con---.;q
siders the 4.7 acre parcel as legally- intact., ;Mr. ,Sisk;:explained-,
that plans have been prepared and-,discussed-on, staff !level tol;widen!,. 1,
and extend V.ista Drive north to provide secondary access to the
proposed commercial area located northerly..of the proper ty,_.:A.;map;;,,;
was exhibited describing the proposed. alignment of the ,road, ' ;•,,,�Li;;;;
& Assistant Cicy E'ngineer .Viskovich described the cross..sect ion-of
;j,;;f;
1-U-71 the proposed Vista Drive .extension:and..the.,effect. on!the;'Tentativen,,
discussion Map under discussion.,r;
It was explained that the street plan, as presented, would require an
additional 17 feet of dedication, over..and. above,,th3t:which would„have
been required for a 60-foot street.;.
Commissioner Hirshon commented on the frequency of these illegal lot
divisions and indicated that the applicant,.'s. recourse.would be' to
show cause.
At this point, City Attorney Adams. raised .a ,point-, that,;in;lhis opinion
the applicati.n, as submitted, was- invalid in that the applicant did
not legally represent the oc,niers of the entire; ,4.7, acres,,,,encompassed
by the map.
After additional comments regarding the legality..of.,thel application, '.
public it was moved by Commissioner Buthenuth, seconded: by Commissioner
hearing llirshon that the public healing be closed . The motion passed by
closed a unanimous vote. o
It was then movebl by Commissioner Buthenuth, seconded by Commissioner #
.14-111-71 & Hi.rshon and passed unanimously that Applications 14-TM-71 and-.l-U-71
1-L�-71 be continued to the meeting of March .22, 1971 to allow the applicant
continued to get consent of the other property owners involved in the applica-
tion.
Unfinished Business r.
6. Request of Sterling Home Developers for approval of (1)
Revised Development Plan of Application 23-Z-69, and (2)
Revised Tentative Map of Application 33-TM-69. Said
property is located approximately 500 feet nertherlyi`.and:t
200 feet westerly of the intersection of Stevens Creek,;, ,,
Boulevard and 'Foothi.11, Boulevard . .,'.! ),.;1 tr;,;!;; r
(CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 8 M1ETING) ti
low
i
4
x
,
�t en_414 a �Kti ri�c,f ; rn
t rr�� raY i kiJYp.. �r 1 �.t�
l'41� t� i3t zK+y } a x e t � q�exFM nt
v rt
Yet 3N'7"4i` 1 i u^''� S
t tr Yki�^ sr•, f ��r d z� _u�3 p�tf f
Z "1 i.
Minutes of the Planning Commission, February. 22, 1971
• i; i , '.', : : ;•, '•t ,+> tr 4,' ,?u l.i'•,cr ` 1 � i:) � v =*i i -`<< `�� �+''Page;,:,, 'u
Unfinished Eusiness (continued)
Through the use of exhibits, Planning Director Sisk' reviewed .the ) . >f
changes 1 roposed"i;r1the''revised Te.ntai_ive Map!racid.•1DeveFopment„±Plan ;,t,'°r
Mr. Sisk clarified'''the Equestiorls''ra.ised iin!IaE';the,'Februafy:i8'':�•1971rr:;:
meeting regarding distances between .buildings"�in'{the•.fi•rst';�and�Y;,i:;;"�•:;;'1'
second units and the revised -front yard set6ack:•distances between
the units and the public right-of-way line o£ streets B and C. '
A major concern was that: sufficient distance be provided between'-'° f,
garages and curb line so that parked--automobiles:would vnot..;force, •,; .••.
pedestrians off the sidewalk and into:the street•,. Afterr•the
Commission discussed ,va.rious alternatives to reduce the possible
hazard of having driveway-parked automobiles overhang publc •side-1•,,1 ^ 1 c
walks, it was agreed that a requirement to place non-outswinging 1
doors on all. units facing streets B and C would be appropriate.
i $
Commissioner Irwin moved and it was seconded by Commissioner Meyers I
that the revised Tentative Map, 33-TM-69, be approved subject to ' f
the conditions contained in the staff report and one additional
condition stipulating that all units with garages facing streets
B and C have non-outsw..,inging garage dpors. 33-TM-69
approved
Ayes: Commissioners Buthenuth, 11irshon, Irvin, Meyers
and Chairman Puetz
Noes: None
Absent. None ' '•J' '�
Commissioner Irwin moved and it was seconded by Commissioner Meyers
v
that the Development Plan labeled "Exiiibit D, Second Revision, ;
23-Z-6'9" be revised Subject to the conditions contained in the
staff memo of February S, 1971 and one additional condition re- ' 23-'L-69
quiring that all units with garages facing streets B and C have ? revised
non-outswinging garage doors. development
plan approved
Ayes: Commissioners Buthenuth, Hirshon, Irwin and Meyers r
Noes: Chairman Puetz i
Absent: None j x-
New Busi nncss i
There was no new business introduced.
Report of PlanninP. Commis loners �
There ,ere no reports presented at this time.
Report of 1'lanninE, Director K
Planning Director Si.slc stated that he had omitted a written corrmuni
cation ro the I)lann.i.r.g Conmii.asion from Richard 11. Donahue of 7940 letter
Woodlark Ida ,•, requesting tliat the City of Cupertino oppose high response
density Toning at the corner of Bubb Road and McClellan Road. authorized
Mr. Sisk asked I-or permission to respond to the letter and per-
mission was granted .
l i ,
}
'� 2 -�h. 5.'t,:.r• i,.._ .,�....� •"::. .<., 3c.-'c�dt"Z+.uqS 1.: 9 4.a:..v .fS(n e•':n}w)��;,'_ �� +.; �'iJ .yr„R �n,A;': :�! \) �1� '.5ti pNf,}. l va`nr-.Yti,t 9�r,F.,:>H� v'•a:,r'ty.t'4
'�'. -,'S .�:3., a } �:i. rr � s,y" ;?fyt�r 4r• .,t+� '4 Tc1,fi. F4� 1t t 1'+t'A�t 8.F ti� .{�.i!Y4..�, 1 r�3�rw{"`� a..i � ".�� _",-. Y• � .iy_,
i'• !J '1'.J+� F � •' iJ 1. ! `✓Fit Ix . 4 a 1•! /1 d n •..r: 3f ..rl J ,>� '�`'7:n. ....:..'hJ1
aaY .'� afT�•T. ..� .,.? .aril:2;'{U r.M1.�.� �'4�W!�+ � :%`fAl �n i�,i k. i•h t'Kf.tjY *}.r?y7.q7. >�.i N7Jni 9r i3"?y��tq " },...i�,fi�`:�N•f �1�'= t1` r_. ,kiv.^+a
.k. ! V x,3> 4 �*}.'� irf>. �t.'t. �+ •r t � �a Ta'.1 � r+1' � 'ltC « � 5 { /s:. -y 'u. ¢�
- s).S�J.wt � � '2x) k>7'.4rtsr't •'f4:.,y H t }..t `� .,r1°� p,`fi4. 7 � 1.}' K 'i °^o.r
ti pl �:�� s} y`4 rL} �...._::f a} ;kN�.. tr 1. ,,�a� .:d. i:. 1;.:'F � -r� Y te',h44 �rgk"'i*'jr'yRi ,"�'� •t'•..5•t SkSP �a�' `tT -,ti� .::..; f.e 2' .1� {J'. ,,.ia.
�ci .r � e �'.;-k . �� t�+t-.,.t �t r i'f:d 1; {. Y�L l 7\`.�7'Vt) 4�,�tA}i}�i�� ,.'f:,t� tea,.MN9:+n;'� �e ,�c y.•�nr3 7?n«'�.R.•�ni ra tt_, 4..� i.., v �' r :-„,{_.,-�y1,
.7 v.•r:'1: inx,�.`tr'.`4'.`.. ;tl '�y '.Z,:«, r•. fa'� � 4 >v`• o3$,c- v 1��$ t.:� 1 } )'ri )'i,��' }4rF 'b h r� 1 ) r }:r .t� ,�
•7;t. ro'R ,t .,7 .Z. s � r,” 1 Lam._::ii Y EX
a .ii 4 ..`f.:-.!iF ire.�Zf..-{t .,�.,fit• i.�,. t �V f t F r •.;�i;.• to o K k
r, "q
'try'. ,_y�;,.• :y;3�7
:�}��a ,a.r��;;l? •;-fit`
art"e '�y
t;r, rxyra.
f•' T
J
1 "8
•`'rya
eix }n:
tB
tfh
•�`L5 0i
,�m
her _
m 'b45wFr°-�.
{;.•�tr• N1t'R,iP S w7'•fi-•ti 4.l:s'-,.�;v...L u• "'t.... p c 1 r__, yr�';'
t y .. •..r.. a 'r°,.s r;��.;�k �..,.. o ,. 1£r''tyt.w�,,7cs}�. t�r?;eti:i �,�• `•'tr3� fas Fff' ti�yi; tin�, J w l�.s}a S:'h 4<;.�.F ? .,1 r f 5- -,^ j\.. LY 1•30 Y a. }ice S 4st:. o-,!�.tiif.�'%t`.�,'0.."�-"=.,juJNf !• ta4.:e.•.}. 5..y';iiFo�` ,':)r,`� �tt,,^� ^8 e�?r .cC.F���' �t C X '��..>,'f L 2 c<'�`•ta:��7�?x•':J!�t`sf;�,�; s�6.�•5;<.:�i��e 'i<.,•.<� dyY. -o rEn:fat art x -J �, . «'
' r-- 'i-:r :t .,:. t'. .`•+..:[�hc'i51,� 1. a.I..L ,+ r Wq}3i '?E. ��jau�.j"•i'i 11'•.t%c'ii3,:t. ... ..+ -'tai ,7 •C. w•ii1•. •<:`:C >v.�r:^ Ly yY`°i 1 rc;
! ,.�,. d.,*�� y:c:' V4rM`s•�.'!•t,h.,°�`nr,Sr`�sj;1.�.r=1,4��•i"�h)Y• r1.. �.r:$r..4{5�1'"F`5;1.:�}-
;L,�t;.pit �.y�r-4 y.}�U a �'s� ,., t� .T!(?,�5 a t. t`;,�� •l. ,'t1 �.•
.�'t �.s ,. Y �.TJ'�",t3�+� 4v;1'F �4�• � '��jM �4nk�iii iM..1 .T.'.',{�.""'�S t �Rlil�l}. �{�'C�l�et�}'t'{,y`d 1>-` � M1:.`-s -ro F� 1 ~y
- ""14 a'1- t ,r y,t'.1 a *' p' •,�+{. _`!r tF ,K��L�.t 1?t�.,,. y L-: . c .n.- �t t. z"si r •i:ei71 )�� t•:•�S?;: ,. - J- •i�I. .
1ka�v1:t'SR...S. �Y g-1i'. ..$��. .3...: .e3 aa.R SPY.s 4..'«�"�rx�u1U.1,e. '.w�th...•,4: ,u.-�;.4_.. z�:h�i ...^''r�u. tz�. �2i,`J_{S`.;,.•;r��nt.�lKdn�`,;'�3'i�+�"'�L.r"�...xY:','�C�FtT'�:9�..�:a..::✓.• �•';'e.,•,..e:c Y ;%•o u t�.'*i c.�S z.;K