PC 02-08-71 i°
hrf'r.• •.. fl�t`4'�i tMi;.c;'`. � .t { F�.'C R �-y��1lr.+`, at <"�,� M'�'yg Y �� ta. ,�, � °Y�?r "� } ~''i',. �.
h't ...•
}1 t�9 f figYT� hti fZ ��Mf Y}tr `
4q;
i�E W tfi4� qr4,'�' .•y,
S A
� �• - �S r 1t jt �1t�,1, i"�t
CITY OF CUilrlaiNn, .Statr_ of California
.?r{! it C}
10300 Torres Avenue, 'Cupertino `California
Tr 1e hone: 252-4505 ( PC-27
..lei_---- ) i�1� .r �.
.. � r•,'2 ,:ri 'r:.+i.tjt:fii'r ') i. ',: :t, :1 !I,'•��Yl � ;'/1�1° t 't .i
MINUITS OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ! '
FEBRUARY 8, 1.977. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBL-R, CITY BALL
CUPER'TINO, CALrIF02NIA
,
. 1
Chairman Puctz called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m:.• and led the i
flat; salute.
!Roll. Call
Commission•_rs in at :endance: Ruthenuth, ilirshon, Irwin , Meycrs and
Chairman Puet:z. There wc!re no Comin:i.ssi.oners absent from the meeting: roll ca.l..i.
Also attending: City i•fannger Quinlan, City Attorney Adams, Planning,, ( c
Director Sisk, Assistant Planner Col.:an, Assistant, City Engineer,
Viskovich and Recording Secretary Dolores Idhite.
_oyal of ',linute.s: Minutes of January ll., and 25,• .19,71. 1 z
It tdas moved by Commissioner Irwin, seconded' by ,Commissioner Meyers ai:d
Passed unanit-:ousl.y that the Minutes of the meeting held January 11, i r.
1971. be approved as written. Minutes
! approved
It was
then moved by Commissi.uner ,foyers with A }s1econd by Ccmmissionerl
Ii ;,*.in that the ;finutos of the meeting held January ?.5, 1971 -e. approved.
t
as airi.LCen. 1 :�
Postponements, etc.
I'lanni.ng, Director Sisk indicated that a request had been received froth,
tile applicant relative to Items 1 and 2 on the agenda that these
matters be continued to the meeting of March 8, 1971. The' applicant
had informed the Planning Director that he had been working. with thc' .
architect , located in San Francisco, and t:,ould be submitting a tie w set'
of draw-inks for both facilities at t'fie ^eet:ing of March 8th.
It was moved by Commissioner Hirshon and seconded by. Commissioner 126-U-70
Meyers that Applications 26--U-70 and 27-U-70 of 'Texaco .be continued 27-Ii-7U
for hearing at the meeting to be held March 8, 1971, The motion w-is continued
carried by a unanimous vote.
I.7ri.tten Communications
Cliairillan Puetz recognized a letter re_cen'tl.y receive d from Mrs. Juallita
McLaren requesting to speak r.egarclin;; the Red Cross Blood Drive. }
Mrs. McLaren Advanced to the podium And informed all present that blood t.
on Tuesday February 9th, between the hours of 4 :00 p.m. and 7 -00 p.m. , donations
on Alves Drive next to Gemco, the Red Cross organization would have requested �.
a blood mobile stationed for blood donations. Shc' r.equested all
persons between the agc3 of 18 and 61 years donate,as 6 million .1
Units were needed for this worthy cause.
11125 14!11�iij�
f
- .y 4
".��}7
Page 2 Minutes of the Planning Commission , February 8, 1971 PC-27
7,t,5
Oral Communications r
There were no oral communications presented at this time.
Public Hearing a,
ti
1. Application 26-U-70 of Texaco, Inc. for expansion of .gasoline
dispensing system in existing service station at the southwest
corner of homestead Road and Sara toga-Sunnyval e:Road,,,173n�a CG
ue
(General Commercial) zone. First Hearing contind.... . ; , [
2. Application 27-U-70 of Texaco, Inc, for-expansion of• .gasoline
dispensing^ system in existing service station at the northeast
corner of Stevens Creak Boulevard and Saratoga-Sunnyvale..:Zoad.,
in a CG (General Commercial). zone. First Hearing continued,.
The,-,,- two applications were previously continued under the postponements
portion of the meeting.
r
3. Applications 1-TM-71 and :'-U-71 of. Mary Trcnis for Tentativre #
Map to divide 1.49 acres into two parcels and' Use
Permit to
allow the construction of an enclosed car washh with gasoline
sales. Said property is located westerly of and adjacent to
Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, approximately 420 feet sou, ,.Ofi
Rodrigues Avenue, in a CG (General Commercial) zone.
First hearing.
Planning D.Lrector Sisk mentioned that the application involved two
requests the first of which was for a Tentative Map to divide the
property into two parcels and, secondly, for a Use Permit to allow
t-T`1-71 & for an ecxcerior car wash facility.-U-71.
pr�se::tati°n lie said the Planning Department was concerned about the close, proximity
of this proposed operation to Liar Town Con-ter and it was felt that the
use was not in keeping with the plans Cor the area. He presented visual
aids depicting; the the property in question as well as the site plan �
Of the facility,
k
Ln response to a request from Comrn:issi.oner. Irwin regarding information
avafiah.l.e oat this type. o,f operation, ,•:r. Pill Briggs, one of the owners
of Clean Machine, :Inc. , advanced ;.o the podium to enlighten the Commission �
on the Proposal.
,
e
Mr . Briggs presented slides showing the progress made in the past, few
years in car lJash desi"n. t?e said he had one car wash in operation' in
cis•,-�:r i. i.or. �.
p San I candr.0 o;hich had been u ���•ra.. Ln,; for approximately 4 months. The City
s:ito was described 7
ibed as vc7y deep and more tan adequate for the proposed
use. Ile continued that this, facility would be facing a 6--1ane ,roadway
tJl?ich lle hoped would pl.ov:LdC Li to .300 cars to be washed SJithin the
fcrci.liLy. slides Were then sho;,'n o.f the property which had been taken
f coo various d Lrect:i.ons,
.t.:i
5
}
r
t
t,.,.,,. x.�„� t; `i'�;tl�' 'STY�k�l71Yx1.,n, ''cW.4:('z', T u' °;;,�'g0?'h(�i C{•u"v.� �t y
5 f�•2;j�1$!rp;, .:it'�a r•t t1,'�."� �i ��'�n�����.`!,ny1 .;,�c i„ ,�t,.� ��,}y a,�„5 t t' � � e + a t;
s �..,v " w rF r�� �q9 y7.1+'+a•�tis�s�! � "� y�.�y,-� e�Z
Minutes of the Planning Commission, February 8 1971 C sPC 27
v-1i l� tO r'. ;'n .J ,.ytti.n':1:i`l c 1l� lr Ttrrtl'I; ' PIIgB� 3[:'•
Public llearii-.gs (continued)
In continuing, Mr. Briggs took the Planning Commission on an excursion
through the proposed' car w�sli' operarion 'by"means of slides'. fie.'des
cribed the' operntion, 'st'e'p oy` t'tep;T''an.d 'pointed-'out °that-"the'a'ut'omobile .�
upon exiting the wash would be compl.et:'cly'dry:`' 'He` said thel'ontire
I
wash process would take about one minute.
Mr. Brie' G went' on to describe' the noise' level''to'be'` 'compaLWile with -`T' I{
erg-
the surroundings, indicating that a- 6-'foo 'masonry.`wal'1 was' to
placed along the rear of the property' il.otig'with' 'trees` and -'slirubs,,
to insur.'c proper 'screening to 'the'i-csi.dents 'and 'to''provide= for' g'recii' Tt= I
area. Ile said the 'major portion :o'f 'tl•ie''noise' emanating'front the- oper{i?• i
tion t,=ould occur at' the front of:' the j�jroperty.'' ' It shad. been'`pio osed`,``'
he continued, to plant olive. trees as they' iwou ld' remain green `through•'
the year. lie mentioned that the front planters would`incorpo'rate--Tow= I further
gro:.,hi ; landscaping and .landscaping would be used in the middle of the y descripti.vc: ;
property for traffic channelization, The total landscaping he"2n�'r
dicated, would comprise 20 per cent of the total Land area.
„i� 'ic: i comments
A rendering as shown to the Conimissi.oner.s and' Mr. Brie ' described 'the : t
g gs i
J..
architecture of the facility as' including sofid masonry 's.lumpstone','`a
Mission tile mansard roof', one restrocm,` an off ice'-at'-the'-r=ear+ of' ,the--'
buiidin, and a front opening, 7 ' x 12' wide, to provide access for• one -
automobile through the crashing system. In order to ThAp curb` pollution 1 ti
the building was erected as an enclosed operati.on''to' reduce°noise, crl;icli
is below the street levels checked. Low-level lighting , he='said , 7wouid
be included in the landscaped planters; there would be 4 or:"5 signs; ''l'
none of which would be visible from the street; biodegradable soaps
would be used with the wash water being iecla>.imed and' the'-pr'oblem''of ' •
overspray was also being investigated.
t
In concluding his presentation, -Mr. Briggs mentioned 'his feeling that
the staff had clone an excelldnt job on the staff' 'report but''he was j s
surprised at some of the comments contained therein. s
In responding to several questions from the Commissioficrs, Mr. Briggs i
cem+nented that the proposed use for the adjacent property was unknown,
that about 24 automobiles could be contained behind the gasoline Bump '_ J
oporati.on, the operating hours woulci be from 8:00 a.m.. to 8;06;p.m. ':"
generally, excluding holidays, and the noise level. would be at 55 to
60. decibels maxiTnum measured at the front of the building with 20 to i
30 decibels at the rear of the property. lie then indicated that com-
plete cooperation would be given regarding any conditions imposed.:-' '
/Audience comments were requested by Chairman Puetz, at this time, and
Mr. R. D. Koenitzer of 10060 Pha.r Lap Drive, Cupertino, came forward i
voicing his objections -to the proposed use., saying that the location
was a bad one being across from the Town Center and the City -Library, audience
a
the use was not an appropriate one for the doe-;ntocwn area and als-o that ' comments
he would prefer a unified plan for the entire parcel, lie then questioned
the noise level of the vacuums located at the rear of the property, f
indicating his concern in this regard.
I
i
I' r
1,
4'
- -•,�$Iftkt'F7.rCi?�ve"�4>,~�;;i + 1 :ttarppc"'7Fp� qtr'! �•c n•�, '^„' a a,. .:<i
•.�� �"1 I..d v v�V�'.:2t` Y ",� .S Yee.'r�4t?wr�''�iq9qq,,��su. n r�,,ly,„� r'�1��F ,� try, p ,� ,
X11 ;',`i',��� ,t'..a a��:§`CYi�r<t4hy�,f¢:"� {'.�".11•Ski y' a"t At K1 S. ,r{�y 7y! t J:i�•
t �+«< �,1�.rCl•�ryyt,+S� �'�uf}1 � ,4 ,d�,.�, n, t�.:,
r r ,rj•."1 :.t, ,:1 -#-IC;.i i.�tJ t 'isf t iit:Y 4
Page 4 Minutes of the Planning ComR3ssion, :February 8, 1971 ,, ' ; %,FC-27
Public Hearings (continued) a,
public Inasmuch as there, were no further audience, comments, it, was moved.,bytrS`.;
hearing Commissioner Meyers, seconded
by Coumissioner .Irwin and„passed.,unanimoussly
closed that the public bearing be; closed. ; it, ,: t •, ; '<t, „ .Yi,J
Several opinions were indicated by the Commissioners, some of which were
as follows. Coinmissioner. Hirshon felt than tthe,;architectuze of:
building was good and should be shown on. the ,street ;side +o_f,.the.:site .;., �s
Commissioner Meyers indicated that a. good. job• had -been ,done.;on tthe;. iu1a.I
project but felt that a non-automobile related,,use would,,better,rfit;
the area. Commissioner Buthenuth said his; only,-reservation.,, that,:rc,;
the proposed use would necessitate a lot split an he, was concerned,, i
that it was not known what type of use would he incorporated onto,,ahe,.,
adjacent_ property. i tr(
Based on the fact that lie felt that the lot split, would' reduce control;. .
of the area, that the noise problem had possibly. not .been,,inuestiga.ted;
in enough depth, because of Cite traf.::ic problem and the bad image that
the proposed use would create :in the, area .Col*tmissi.oner ?twin ;enter,tai�ned
a:::.,, .,
nd . §i
a motion, which was seconded by Commissioner. Hirshon,,that. Application.
1-1'M-71 be recommended. to the.-City Council for ,denial..,.,. .
1-Tt�i--71 `
denial- Ayes: Commissioners Buthenuth, Hirshon, Irwin,,,Meyers,.and t
reco:nrnonied Chairman Puetz
Noes: None
Absent. None
It was further moved by Commissioner Irwin and seconded,by, Commissioner
2-U-71. Meyers r_hat Application 2-U-71 be recommended for denial,. ., ...
denial
T't
recommended Ayes: CominISSioners Buthenuth, Hirshon,. Irwin, Meyers; and ;.7
Chairman Puetz } :;
Noes: . None
Absent : None
t
The applicant was commended by Corimissioner•I.rwin for,his presentation
and he added that he felt the layout was a good one except. for the.
location of the. property.
Chairman Puetz informed the applicant that lie had the right to appeal ,
the Planning Commission 's denial of the application to the City Council, s
in i•jriting, Within 5 days.
4. Application 2-TM-71 of City of Cupertino .- Avery Construction
Company fora 'Tentative Map to combine a 28-acre parcel and a,.
4.31-acre parcel. into one parcr2l. Said property is located
easterly of Mary Ave!iue, appro-xir.aLely 1200 feet north,of E
the intersection of Mary Avenue and Stevens ,Creek Boulevard,
in a P (Planned Development) zone. First ,11earing. .
,
1
.!• t. 7 l k4{fD `^ 4 SAS} T di• .ff9 a( W. '" 4 +JMQ, ti 11
)R•G J�•)�� t�� F )Y},,r�,t ! .1 �i t .�yl}G."I r ?L h .1 i :�.{`.M
Rl
�twtFrt;lp 'k{i���MMa`� t, ,. � • '�"��r+ '°a.•'7� 5 �5t'A'`Lf{ t'�h`� '' .F��.
PC-27
1 ! r, t...•; _ ..i
Ptinutcs of the Planning' Commi'csion',' February 8, 197
Page 5
r lo:J'N
Public Hearings (continued)
.tf E`.J.i? -) fC•!aI
5. Appl.i.catioi .3-'Z'-71' 'Of 'C'i)yi'of' Cupery no fo'r' Rezoning of •4.3 t:'.•_
acres from T (Transportation) to'�P"'(Planned'Development),with°
R3-2.2 (Resid ontial Multiple family 2200 sq ft. per -dwelling, ` '
unit) use intended 0.62 ii'cre` from' T ('fr•"ansporta•tion) ttot
(Planned Development:) with CG '(General: commercial)' Ittse in j
tended; and 0:50 acre from T' (Tr�insport atibTi) to 'P3 2.2-rf
(Res i.dentlal 'Mu.lt.ple 'rai�lly 2200'sgt. `-t 'per dwellingsunit,
Planning Commission Resolution No. 520 applying) . Said { <<
property is .Located easterly of the pending Mary Aven'ue"re-t
` alignment, approximately •1200 feet north 6f' 6' intersectio'na'±
of Mary Avenue and Ste vens• Creek Boulevard`.* 1Firstf 1Ie''aring':`
i
New Business
6. Request of the Avery Construction Company 'to amend Use ''Permi't,i '
No. 22-U-G7
in order to incorporate -an additional. 4.3 'a'c' res'
(68 additional (i;,lelling units) into the existing 28-acre
(449 units) Planned Development zoned''apartment complex:.
' Said property 'i located' easterly' of Mary Avenue', 'ap.prox•i
matcly 1200" feet north' of Mary 'Avenue
enue and Stevens` Crek' " ;
Boulevard.
suggested by Planning Director Sisk that Items 4 ,. 5 and 6 on Items, 4,5.5.6;:
{:
the agenda be consolidated for. discussion'. 'It was `so"moved .by,.Com- ' consolidated
miss:i.oner Irwin, seconded by Commissioner Meyers and passed"una"mously.
Mr. Sisk explained that three separate actions were involved-' those bein ' ` ;
a Tentative •tap, a change of zoning of a portion of, the property •and f;
On consideration of an amendment 'to ; 'previous. `approved Use Perm C'. '
The zoning change proposed was for the realignment of Mary 'Ave'nue 'which' j
was to be dens in the very near future. Visual aids were presented`'. .
showing th-e tentative map and the site plan of the proposed• develop'-'
presentation
went.
Mr. Burt Avery of Avery Construction', Mountain Vie,,-7,' came forward
indicat:Ing that ti)c proposal was a6vanced by the Planning Depar'ment ;
staff. Ile said Mary Avenue now has a reverse curve and mentibned that"
t:he: e::tr:a portion of land would b . usecl in the same manner as' that
across the street incorporating the identical density. The plan
uti:l.izes 7-foot meaaciithic si.dc•,aal,,s anti the suggestion was made'by
Rjr . Avery that the trees be moved to allow for a bicycle path along'
Mary Avenue. 1•1r . Sisk responded that provision had already been-made'w
for said bicycle path.;
Agreement was indicated by Cemrtissione.r Meyers regarding the relocation
tTer that provision should be..
of the trees and tae also indicated fu ;
i
made for both struts to have '-,top signs. It u.-as suggested that the t
Department of Public lJorks put additional speed limit signs inithe
area and that adequate policing be incorporated. In concluding, Mr.
Meyers recommended the staff reconsider the possibility of the'small
Parcel being landscaped by Mr. every. j
' E
r;
F
G
�4
t�'
. i. ' , t ,y� 'i rs ifi �,+,1.T tA" •� f ,�C�- yY,s r ,d'XC t'� 5 i,{st. 'i
„i i -- j+i-.1i " '�,5..'x yy�t�i Srt ` t j;stsa��, vl a�. �l�i'.y - �r' �- it ✓t �,'k4
• + -:fir �S j- �+.; /�:tt s�isth ,7
Page 6 Minutes of ,the Planning'Commission, ,February .a„;1971,;;;f,,; ,t ., PC-27
Public Hearings (continued)
Chairman Puetz requested audience, comments, however, ;no,ne_•.werel;,in-
dicated and discussion cone inued.,
Commissioner Buthenuth asked that a cross-section, map be.,pre,sented for
review and inquired if Mr. Avery had any objections,-to. landscapRing the
triangular shaped Portion of land.. Mr,. ,Avery„offered •his:agreement
and added that, at a minor loss of sidewalk, ,the,oak tree,zwould re-main:.
In concluding the discussion, Mr. Viskuvich briefly,relayed the, cross- a.
section information for Commissioner Buthenuth's,.information.and
Mr. Avery mentioned that lie would be removing ;improvements from:
Mary Avenue and placing them on the new aligiunent in the same manner
at no cost -to the City. ?i ` •+. s
public It was moved by Commissioner Meyers, seconded by. Commissioner. Irwin,
hearing and passed that the public hearing be closed.
Closed
It was moved by Commissioner Irwin and seccnded, by Commissioner', Meyers
that Application 3-I_-71. be. recommended to. the City .Council; fo,r_ approval
with no conditions being imposed, and with that certain:..5, acre, parcel
designated from T to R3-2.2rf as sho:m on Exhibit A to remai.,n ,in the
Transportation 'Lone. v
annroved Ayes: Commissioners Buthenuth, Hirshon, Irwin, ,Meyers and
Chairman Puet
Noes: None
Absent: Ncne {{,,
It was further moved by Commissioner Irwin that approval be ,r,ecommended'.. M1
of Application 2-111-71 subject to the. Standard Conditions (1, through. 1*4).•
and i.,ith the stipulation that the cross-sections of the •Tentative] Map
be completed prior to submittal to the Council. The motion wae, `seconded
2-1'-1-71 by Commissioner Buthenuth and passed by the following vote.
L'
appYOVed
Ayes: Commi-ssioners UuCtrenuth , llirshon, Irwin, Meyers and
Chairman Puet'l. i
Noes: None
Absent: None
A motion w.is then entertained by Commissioner Irwin and seconded by ft?
Comma-ssi.oner Pleyers that Application 22-U-67 be recommended to the
City Council for approval with the change in wording in Condition 12 i
from tiro date of October •23, 1967 to February 8, 1971 and, additionally,,
that Condition 16 be added providing Chat rile landscaping of the ad-
jacent triangular-shaped parcel wall_ be included by the developer
22-U-67 contingent upon ultimate usage d etermination.
approved
Ayes: Commissioners Buthenuth, liirshon: Irwin, Meyers and t,,•' •;
Chairman Pulutz
Noes: None
Absent : None ! :
MEMNON n
F,
E- li,
7
t
t
:.�: . ry .'c�`�ku: } •�?,« �ltyr;f�µt t"f,'��;�u<i'i�?1��"��:4 t "ue r ��"�'YV � �t`r�` -`r��q'���,'��,,r '*`" �s�,�,r"gp u �4„ x �,C � �f .� ;� T
f R• -� il �jh.
�'' i a •a`99,ft - �',t
� 'ttS t
.•.r�t L )-why fl,i
Ott Y Yt
Minutes of the Planning-'Commission!•,^r-ebruary x8;:•:1971;rc,'r;.f.':I of PC-27 c
• Page 7
Public Hearings (continued) i i. •".,rc.i ;;r! "'oi.''.5;•"
• v
A Minute' Order was-proposed. by:'Commissioner ,Irwin f•aradr,jec`onded cbyc J,G
Commissioner Meyers relative to••thisi development,:with: respectl:to: :,'1;>xf'1::�=':i. Minute Order
a request that the City Council•Yevi"aw t he,'ingress:and! egress: for'•'r:i proposed
the placement of stop signs at .each: of, these: pointsilini,the develops'
ment. The Minute Order was passed by .a' unanimous-voLe of"the
Commission.
A recess eras called by Chairman hueLz at 9:55 p.m. and the meeting was
reconvened at 10:05' p.m I recess
7. Request of Sterling home Developers for approvaltof (1), Revise&
Development 1'1°an of App.l.icat:ii)n 23-7-69 and (2) Revised Tenta-
tive Map of Application 33-1'M-69. Said property is :located,-,a t
proxinnately 500 feet northerly and 200 feet westerly: of the.q:: 'c;
intersection of Stevens Creel: Boulevard and Foothill. Boulevard:: i
Mr. Sisk introduced the applicant's architect who came• 'f'orward. to :the
podiu:,n concerning the proposed revisions. .
Air. ldarren Gilbert , Architect, 1515 The Alameda, San .lose, described !
the revisions proposed which included, primarily,-:-. a;} shi-f•t ,of building.,-1,
uilding 1 !
locations. Ife said there had been a greater demand for tine single sCOry, ;
two bedroom units;' there was to -be 60 feet of .right-of- !•
way, dedication:: .•:, X23-•L-69
instead of the original 46 feint and they were: proposing, four;sless;'units:'' i33-TM-69 z
in the second development thereby reducing density. 1-He continued:: by ."•"` ;presentatior.
saying that they were• also asking :that they building setback •be:rreduced �
to 15 feet instead of 20 feet as originally planned.
In resnonse to a question by Chairman Fuetz as to Lhe' street' dedication,s° !
Mr. Gilbert indicated that dedication .,roul'd include a full: 60-foo,t,n
street with space provided for normal sidewalk on, the P r '& E,•side; 'of
the street. It was added by Mr. Sisk that tile improvemc'.:•t did not -I
include a parking lane on the P G S.0 side of the roadway.
Mr. Gilbert continued by describing the furnace location as being
between the house unit and the garage in the corner of the patio, further
which was to be contained within a 2-1/2 foot by 3-1/2 foot enclosure. . description
i
lie then pointed out the movement of the buildings which had been pro e
posed and the various changes in setbacks. Mr. Gilbert then introduced.
Mr. Fred Ludemrzn also with S.terl.i.ng Howes.
Mr. L.udeman conuncnted that the distance between the buildings in the .
upper portion of Unit No. 1 had been reshuffled slightly between the
approval. of a Tentative Map and the Final Map. The Final Map, ha said•,,
showed the relocation of the buildings in Unit No. 1. He concluded by
explaining that the request for a setback reduction on Building B had
been requested to allow the proper setback as required.
!
It was suggested by Mr. Sisk that discussion of these proposed changes continuance
be continued to allow further review by the staff and proper presents- suggested L
tion. I 'r
ON
IS I
,
. � F
i
h 4
,
,
t
gi
'. Y x,�,�r ".�' vzt��.SS4�II �t. \i, '�"•?old �� t t.•R �N�ttCHS.<t z qq r W ��,a„a. - �E bm cri. �y(v.Y • rd �.
'1" yi �F .i.� •{l 1 i t;''',�fi SKr
'M TaiSf
Page 8 Minutes of the Planning Commission,, February 8-,j.'1971 '•.S 'I 's.fr ._<•.ti+rrit PC-27
Public Hearings (continued) !i ,:'' '. a.• ; i.l dr,'J
Discussion continued,-wherein it was suggested: that ahea presentation!
include such items'as 'the distances, between' driveways :and••buildings',S
a sketch of the building layout: including the 'Tentative; Map' distances '
as compared to what is presently. proposed, an explanat•ion 'of+:whyl'.the; z
development plan was:'not brought back. before; the' Planning=Commission t.rz:•,r7r
for approval when changed and also that a reproduction be included•s-�r'r%;,r!
for review that is of a larger scale and more readable.
23--7.-69 & It was moved by Commissioner Irwin, seconded by Conuaissioner.::Meyersi� •-'::,:'t
33-TM-69 and passed unanimously that Application Nos. 23-Z-69 and 33-T.M-69
continued be continued for discussion. ,•,;i „` r
A suggestion was made by Commissioner 1Keyers that the 18f eet?'of
property across the street be considered for utilization within the
development, to which Mr. Luderian responded that the Ci'Ly••Council
had requested the landscaping be placed between the development and
the P G & E facility. fie said the proposed 'landscaping was to be • : •• :i;
placed upon a five-foot mound to act as a screen.. 1•u=: : : 1
Report of Planning Commissioners. i - .•1
Concern was indicated by Chairman Puetz relative to .control. of''r.:,'."-
commerci.a.i uses_ throughout the City. Pl,anni.nv :Director. Sisk' replied
that a certain amouri.t of control is exercised. by:-the Plannirig-�Comm issxoa'
in that there is a listing of certain uses allowed on' commercial: prop—.:.-,
erty.
r
Some discussion ensued and the City Attorney explained that: the•rCity,-1
does not li:,ivc the no:,er to limit the number of uses contained with nr
the City, nowc:ver, it does have the power to restrict the number. of!.-. •
C011IT M 07.LCill areas. tie continued by saying; that the City cannot. desig-
✓;lr..c'd . Hate what business goes into an area. The City can, however',•'througH
C UI:1:ael:t5
the Use PelTlit pre-cedu.r.e provide that certain uses require an applica-
tion through the Pl::irinin'; Commission and a decision cail ba made- based ,,1
on the criteria o tili'. Ordinance for the general welfare and compat-
ibility to the neighborhood by e Gendi jig the Use Permit, procedure to,
include mare uses ti';an are presently incorporated. He said control
coul.d also be exercised or an existinz use because of health hazards,' •
etcetera.
fn summary, qtr. Ada*ns mentioned that, basically, people own land and
they can do anythinti that the}• calr.t to Lath it. He continued by saying
Chat zorlinf; is a t,rpe of restriction and the City must: endeavor to
create a balance between the r:i.t;hts of the pr.operty 'owner with the
Igeneral good of the people living �.r.i.thi.n the community. lie felt -to.
stay that the City can nn.lv have. a certain number of reStaLlrants, 'stores,•
c=_tcete.a, could not be done but added that the Use Perm.i c. provides :a:"'••
certain amount or control of Low many of thOSO usc.�; can be .incorporated
Lri:tlr!.n the C:i.ty, based upon the :,cner.a.l pr.omeCion of the welfare of
the residents and comp,ati.bility wish Clrc sur.roLnulin, uses, '
;. 7
r
4
a,•,'. h q d } 1 yrufiF 7 ��i r � {t?�N� + � t � #Y
' � � . .5+x•;4 t: W i ^�.q a, a7 i
e'lfi1 r 4H S
•r r �h j h. h �+"uLFM,< t ''� • n
P•. r; 3 .r
• i�. Fi y�T �rZ iF }`�•.0.t� h
• L7 ;
Minutes of the Planni.sig Comini'ssionk'ebruary 81;119717 •,rid a,. . r�uftl5. PC=27'`
Page 9
Report of Commissioners (cont
7'r:lrrr.i
Dialogue continued'lirlef.L'y; a:fter''wkich''•it''was agree,a"GyrMr` 'Si'sk fi�o 1
.)
present an in-depth' study to the'Commission' for their• infornato�r ,
concerning the Commercial Orc✓rinance.''
i
} Commissioner liirshon reported that-lie had been working on' the Pliinn ng
Policy Subcommittee which had been reviewing parks; open •spaces'and r ?
recreational activities. lie had been attendingImeetings wherein-'' " i report �t
plans and ideas had been formulated for a study which was rencler.ed Presented
that took two years based upon parks, looen spaces and recreation=four' {
the County. The subcommittee, he added, had beern 'requested to work': f ''
' 1 t
on this project , evaluate the study and'make recommenditions''-tah'ich' j
are now being done. lie concluded by saying that this undertaking 1
would be completed in approximately one month.
i
Re o r t of Planninr, Director
Mr. Sisk took this opportunity to take reservations 'for !the,short_r , i
course for public officials scheduled, for March 11th and 12th.
Reflecting to the previous year, Com,-nissioner Irwin offered his
favorable comments as to the course and rec.owmended all, who could, i u`
attend.
' t
The Co=ission was informed by Mr. Sisk that a zoning analysis study 11
was to be made public showing conforming and nom-conforming uses,
percentages involved in different zonings, etcetera. Copies of
t.l:.is study were thr>. pLesented to each of the Commissioners for
M~. Sisk requested that the Conunissioners cons ider_:,the\pes'sio. 1ity_pf
clustering duplex uses' -;s opposed to having i.rndividual lots' incorpo- I
rating two u.,,its to the lot`. The present zoning, lie said, was equal + continued
to 4-1/2 units r.e.r acre with the duplex use being approximately 7-1/2 f dialogue
on a net basis. Ile questioned whr?ther or not clusters of a higher '
density should be. all_otaeu an,! requestacl comments regarding this
•F
pnssibi.l.ity. r
Discussion ensued wherein it was generally agreed that the cluster
developments recently presented had a-ppearcd cluttered and lacked
open space. It was suggested by Commissioner ruthenuth that future
cluster development be reduced to allow for more open space within
I
the City. `f
'3
4
Commissioner Moyers mentioned he hacl rencl recently that a small
parcel of la:?d loc% ,ed on ltcClel.lan Road between September Drive and
the railroad trades Was con:tiderccl to be part of the County and he
que-stioned this item, s
A brief outline of the history of t .is urea was given by Mr. Sisk ! s
which was as follows. in the early 1960's, when the City was having
discussions with San Jose as to spheres of influence in that area,
r�
1
::.;r;;'r` t a e Y .a.� +..: �;�` +'v` ;a r 4t�dm y • u<;. ..";,17
.'�":.+•,h'^ trams,..a v... ,Qt.,?. .r�,. #, '�,,,��a,�'x;,�v,,�'+r, ��,..:'! 'aC+� i9-jt h.,;L3txi�":'�•';�,;•.vd,,�;,a�C - x Y Y�. r! ,•.8�:° .;�,.!.� M., .�� ✓k o* .! .•ec�'�.#y: �.s t.,t.� t1,?i::°t,^'.
,.►.. :4 �I�i,''^�J'1 t.;�'<,.bfa t.{'1.-z^�Y•,,.,4tf. ..,:I�(, �y�t .N� Y+.v- u: y•y �`.h+i i'x, eac t:�b u.I e:;..Y-'a ,',F•S`./,1i�.4•,�,s•,
`•' .�,',•s�t ,` !,f 4:;+.,?'.', •s` .s 1,4y .,•, y.
... n.!^ ,�.1�;,. '4;•- � .. ,.♦,\ ,,}Y..,+ R Sti+:i, ! T�x•1.�.:Y�:• ';n•. k,�'.••c�}fit;a rM1 }.+?�Sd �y;'r�t x.� .. 't! y t,4C
kk ,$y. yt i° f"�.-71�'� ,r,r i„it,•V,3�''� :'3: st,s' §,.\. („ i,�.m. Y. #n �.tva) `^yk�•SF a}t}'t,;+13d'n. .5
t., V'i'y;_ i,4. tr ";.+:3rr , Nat.-•y'1 r...t sq,tr.., � nt•K{ �"!, .��/y,k'" .��+. C �'i4nk :NM�� t .r 4 Jtw�.#� "�i$ti/ � .S 4•�.cY'+G, t*N; �
.c-. -:7. .; ,,` 1. n.. 'ab"F ,.1 ti+,.v ;.y?? ., :'"�. ass,{r.�r?:!}.�•e,-y' R;4 ,t'n,,c tia #"y.a. Tfa< �.k•r :� ": 1 s a"'} , ,;t ap by';
ii5s, ti-}LM1.. s.��,t .�., "a'"`,, si� 3,•�i. ,t3 r ,f � ,t ;ti 5y,,h i ,ut' , re+rrd•^�n v.+.t r ,r,._3� ,�c+5 .� 'Ff na �'G,•,r �w
?� �+ '.x.'�,i � "i< a; l t �.�,�, v�`;4rnr :.., �;t?'.r:'�:"di.<. ry,4 N: p.:�,r -V °ha.:..��!`4 Y�• •.P',t ,1.,,•.�wt�" ..t C. 'h.. �. t�. ';. �s Via."•r,�.
� y;y a,; �` � "�', '�:•,s.�E. ,,t�s. �S, +•. v.� �.�r'�tt r : k r a ,+:�`✓r�r+< a•3?^.�, �.iPS � . .,� � n5 ;a J;�r i ,� t'_ ,s � , .�.,,,
gip• , t
s�,fii�ti{,.:r t •,•..d �V fit..1 � '.`k'•R 4•;.� e.,, fw vts„g ,:�:'" .'Se`.,,o•_:�F�.w� ;L i�a,-0,c, ,. ,,. 4 ��'.e'»r'• '3V, .tr ., t '+S y 7 f �Y, k , .�tr?.r
d --,....,>s f..k, rrLh. fi _��,r`,.,.s t;w .��}t d dM`: 'kt'.y.\��'-..r.�`e !. 'Sf..�iC_.,rt r,'�!y>�'`'y �5��8,?k ,31,,,t,pi r;u, 4:;kbM1 k'do-�•u4 , .,S;rsti ? �h \- s„� ".r,•t r :..:?h
.I.�a.. s�p.,•t(,ti.,` �.>� •..,±.�«ly�r •xy,y,�a^.Sf:�.C�.;Rt•,..c ryt.,r l.a.. .ddS,.X� � .�;et! >t;< ,1'>. � g•.•`_.�^' iY n�v< d •,t�`Si..�� ,;:r., c e '� �- •' r•rU.
�.. !... ..:,wq';,.hi..,.,<�i,.•y'�.' .,C't�i.'$t.:';,x•�n ..�','k,'., ..yt?a�?.} t4*�ai+� �q��i`M:.. :TG-,yet l,.�Y}��:....,r?t•1,. ,,,1, �t it c i;a' .(n'' r� l'y+ti1.� � r3 ":~�fi L �.v 3 � �1d:. ".'t�:l.
����.. § �. S ., $�.�.� .c:..,.:Y.1d" F F;�:y,.s4"w .,i+:l'•Crr` ampl'r `9.`"M 1 �,,�•'��• '?
zy
float ,
e'if�`. • r a • • •
ti
p •.
[4•
r:�y
k°
x�•GV , S ^is�.� sh'';c•G+'4'P:t vG`:',•"„ t ^, Y" . u:t -�.
kk.i7,�^a�'>�` g i:. � ,� r ra tt'._,,�a'p^r•�,r.�ea,s1'�, i ,... ^r�,'e w:, � t�3.
^.Sl..�q<+,".-y Y !?•;.,ev T?.f-. r4>r ;m.r v
�i.sHfvl, •,,, x.wrS�mi[[ aa,,i..ark's Sr.0 ` } i `�t '3u„'�` v,�•f♦'' L t�!� *r..,".. n �� �,'4 :�h. ,'A Q�. o_.>:., n a Yk `tiY
i?�',' "'? j � , C�.'81N.}.n„?RRa?:..� ,i 1.•^W?"!.i,++:. `T`ti 1•k- '�k'.e}.�'! ' f ilk;
<,+!•',r•a,»•�--a •�a-s.," i-�a+ �'a"k. 1" fy!'� " �t.• .,''r.Ma fi K ,y,, +?'St'WK�% ,kr,�.'�. , r +sG c:#+,,CCK.. "a •."..r M`.q `;,ht a 1, t s. , r, 2 -
�,�,,,t �_..-f ax•:'•. a:rer t,r i,:•�. �•'f ..i 4� '�f va. k�L ^� a ,1. � h+��a rt 'w t t- :r.y..�: ea
;L'a�..r� ,.u._ r. P �.'{re .°t.,t;{,:d,.�^.w.:75.!°t•"T.T�i •�',t..,, v?M3�`y,":� ,.t>�?f,•-a"y''vt- ".�'7,:�4 '°.,� ,��'•r.:.�, i5t�.,JSe ``7•.�'7•,` '3r'�.•,,+• C. � �f �� k'L:.