Loading...
PC 05-13-63{ 10321 S. SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD (CITY HALL) 252-4505 - CITY OF CUP E R T I N 0 Cupertino, California MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, May 13, 1963 TIME:- 8:00 P.M.. • ,. PLACE: Board Room, Cupertino Elementary School District I SALUTE TO THE •.FLAG 4 II ROLL CALL: Commissioners. Present: Fitzgerald, Leonard, Rampy, Small, Frolich Commissioners Absent: Adamo, Snyder Staff Present: City Clerk, Assistant City Engineer, City Attorney MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS::. .. April 22, `27, 1963: Corrections and Additions: . Commissioner Fitzgerald asked that • on the closing of the nominations for. Vice-Chairman, the second be • changed: to Commissioner Small, instead of what is.. shown in .the minutes • This correction .is for the first page. of the Minutes of: April 22, 1963, The City Clerk stated that George Volker, the.. planner from Wilsey, Ham and Blair had a few corrections to make to the April 29th Minutes. • First page: Third paragraph from the bottom: delete .the • sentence. "The Planner has used the extrapolation method 'and forecast 160,000" and in i:t.'s place should be; "Using the extrapolation. method, the forecas`e mould be 160,000. " . also "The land.dholding capacity would mean 180,000" . The change here is striking the word "is". and inserting the i ords. "Would ' mean" ; . - The third paragraph on page 2: "Neighborhood density tables - were passed. out, etc" And continuing on with this paragraph, " . . . with neighborhoods laid out in half and one mile squares"should be deleted and substitute, "generally bounded by streets approximately one mile apart". In the next line, the word "south" should be "north" . Next sentence, delete the words "in 1960" and substitute "prior to" . 4th paragraph, from bottom on page 2; delete words "after presentation" and substitute "with". Commissioner Leonard stated that he would like to make some . corrections to the minutes of April 27, 1963 wherein several remarks ' , were attributed to Mr. Patterson of Varian Associates. That Mr. Patterson had raised the question on the suitability of the Monte Vista area. None of the rest of the paragraph should be attributed to Mr. Patterson. The Planners who have met with various people reported that Sunnyvale is concerned about the widening of Homestead Road. Mr. Leonard stated that the whole paragraph should be re-writ- ten as to who actually made the statements regarding water supply, sewer capacity, etc. It was out of meetings by planners not attended by Mr. Patterson that Sunnyvale ' s concern about the widening of Homestead Road stemmed from. That Homestead Road, on one side should be developed, but what kind of development? Light industrial was the type of. development suggested and this was a recommendation by planners . It was planners and not` Mr. Patterson who reported re- actions from people in residential areas.. They objected, to. strip commercial next to them, highest preference was professional office • ilo and research and multiple; strip commercial last. Light industrial ' was between professional offices and multiple, . he percentages quoted in this paragraph had notl. g to do with this subject, they ref ez red to land use. . • Commissioner Fitzgerald moved that the Minutes be -approved as corrected. Seconded by Commissioner Small. All in. favor. I III COMMUNICATIONS: A. Written: 1. 'League of' California Cities letter re various bills ' presently before the State Legislature. 1 L. . III. COMMUNICATIONS: A. Written: (.Continued) . _ • , 2. Minutes of Santa Clara County Planning Commission Board of Zoning Adjustment - April 17th. 3. Agenda for County of Santa Clara Planning Commission for May 1, 1963. There were three items for the Cupertino- Monte Vista Area. 4. Notice of a Public Hearing With a map attached for a re- zoning application of John Lopin to zone one acre on the corner of Homestead Road and Stelling to commercial for a gas station. 5. County of Santa Clara Tractjnumber Request.. The tract • is #3506, extension of Lockwood Drive and VosS Avenue. 12 acres, Mason Enterprises.. Chairman Frolich asked if the Commission wished to do anything about any of. the correspondence, particularly the public hearing for a gas station on Homestead Road and Shelling. Moved by Commissioner Small that a letter be submitted to the County in opposition to this station. Commissioner Leonard stated Plat he- felt the one ,acre site • for commercial was not so much the issue, but that it was one acre of a ten acre site and what would happen if the owner got his zoning on the one acre, and then came in for 'like zoning on the remaining nine acres.. Commissioner Leonard felt that this was more important to find out, as it would ten be a question as to whether it would mean an ultimate passing of another large commercial development. It was mentioned that the applicant was asking for C-2 zoning and that. this • was neighborhood commercials However, another shopping center in that immediate area would *a blight. It was felt that the motion should be restated, and Commissioner Small so moved, that a letter be •writ-ten to the County in opposition to this application asking that consideration be given, not only to the one acre in ques- tion, but also to the remaining nine acres, as to what is planned. AYES: Commissioners: Fitzgerald, Leionard, Rampy, Small, Frolich NAYS: . Commissioners: None ABSENT:Commissioners: Adamo, Snyder • MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 - 2 ABSENT. j Commissioner Small moved thatthe communications be received and filed. Seconded by Commis.sionerHFitzgerald. All in favor. Chairman Frolich asked if these were any verbal communications from the audience. There were none. . IV HEARINGS SCHEDULED A. LOUIS PAGANINI: Application 80-Z-63 to rezone 22 acres, approximately, from R-1:Bt2 to R-24-H. opposite Portal, 500' south of Stevens Creek • Boulevard. First Hearingl. Mr. John Parsley, 3359 Linoakis Drive, San Jose, California applicant. The Cit , Clerk dis la ed renderings of represented the p Y the complex that is planned for this, acreage. ,There were also maps passed out to the Commissioners . Mr, Parsley stated that it was felt that these apartments Would bring in more revenue to the City axial less children than an .R-1 development. These will Le two-story units, 371 in number, They had originally submitted an application under R-3 which would have allowed them 4+16 units, but had re-submitted under R-24, which gives them only 371 units. Chairman Frolich asked for comments and questions from the Commission. Commissioner Leonard asked if this was an FHA project type housing. The answer was yes, under, FHA 213, Coop. The units would be sold off individually, but that ,!street improvements, dedications, etc. , would be taken care of beforel, building commenced. Commissioner Leonard asked Mr. Parsley if he could give a rough estimate on the cost of these co-op 'apartments. Mr. Parsley stated that they would cost in the neighborhood of $1.5,.000 for :the two bedroom. and$i7,500 for: the three bedroom units. " Mr.. Leonard then asked what income bracket this would attract. The. answer .w8s that the. monthly payment would be approximately $135.00 and that a potential-'buyer must earn at least five times .that amount to qualify for-. an. FHA loan. Mr. Parsley further stated that the reason torputting apart- ments in this• area is that land values are so high: that R-1 develop ment is prohibitive. , Mr. Leonard stated that other cities surrounding Cupertino 40 were running into a problem where the respective School Districts were suffering because, of an influx of many children from develop- , ments similar to this and: no increase 'in. the tax base. Mr: Parsley stated ..that he is developing in San Jose -on this .same order and that most Of hie sales were to adults without 'children.. These people were using the extra bedrooms as dens and guest rooms. Commissioner Small expressed concern over the amount of auto- mobiles that will be generated from a development of this size. He was concerned for .the traffic pattern and problems that may, arise out of an increase of approximately 500 cars in the area. The project would be very close to a K-6 school which might also be a problem. , The main traffic pattern seems to be.-down Portal for ingress and egress,.. . Secondly; Mr. Small stated that presently there are 810. uni' s already zoned in the City of, Cupertino and asked. if this developer feels that he can buck that .type of competition. ' Third, Cornmis'sioner Small stated,.that they had seen- many pretty'pictures before and to - date the quality of building in the way of apartments in Cupertino has left much to. be , desir'ed. He feels that maybe our Ordinances are not : strong`enough or tough - enough to compel developers to put attractive apartment houses. Mr. Parsley stated that he' had seen nothing in Cupertino to equal what he. planned to build: ' Ile 'further stated that the apart- ments are larger or equal to the average tract home: Commissioner. Rampy stated that most of the questions and cop- merits had been made, but also expressed concern over the traffic problem that must :arise from this development: • Chairman Frolich stated that he too was concerned about the - traffic problem, the fact that this project was so close to a K-6 school. He suggested that between now arid the next time this appli7 cation is heard that it might be worthwhile for Mr: Parsley to look' more closely at the traffic pattern arid try to come up with some sort of a solution. The general rule seemed to be that multiple housing located near freeways or heavily traversed streets, `streets where R-1 housing would not be desirable: Also, why R-3 or R-24 is felt to be good development for this particular area. Mr. Parsley re-stated that the property was so expensive that R-1 development would be prohibitive. Chairman Frolich observed that possibly the land price might become more reasonable if the muliple' development was not approved, ' and it could be developed as .R-l. Chairman Frolich .then asked the City Attorney if there were. legal : involvements in a co-op . apartment house project, . The City Attorney questioned Mr. Parsley as to by-laws and 411 'how the open green areas would be handled as. to maintenance. Mr. Parsley stated this would: be included in the monthly payment, a cer- tain portion would be all'oted to maintenance charges. That one family could only purchase one -unit, or one share of stock. That this would be -owned on. a 'co-op basis, no one person would be allowed to own more than one share. That they have the right to refuse a client. ' ' The City Attorney asked if there would be a subdivision map. The answer was no. • Mr. Parsley stated that he would build this project in three stages, that. he would not • build all of them at once. He figured it would take. three years before this would be completed He will be sole owner until all units. are sold, then he would 'be out of it completely. That the City would have no responsibility to this. pro- ject, other than dedicated 'streets,. • Mr. '.Leonarl. commented on the possibility that. this type df project may attract an element that powsibly would not be appreciated in Cupertino, that it booked like a built-in slum area. He suggested that Mr. Parsley bring in some pictures by a professional photographer and also a credit package on every third buyer to back up his state- ments on the quality of this project. • Chairman Frolich suggested, tha, since there was no subdivi- sion :map submitted with this application, that the City Clerk get a report on it from the Sanitary District.; He' then asked for com- ments from the Audience. .1 Mr. Gary Stokes, President of the Idlewild Homeowners Associ- ation stepped forward and stated that „!he was representing the Association in opposition to the approval ;of this project . He felt that the City was going to receive in return for granting this appli- cation, nothing but problems . . • Mr. Small asked Mr. Stokes if he was representing all of the 353 homes in that tract. Mr. Stokes laid they didn't have .a member- , ship that large in the Association, but that he was representing the membership . Mr. Robert Bosted', 10894 LaMar,,Drive, stepped forward and stated that this. same type of development was suggested for this property two years ago, and he could see little improvement in the plans tp develop this land. He asked how many times the Commission would be asked to consider this land for this type of zoning'wahen there seemed to be the same problems existing. Chairman Frolich asked what the distance would be between the units to be constructed and the closest R-l. development. Mr. Irv. Ka'ster :of San Mateo, the Architect that designed this project stated that the closest ..was 25 feet .and there was a ,:jog of 30 feet in one section. Mr. Gil Ogden, 10143 Richwood Dr.iie, .Cupertino. asked what was to prevent an automobile from comingjthrough the fence, right into the back end of the R-1 development? ' Was there to be a fence. The answer was yes. , Commissioner Small stated that this project presented quite a few problems that should be discussed further and therefore moved . ` that the public hearing ' be continued until the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission. Seconded by Commissioner Rampy. AYES: . Commissioners: Fitzgerald, Leonard, Rampy, Small,Frolich NAYS: Commissioners: None ABSENT:Commissioners: Adamo, Snyder'l ' I MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 -- 2 ABSENT B. VAN VLECK REALTY: ' Application 81-Z-63 to rezone Lot 38, Tract 584 From R-3--H to C-1-H; northwest corner of Kirwin Lane and Highway 9. First Hearingi. : Mr. Graham of Van Vleck Realty, • spoke to the Commission on behalf of the application. He stated that when. this property was before the:_ Commission earlier this year, ., they objected to the house on the property being used for a commercial enterprise. So that the Realty Company had had the house removed. The Commission were shown a sketch of the proposed building. The Realty Company felt that they needed Commercial' zoning on this property because" they were only going to occupy approximately 1000 sq. feet of the building and the other portion would be rented to another tenant. That the sketch indicated more than one office;, bu.t this was an error, they only intended to rent to one other tenant. They also .felt that they should have commercial in order to operate in the manner they intend to operate. That professional office zoning would not allow them to operate the way' they wanted to . There was''considerable discussion regarding the parking, ratio and the possibility; that with all the dedications necessary for the highway that this property would not be large enough to take care of a commercial enterprise. Commissioner Leonard made several observa- tions regarding other real estate o 'fices, and their tendency to be /1I rather gaudy_ in .their •decorations, . Mr. Graham stated that. .they had exp.erienc.& difficulty in' get- k ting signs erected under professional off ice 'zoning and .therefore 1 the application asked ' for commercial zoning. • Mr. Leonard asked Mr. Graham if he could . enumerate other offices operated by this Realty Company and Mr. Graham stated there ,.was one 1 on Alum Rock Road' in the .2200 or 2300 .block, one on El Camino in Santa Clara across from the PX Shopping Center. In Sunnyvale on 1 Murphy just off of El Camino..:: . Mr. Mark Kelly;• Kirwin. Lane, Cupertino, stepped forward and . I expressed opposition to this application. He stated -that he, lives just down the street from this property and he and other residents - . on the block felt that this would further degrade an already '..'on the I skits" neighborhood They wished t.o stop any further degradation. Commissioner Fitzgerald asked if they were to get the zoning • • .; would they' dedicate the 'necessary footage for the highway, . 2D ,feet. . The answer was yes. . . Commissioner. Smal-1 moved that the First Hearing be closed. • Seconded by .Commissioner Rampy. . All in 'favor. . •. . Because the City Attorney had''to' leave, it was decided to .move on to' Unfiniahed Business, on the agenda. The City Attorney read Resolution 137, Honoring former Chairman Charles .K.. Snyder for his efforts and time and devotion to the Planning Commission. r . I AYES: Commissioners: Fitzgerald, Leonard, Rampy, Small, ' Frolich NAYS: Commissioners: . None . • . , . ABSENT:Commissioners:,': -Adamo, Snyder . . MOTION CARRIED: - 5-0 -' 2• ABSENT.. . C. PIONEER ROOFING SUPPLY: Application 82--Z-63 ' to ' ' rezone 690 ' along the Southern Pacific Railroad . . Track from C-2 & R-2 -A to M-1-H; Stevens Creek' ' Road north. First Hearing. " . Mr. Marvin Knox, 166 Saratoga, Los Gatos, represented, the applicant, stating that the application was for rezoning to bring the building into proper use. The building is a temporary structure and will be subject to review after the zoning- is approved, . This will bring all of the Southern Pacific property into M-1 zoning. As soon as the zoning is approved, they intend to contact theBuilding Department to find how and what they are 'to do to bring the property and building up to City Code. He stated that this is Southern Pacific , industrial spur and it unloads considerable merchandise, ' etc, for I business men in the Cupertino area. . Commissioner Leonard corrected Mr. Knox, saying that for per- ishable food stuffs, this spur was very poor. That for materials that cOuld set ,a while, it was all right, but not good' at all for anything that must be handled quickly. Mr. 'Knox agreed with Commissioner Leonard, adding that. heavy equipment was another item' that was not handled at this point, be- cause they do not have the proper cranes; etc. to handle it, ' • There was considerable discussion about the section of property intended for rezoning. The question arose as. to whether it was in Cupertino. ' 1 Chairman Frolich suggested that the City Staff make a report at the next meeting as to the exact location of this property. The feeling being they 'did not intend to zone property that was in the County. Commissioner Leonard asked if this is zoned as requested, Where are we? After it is rezoned, what is to stop the owner from claiming hardship and inability to bring the property up' to Code. -- 5 _ -,. Mr. Knox stated that up until they get the zoning, this busi- ness is a non-conforming use in a non-conforming zoning. They must go before H-Control after the zoning is, obtained and must take out building permits, since that had never been done,. Mr. Smith, owner of Pioneer Roofing Supply, stated that they had moved in there on lease from Southern Pacific and had been mis- informed as to what they were able to do® They had -constructed the least expensive structure. Now they wished only to conform to what is required by the City of Cupertino and they fully intended to do so. . Commissioner Small moved that the First Hearing be closed, asking for a report from the City Staff regarding the exact location of the property to be rezoned. Seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald. AYES: Commissioner•s:Fitzgerald., .Leonard, Rampy, Small, Frolich NAYS: Commissioriers:None = ABSENT:Commissioners:Adamo, Snyder MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 - 2 absent. . V UNFINISHED BUSINESS: A. Preliminary General Plan - Map, Report: This has been postponed until the first meeting in June. Chairman Frolich asked the City Clerk to notify Commissioners Adamo and Snyder that there would be no meeting on the Preliminary Plan, B. Miscellaneous VI NEW BUSINESS I' Commissioner Fitzgerald asked about the coin-operated machine, it was thought it was to 'be on the agenda. The City Clerk stated that this would come up at the next meetings Moved by Commissioner Small, seconded by Commissioner Leonard that the meeting Adjourn. MEETING ADJOURNED: 10: 10 P.M. f , APPROVED: /;S/ Donald Frolich Chairman ATTEST: / City Clerk -- 6