Loading...
PC 03-11-63 10321 So. Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 252-4505 C I T Y 0 Feu PER TIN 0 cuper5"ino, CalTf'orrl1a------- MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COi'!MISSION, March 11, 1963 Place: Time: 10321 So. Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 8:00 P.M. I SALUTE TO THE FLAG Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leo¡-,éJcl, Small, Snyder Adamo, Rampy City Attorney, Office En,-).',cèer, Ci ty Clerk II ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: It was moved by Commissioner Frolich and seconded by Commis;-_. )ner Fitzgerald that the Minutes of February 25, and 26 be considered '. 'c the March 25 meeting. Motion carried 5-0. III COMMUNICATIONS A. Written: 1. Alpha Land re: Appl. 28-v-63, letter from Philip Ingber, requesting a meeting between the City and their attomey, because of legal implications raised at the last mee~tng. Mr. Ingber, who was in the audience, explained that the statement was made that the building might not have been legal in the beginning, and since they have come before the City to estahlish the legality of their property, they request a meeting to try to resolve the problems and to learn the reasoning behind the st8.tement. In reply to a state- ment by CommisSioner Leonard, "It seems the intent is do it our way, or we will sue.", Mr. Ingber said they have no intention of suing, all they are trying to do is get our prcpe~ty set up in a legal manner. Commissioner Fitzgerald couldn I t see what could be accomp1j_s;1ed at a meeting,. Chairman SnyC.e:ê e.,,'.wd -Nr, Ingber v;hy he felt a meeting necessary . Mr. Ingber: We get off on different things. W1::.en someone suggests it was illegal from the beginning, this disturbs us. We don't think it was. We would like to know why the statement was made, Chairman Snyder could not see how anything co~ld be accomplished by an additional meeting. Commissioner Fitzgerald asked the City Attorney his feelings about a study session. The City Attorney replied that the question of legality is not the issue before this body. The issue is whether or not to grant a subdivision of the tract. When building permits are issued, that pre- supposes the building is legal. Chairman Snyder: Can we request the Building Inspector to submit a report prior to the next meeting as to the original conclusions on determining side yard and rear yard setbacks on this parU.cular property, then handle this at the next regular meeting. Commissioner Frolich also wished to handle it on a regular meeting; night rather than on an extra night. The City Clerk took the item off th8 Agenda after letter and discussing the matter with the City l~nager. Attorney said the safe thing to do would be to continue to the next regular meeting. receiving the The City the heé,.i'ing Commissioner Fro1ich asked ~jr. Ingber if tile intent of a meeting is to discuss the matter of whether the development meets the ordinance or to discuss the variance. Mr. Ingb¿r replied that the intent was to establish whether the building was legal at the time it was done, and to discuss interpretation of zoning ordinances. Mr. Nudelman, 10574 No. Blaney, came to the meeting specifically to hear the Alpha Land matter, since he understood at the last meeting -1- that it would be on this Agenda. Commissioner Frolich pointed out that the newspaper published the fact that the hearing would not be held at this meeting, and there might be a remote possibility that someone interested had not appeared. The City Attorney added that he felt there should be a full hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Fitzgerald and seconded by Commi,',:lon- er Small that the Alpha Land Application 28-v-63 be continued to March 25, and a report on setbacks requested from the Bu:!:lding InfJ;/·ctor. Motion carried 5-0. ' When asked if a meeting could be arranged with Alpha's atto·:'),;·'y, the City Attorney said his instructions must come from the City Manager. 2. Department of Public Works, Tract No. Request, Due, Elliot Builders. Tract No. 3442. 3. County Agenda - March 6, Application for Unitarian Church, on property located at 2273 Stevens Creek nc:.:J. Property of Bess Levy.. 4. County Summary of Actions - February 20 Meeting 5. Stoneson request that application te ç,-,ferred to Mal-ch 25. B. Verbal No verbal communications It was moved by Commissioner Small and seconded by Commissioil,,'" Fitzgerald that the correspondence be received and filed. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Fitzgerald explained that the building the churèh wants to use is a flat, pink house at the top of the hill. Tr2:~fic will probably go to Foothill or around the horseshoe. IV HEARINGS SCHEDULED A. MACKAY (PALO ALTO DEVELOP. CORP.) Appl. 76-Z-63 to rez,me 35 acres from R-l:B-2 to R-l; east side of Foothill Blvd. adjoining south side of Hartman Drive. First Hearing. Mr. Leo Ruth, Civil Engineer, 919 Alameda, San Jose, represented the applicant. The property is known as the former Eaton property. It fronts on Mountain View, Santa Clara Road, bounded on the north by Creston. Stevens Creek School is on the easterly boundary. There is an existing improved street in. The map presented has no legal value at this time, Mr. Ruth explained, because rezoning has not been accomplished. 96 lots are shown for 35 acres, a density of 2.75 residential units per acre. As me,ny 'crees as :possibH) wi'J.1· oè s13.ved, . ~ '.. ~,. ~- "~';:¡.' v . '.'1' Lot 5~ will be used for a cabana neighborhood swimming club arrangement. This has worked out very satisfactorily in Montclair and Arroya De Saratoga developments. There are no lots under 7500'. Eight lots are 8,500' and all the others are in excess of 8,000'. 52' is shown for streets. They have been to the Sanitary District. Commissioner Small was happy to see an R-1 application; there were no comments from Commissioners Fitzgerald and Leonard. The City Attorney asked if the Cabana Club set up had deed restrictions. Mr. Ruth replied that it is a corporation set up. Mr. Ruth stated, in regard to the PG&E easement, that they would like to put it into some sort of a park, maybe a common green. Also Mr. Ruth seemed interested in a possible use of the area in connection with the city recreation areas. Property owners do not have to belong to the cabana club, but then they can't make use of it. The City Attorney stated that the City requires deed restrictions be filed with the City. The Chairman asked for comments from the audience. none. There were -2- It was moved by Commissioner Sn~11 that the first hearing be closed, seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald. Commissioner Frolich aslœd about utility service. Mr. Ruth said it would all be rear easement. Commissioner Frolich moved tha.t f-laclcay (Palo Alto Develop. Cor!'.) Application 76-z-63 be approved subject to the 12 standard conditions, and 13. that Council give consideration to the possibility of workj.ng the PG&E easement into some sort of city recreation facility. Secc>:'ded by Commissioner Small. Commissioners: Commissioners: Fi tzgera1d, Frolich, Leonard, Small. Snyder None Adamo and Rampy AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Commissioners: Motion carried 5-0 B. LES-TOM ENTERPRISES, INC.: to Ordinance 220 to allow a requires 20'; Lot 30, Tract Application 29-V-63 for a Vi' :·i.ance rear yard of 11' where ordir:,. :Ice 3277. Mr. Tom Fama, 1817 Hamilton Ave., San Jose. Mr, Fama appear0.i about 6 or 8 weeks ago before the H-Control Committee with two cO':ï::;red and two open parking areas on Lot 30. He agrecd to put in a 4-car garage. He believed H-Control said a v8.riance would be neeœd but when he applied, he was told he did not. Then he went before Council, :md they said a variance was needed. Six or eight weeks construction :·lme was lost. In order to put the four-car garage and maintain the quality of the bUilding, we have to come back to 11' in lieu of th:ò 20' setback. Commissioner Frolich: M8.ybe I got Mr. FanB into this. I don;t believe the original application would have made it because there wasn't four covered and two uncovered parkj.ng faci Ii ties. This could probably have been done without a variance, but to the detriment of the building. It was the feeling of I-I-Control that this varJ.'1nce was for the ultimate improvement of looks of the lot from the sid3 street view. Because of this, we recommended a variance. Commissioner Small: Further the Architc0tural Committee wa:, opposed to any open carports on a carrier lot, HIÜch he could have done. The applicant has volunteered to put in garages. The Chairman asked for comments from the audience. Mr. Jan Veenstra, 19399 Calle De Barcelona, Cupertino, lives in back of the development, and he stated that he is concerned about the invasion of back yard privacy if two-story buildings go in there. Mr. Fama stated that 20' is as close as another building can get to Mr. Veenstra's property, but that the building hasn't been designed yet for that lot, so he couldn't say if it would be two-story or not. It would depend on the decision of the Architectural Control Committee. Mrs. Dennis Daggett, 19423 Calle De Barcelona, Cupertino, stated that her back fence had been undermined by bulldozers working on the project. Mr. F~ma said construction should be completed in 90 days, and with her permission, they would fence the back area. Commissioner Small ~ì,,¡:1ised the buildings as being very good, in the neighborhood of $50,000. It was moved by Commissioner Fro1ich and deconded by Commissioner Small that the hearing be closed. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissionel' Smé1.11, a"íd seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald that Les-Tom Enterprisesó Inc. Application 29-V-63 for a Variance to Ordinance 220 be approved. AYES: Commissioners: Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Small, Snyder None Adamo, Rampy -3- NAYS: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: Motion aarried 5-0.