PC 05-28-62
10321 SO. SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE ROAD
AL 2-4505
C I T Y 0 F CUP E R TIN 0
CUPERTINO, CALIFOP~IA
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 28, 1962
PLACE: 10321 So. Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road
TII1E: 8:00 P.M.
I SA LUTE TO THE FLA G
II ROLL CALL: MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS ~ŒETING: May 14, 1962
Commissioners Present:
Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Rampy, Small,
Snyder
Adamo
City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk,
City Engineer, John Fleming
Moved by Commissioner Small that the minutes of the May 14, 1962,
meeting be approved as submitted; seconded by Commissioner Rampy; and
unanimously carried.
Commissioners Absent:
Staff Present:
III COMMUNICATIONS:
A. Written
1. County of Santa Clara Planning Commission: Agenda for June 6,
1962; Summary of Actions of May 16, 1962 meeting; Supporting evidence
submitted to County for church use permit by Stelling Road Baptist
Mission on West side of Stelling Road 500 ft. south of Rainbow Drive.
2.
hearing
Stevens
County of Santa Clara Planning Commission: Notice of public
of proposed cemetary by Roman Catholic Church on Mt. View-
Creek Road, between S.P. P~ilroad ROWand Maryknoll Seminary.
3. Santa Clara County Department of Public Works: Tract ~lmber
Request for Baywood Terrace Unit No.2.
Rampy moved communications be received and filed; seconded by
Frolich; and unanimously carried.
B. Verbal
Clayton Darren, speaking from the audience for his parents - the
Delbert Goodmc; ns, displayr,d a dra-,'lÌl1" ahov¡in;:; proposed subdi visJ.on of
property on San Juan R02.d for four-plexes. Alo;1g with zonine; he also
expressed the desire to apply for annexation 1:;0 the City of Cupertino.
Leonard suggested the use of the check-list in aiding the applicant
in preparing the actual zoning application for presentation to the Plan-
ning Commission.
Small moved that the check-list be given to the appl~cant for use
in preparing the actual zoning application; seconded by Frolich.
Discussion was held as to whether this applicatbn would come under
the jurisdiction of the Subdivision or Hillside Ordinance.
Upon counsel from the City Attorney, Small withdrew his motion.
Small moved that the applicant request filing of the application
per approval of the tentative map; seconded by Frolich.
AYES:
Commissioners:
Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Rampy, Small,
Snyder
None
Adamo
6-0
NAYS: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
MOTION CARRIED:
IV HEARINGS SCHEDULED:
A. VICTOR CALVO: Application 54-2-62 to rezone 2 acres from A-2:
B-4 to M-I-H; abutting the west side of Highway 9, 658 ft. south of
Homestead Road. Second Hearing.
-1-
Victor Calvo, 1880 Fordham Way, Mt. View, gave a re-cap of the
application. He added, to prev20us information, that the building would
be 6,000 to 9,000 sq. ft. in area; that there would be parking facilities
for approximately 75 cars; that all products sold would be taxable items;
and reiterated his statement made at the first hearing - that he \~ould
be willing to change the zoning to whatever classification the City
should have at a later date that was more compatible with the use than
the zoning now being applied for, vlhich is M-I-H.
There were no comments on this application from the audience.
Mr. Calvo stated that the type of entrance proposed for this
business, controlled, is far safer to the motorists than entrances which
utilize most, if not all, the width of the property on which the busi-
ness is located. '
Frolich moved that the second hearing be closed; seconded by Small;
and unanimously car~1ed.
Small moved that the applfuation be recommended to the City Council
for approval, subject to Exhibit B; seconded by Fro11ch.
Leonard
application.
not a matter
asked the City Engineer if he had any comments on this
He stated that this is an application for re-zoning and
for the Engineer until a map is submitted.
Vote taken on Small's motion:
AYES:
Commissioners:
Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Rampy, Small,
Sn;j'der
None
Adamo
6-0
NAYS: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commizsioners:
~10TION CARRIED:
Small moved that item VI A (Les Tom Enterprises) be moved up in
front of item IV B (Ordinance 002(:n..); seconded by Frolich; and unani-
mously carried.
VI NEW BUSINESS:
A. LES TOM EN'I'ERPRISES: Tentative map application (17-T~1-62); 30
lots, 10.5 acres; east side of Calabazas Creek, 411 ft. west of
Miller; R-3-H zone.
R~lph Mona represented the applicant.
Discussion was held on the 3ubject of the bri~gp fee. It was
brought out that this application is subject to whatever the Council
decides 3hould be forth··coming from U'.e applicant in way of an assess-
ment fee for the bridge.
The C2ty Clerk read letters received from Cupertino Union School
District, which approved the tentative map; anG Cupertino Sanitary
District, which stated that annexation proceedings must take place and
an off-tract sewer mut be constructed from the development to the exist-
ing sanitary sewer. The nap is approved from an engineering view-point.
Small moved that the tentative map be recommended for approval to
the Council; seconded by Frolich.
AYES:
Commissioners:
Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Rampy, Small,
Snyder
None
Adamo
6-0
NAYS: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
MOTION CARRIED:
IV
B.
ing
ity
ORDINANCE 002(L): An Ordinance of the City of Cupertino Amend-
Ordinance No. 002 By Adding the Classification "Planned Commun-
Districts" (PC-H).
Ordinance 002(L) was read by the City Attorney. After reading he
advised the Commission that the total number of acres involved in a
planned community district was purposely omitted as this figure should
be decided by the Commission.
Discussion followed on this point.
-2-
-3-
The City Attorney further stated that one of the reasons for a Hill-
The City Attorney stated that he felt the Hillside Ordinance should
be held as an exception to the Subdivision Ordinance, where applicable,
rather than as an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance. (The idea of
this Hillside Ordinance be an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance was
one of the results of the Hillside Ordinance Subcommittee meeting.)
A. HILLSIDE ORDINANCE: Subcommittee Report
V UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Rampy, Small,
Snyder
None
Adamo
6-0
NAYS: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
MOTION CARRIED:
Commissioners:
AYES:
Frolich moved that this matter of the Ordinance be continued to
the next meeting; seconded by Fitzgerald.
The Chairman asked the Commission if they would like to set up a
sub-committee to work out some of these problems.
Discussion 11as then held on Section 3, involving "general elevations
of perspective drawings". It was decided to eliminate the words "eleva-
tions of" and leave the phrase" general perspective drawings" in the
Ordinance. The Commission decided also that an architectural concept
be included in the requirements. Leonard suggested adding some commer-
cial recreation to the list of requirements of the planned community.
A review of these applications in relation to this Ordinance took
place. It was decided that none of these applications would have come
under this Ordinance had it been in effect then, as they were not
planned communities.
The Chairman stated he believed the Commission, from the discussions
held, was unable to decide on this Ordinance immediately. He stated
there were two main problems: one - the size of the developments; two _
the classification.
He further stated, in answer to a question, that M-I-H would not
be included, as this is a p12,nned community in a community, not ~ city
within a city, and M-I-H is not vital to a community. This Ordinance
clearly states a use permit is required, which gives the City tighter
control. He added that it would ,also eliminate spot zoning.
Leonard listed the applications that have come before the Planning
Commission asking for large portions of property to be rezoned to more
than one use on each property.
The City Attorney answered some of the questions raised by the
Commissioners with the fOllowing: this Ordinance is one by itself (an
Ordinance of procedure); this Ordinance would include in uses permitted
all the R zonings, perhaps PO-H, and some commercial (as would be nec-
essary) .
Leonard stated that he would like to know how many zonings are per-
mitted under this Ordinance in one planned community. The Ordinance
states in Section 4 the uses permitted, and this answered his question.
DIScussion then followed on whether or not this 6rdinance would be
overlapping the present Ordinance.
Fitzgerald, Froiich, Leonard, Rampy, Small,
Snyder
None
Adamo
6-0
NAYS: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
MOTION CARRIED:
Commissioners:
AYES:
There were no written communications on this public hearing, nor
oral communications from the audience.
Frolich moved that the public hearing be closed; seconded by Fitz-
gerald.
-~
-4-
II (: Ii, i
"''''''''. .... '..,.#...) ,
Ci ty Cleric
Martin,
.
-,
\~;b, I ((( :~
Lawrence K.
I
ATTEST:
Isl Charles K. Snyder
Chairman, Planning Commission
APPROVED:
Meeting adjour'ned at 11: 17 P.M.
VII ADJOURNMENT
Leonard suggested the Commission have a review of the Ordinances
which the City Clerk had prepared in folders for the Commissioners,
prior to the next meeting.
The Chairman informed the Commission that the Mayor expressed a
desire to have a joint meeting of the Council and Commission.
June 1, 1962,was set as a tentative date for the joint meeting.
If the Council is unable to meet that night, the Commission will meet
for the purpose of reviewing the ordinances, as mentioned by Leonard.
A later date will then be set for the Council-Commission meeting.
B. Miscellaneous
A. See above
VI NEW BUSINESS:
Fitzgerald, Frolich, Leonard, Rampy, Snyder
None
Adamo, Small
5-0
AYES: Commissioners:
NAYS: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
MOTION CARRIED:
(Commissioner Small left the meeting).
Frolich moved that the City Clerk publish notice of a public hear-
ing,at the next meeting of the CommiSsion, on this Ordinance; seconded
by Fitzgerald.
Frolich moved that this be referred to the City Manager, aslcing
how these requirements can be implemented in the Subdivision Ordinance,
and report to be given to the Commission; seconded by Fitzgerald; and
unanimously carried. '
side Ordinance is to allow less costs to the bUilder,in streets, lights,
etc., so as to let him build the type of building befltting hillside
sites. (This was in rebuff to a statement by the Commission that addi-
tional requirements would be included in this Hillside Ordinance, such
as lights.)
~....-...,." ~ -~'''''-''-'-'--