Loading...
PC 05-22-61 1~( ..j . ,ie \ \..,'. P. O. Box 597 AL 2-4505 C I T Y 0 F CUP E R TIN 0 CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA MlNUI'ES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION - MAY 22, ·1961. 21ace: 10321 So. Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 'rime: 8:00 P.M. I SALUTE TO THE FLAG II ROLL CALL: MINUTES OF THE LAST REGULAR MEETINGS: April 26, and May 8. Commissioners Present: Adamo, Eagar, Fitch, Leonard, Small Commissloners Absent: Rampy,-Snyder Staff Present: City Attorney, Clty Engineer, Clty Clenc tmy 8~ute8: Item III A 6 -- delete "with the notation" and add .. "be not:tf!ed that he"; page 4, line 3, change "Blaney" to "Stelling"; page 4, paragraph 9, add "no reference to present applicants intended". Minutes approved as corrected. III COMMUNICATIONS A. Written 1. City Engineer: Copy of City of Cupertino ~1aster Storm Drain Plan And Cost Study (See Item VI A). . . 2. Tom Nakagawa: Permission requested to put portable strawberry stand northeast corner Stevens Creek and Portal (See Item VI B). 3. County Planning COmmlSSlon: Agenda of May 1.7 (See Item V¡ B). 4. County Planning Commission: Summary of Actions - Regular Meet- ing 0 f May 3. ,_ 5. Water Conservation News: .April issue. 6. County Board of Supervisors: Copy of report and plan submitted .by Regional Hospital Commission. Referred to CommisslonerFit~h for report at June 12 meeting. Moved and carried that the communications be received and filed w:Lth the exception of the hospital report and.the Nakagawa letter. B.Verbal None IV HEARINGS SCHEDULED A. Bubb Ranch Assoc.: Application to rezone 6 aCres from A-2:B~4to C-I-H;. southeast corner McClellan & Bubb. Second hearing continued. B. R. Cali: Application to rezone 17 acres from A-2:B-4 to R-l; "Iest side of Bubb Road, diagonallY Opposlte Columbus; 11 acres from A-2:B-4 to M-I-H; between Bubb Rd. & S.P. tracks, 820 ft. ,south of McClellan. Second hearing continued. ~ Don Bandley represented the applicants. City Engineer, upon request,. reviewed the eXlsting street pattern and calculated that Bubb Road might in the future be extended along the west side of the R.R. track and parallel to it but Bubb would not be likely to proceed due north across the R.R. traclc to meet Ma1;'y Avenue. Commissioner Leonard asked how many cars a 2 lane road such as Bubb could handle in the existing ,traffic pattern. City Engineer answered that Bubb might handle17,QOO cars per 24 hours, but pointed out that Bubb intersects with. McClell<¡;n .¡mch in turn ends at Highv¡ay 9, ind5- cating a possible bottleneck.~. .He further estimated that 640 acres, úne square mile, might be using McClellan Road in the near future, with.6 or 8 cars to the acre. John P. Gates, representing Hesta,cres HOmeowners Association, stated that the likelihood exists that the City of San Jose would be disposed to establish industrial or commercial zon~ng in the territory within their city limits if the City of Cupertino grants the existing appli- cation. He said he is concerned with the area around Lincoln School and·the fact that several schools are located in the vicinity WOUld. compound the problem presented by industrial zonings. 29 members of. the Westacres Assoc. have signed a petition against the rezoning (peti- tion not filed). The protestance referred to the C-I-H and M-I-H, not -1- the district for R-l zoning. Helene Madsen, Bubb Road, said that the area in question has always been residential all along the mountains from San Mateo south past Cupertino. Schools have located in the immediate neighborhood, quite possibly because it is considered safe for children. Don Regnart said that the City will have a $60,000.00 bridge problem to consider on Bubb Road. He also said that if the property is sold the use may differ from what is expected. Mrs. Jaçobs, Regnart Road, stated that commercial and industrial zoning should not encrouch on residential areas. Mr. Freeman said there is not another place in the west valley with such a good climate and location and residential advantages and so commercial and industrial zoning does not belong in the neiGhborhood. Other conditions were made in the same vein. Commissioner Leonard agreed that much has been made of the quiet rural atmosphere with its peace and charm, bu~ he said, the question is whether the City can afford a community which is strickly residential. He reviewed the revenue source with emphasis on the sales ta4 returns which come from commercial areas wTIhin the City limits. He said that there is considerable basis for the opinion that the services and goods required by residential uses exceed the taxes paid by those same resi- dents, further that industrial and commercial zones are needed to bal- ance the tax base. To this, Mr. l\1adsen, Bubb Road, suggested that the highways can pro- vide all of the commercial acreag necessary to service the corrüflltfll ty. Mr. Kennedy, Autumn Gardens, said that the zoning would be in his back yard and would lower his property value without affording him any tax relief. Don Bandley, representing the applicants, stated that the economics of the sltuation is largely an unknown quantity. He compared the proposed commerclal to that on the nowthwest corner of Bollinger and Blaney. He said that while he realized there is a preference for rural atmos- phere there would be an advantage in having a convenlent shopping cen- ter which would not detract from the surroundings. He said the 6 acres of commerclal would be an asset and that the tax revenue to the City would be subStantial. Such nelghborhood facilities would reduce the present, traveling distance of a mile or so to the nearest stores. Mr. Smith, Columbus Avenue, said that the majority present are con- cerned with the industrial district and that they wouid be satisfied if the applicant would be willing to wait for an ordinance controling M-I-H. Others present commented on the road situation they assumed would be worsened by industrial and commerclal. In response to a question Commissioner Leonard undertook to clarify a previous point, namely that sales tax revenues are not always pro- portionate to the population in any automatic way. Therefore, one of the financial theories developing among cities is that it is a good idea to locate shopping centers around the periphery of the City in order to capture sales tax money from the outlying districts and frQm unincorporated areas and areas within adjacent cities. He referred to the in-lieu-taxes which he acknowledged. made up In part the prop- erty tax deficit.· He added that the Planning Commission does not in- itiate the applications but is duty bound to hear the rezonings pro- posed by owners. John P. Gates, Westacres Assoc., said that if the Cupertino light in- dustrial precipitates light industrial districts in the San Jose Clty limits (Cupertino areas) the City of Cupertino would not receive any tax benefits but would. be confronted with increased costs in the form of additionàlroad work caused by the consequent traffic. Ðr. Cohen said that the publiC is uninformed as to the definition of M,.l-H and the tax situation and the traffic problem and the status of the general plan. Commissioner Fitch read sections of Ordinance 002H with refer8nce to -2- the definition of light industrlal. The CJ.ty Attorney consulted the City zoning ordinance., The M-l-H zon- ing regulations stipulate the industrial uses not permitted in M-l-H ZOnes. Ord:i.nance 002H :i.s des:i.gned part:i,çularly for industriàl parks rather than individual sites. The M-I-H sectiOns of the zoning regu- lations will remain in force after the M-I-PH is adopted. In answer to a question the City Eng1neer stated that sewers azeavail- able although they have been designed for low density population and usage. Commissioner Leonard referred to a recent Council directHTe advising the Planning Commission not to recommend rezonings for which no ordi- nance eXlsts. He said, therefore, that the Planning Commiss:!.on is not at libety to act on the M-¡-H application. By the. same token, h~ said, that no such restriction applies to the R-l and C-l··H and th.e COmmissior might close the œ arings on that basis. Moved by Commissioner Fitch that the hearings be closedj Seconded by Commiss10nerAdamo. AYES: Commissioners: Adamo, Eagar, Fitch, Leonard, Small NAYS: COmmissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy, Snyder MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 Moved by Commissioner Fitch that, whereas the potential traffic load for the area is not yet satisfactorily developed as shown by current revision being undertaken by the Engineer of Neighborhood Plan #10, and, whereas no plans for'developement of the property have been pre- sented, and, that whereas the proximity OÍ' the ;;;ite to 3 schooh' jEj un- favorable, the Commission therefore recommendb that. the C-I-H ;<lolÙica- tion of Bubb Ranch Assoc. be deniedj No secondj motion dies. Relative to the submission of plans and sketches, Mr. Eandley protested that this was not an existing requirement at t~ time of filing these applications. Commissioner Leonard referred to the possibility of an appeal, also that the applicant may be prevented from re-applying to the Planning COmmission within one year by terms of the ordinance. The City Attorney reported that there is not a one year. time wait re- quired in the ordinance. He further advised that the hearing could be continued with the advice to the applicant to furnish more informa- tion, such as maps, plans, specifications, etc. Mr. Eandley asked for the decision on Item IV A this evening inasmuch as City ordinances due regulate the subject and an H Control Committee is in existance to further screen the application. Commissioner Fitch repeated his motion (see paragraph 5, this page). Motion dies for lack of a second. Commissione r Leonard moved that the application be reset for hearing on Planning COmmission initlative at the second meeting in August, 1961. Motion dies for lack· of a second. Commissioner Fitchrepeated~hls motion (see paragraph 5, this page). Seconded by Commissioner Leonard· (Chairman stated that he would be willing to second the motion in the absence of any other second). AYES: Commissioners: Fitch, Leonard, ·Small NAYS: Commissioners: Adamo,. Eagar ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy, Snyder MOTION CARRIED: 3-2 Moved by Commissioner Fitch that the application to rezone 17',acres from A-2:B-4 to R-l be approved subject to_Exhibit Bj Seconded by Commissioner Eagar. AYES: Commissioners: 'NAYS: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: MOTION CARRIED: Adamo, None Rampy, 5-0 Eagar, Fitch, Leonard, Small Snyder -3- In answer to a question the City Attorney advised that the application could be amended by the Planning Commission wlth the express consent of the applicant. Mr. Bandley, therefore, consented to an amendment to the application, making it an application for M-l-PH. Moved by Commissioner Fitch that the application be amended from M-I-H to M-I-PH and that the application be tabled until republished for hearing; Seconded by Commissioner Adamo. AYES: Cornrnissioners: Adamo, Bagar, Fitch, Leonard, Small NAYS: Commissloners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy, Snyder MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 C. Stella Gertson: Application to rezone lots 74, 77, 78, and 79, Map of Monta Vista Park to C-I-H; lots 52, 53, 54, and 54A, Map of Los Palmas to C-I-H; 17.5 acres easterly of Stevens Creek Canyon Rd. to AR. First hearing continued. The Planning Cornrnission located the property on both the zoning map and aerial map of the City. Mrs. Gertson said she intended to lease the land and build for prospective tenants. Commissioner Fitch called for a report from the &¡ilding Department on the status of the existing buildings which have been newly annexed to the City. Commissioner Leonard said he has some conce1~ over McClellan Road and whether or not it is adequate from approximately Byrne to Mt. View- Stevens Creek Rd., and whether it could bare F'"ny additional trÚffi.c. He said it is almost a single lane at one or two points. Charles Spencer, Monta Vista, told the Planning Commission he would like to see tentative plans for lŒS 52, 53, 54, and 54A and also a plan for the AR zone which he sa~d mlght interfere with the people on the hill beyond. He suggested that the first hearing be continued in order to have the applicant present tentative plans. The Chairman suggested that the Commission lnvestigate the property. Cornrnissioner Fitch said that he would like to see plans presented, es- pecially in view of the fact that one application this evening has al--. ready be denied on that basi s. He said he would lil~e to go on record to the effect that plans should be filed before further consideration, at least for the C-I-H pr~se, also that the existlng buildings comply with the building code in effect for the C~ty. The Co~ssion agreed to examine the property at 7:15 P.M. May 26. Moved by Cornrnissioner Adamo that the first hearing be continued; Sec- onded by Commissioner Hagar. AYES: Commissioners: Adamo, Bagar, Fitc~Leonard, Small NAYS: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy, Snyder MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 V UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Subcommittee report on C-2-H Ordinance. Cornrnissioner Adamo read the results of the first sub-cornrnittee meeting at which the group clarified uses intended for inclusion with- in the C-2-H ordinance. Some of the uses proposed would consequently be removed from the C-I-H classification. Discussion ensued on the merits of following a list method of devising an ordinance or whether a different principle should be used, such as the location or nature of the shopping centers. Commissioner Leonard explored the pOint further trying to resolve which uses the Cornrnission prefers to group and what conflicts the ordinance is intended to avoid. In other words what criteria are to be used to distinguish C-I-H from C-2-H or other commercial zones. The Chairman surmised that the traffic situation would tend to divide _1.~_ the commercial into catagories. The City Attorney advised that some objectionable feature is the usual reason for distinguishing C-2-H from C-I-H. It may contain some noise or dust or odor factor to a slight degree. He rererred to North High- way 9 saying that most of the uses thereon are obviously not of a resi- dential character, nor are they C-I-H. The Chairman called for another study session on the C-2-H ordinance on ~~y 29. He requested that absent Commissioners be notified. It was further decided to hold an adjourned regular meeting on Monday, May 29 due to the remaining items on the agenda. B. Ordlnance 002(H): Amending Ordinance #002 By Repealing "Profession- al Adrni.nistrative Zoning" (PO-H) and Further By Addinß Tte Classifica- tion "Light Industrial Park Zoning" (M-I-PH). Initiated by City Coun- cil Resolution 424. Rescheduled for May 29. C. By Minutes Order the City Council has referred to the Planning Commission the zoning question of the 10 ft. just outside the C-I-H district between Scofield and Rodrigues. Rescheduled for May 29. VI NEW BUSINESS A. Storm Drain Cost Study Report - referred by Counci. Rescheduled for May 29. B. Miscellaneous (See Communications III A 2) Moved by Commissioner Fitch that the Nakagawa application for a temporary building penJit for a fruit stand be granted providing the stand be painted as per Nakagawa letter of May 1 and other representa- tions in said letter, also providing that a business license be sec- ured; Seconded by Commissioner Small. AYES: Commissioners: Adamo, Bagar, Fitch, Small NAYS: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy, Snyder ABSTAIN: COmmissioners: Leonard MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 (See item III A 3) Moved by Commissioner Fitch that a letter of protest be written to the County Planning Department indicating objection to the application of Martin B. Fuchslin on the grounds that the population denslty would be tochigh, the building height too great, and incompatible with adjacent zoning; Seconded by Commissioner Adamo. AYES: Commissioners: Adamo, Bagar, Fitch, Leonard, Small NAYS: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Rampy, Snyder MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 VII ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Leonard and Seconded by Commissioner Bagar that the meeting be recessed to May 29. AYES: CommisSl. oners: Adamo, Bagar, Fitch, Leonard, Small NAYS: Commissioners: None ABSENT: CorMrissioners: Rampy, Snyder MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 MeetLîg adjourned at 11:55 P.M., May 22, 1961. APPROVED: tT':f'EST: \-G. J_. "T." '-Co.. O'i ty Clerk Chairman, Planning Commission .I ( ((\J,'C-- -5-