Loading...
PC 06-10-85 CITY OF CUPERTINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA PC-468 10300 Torre Avenue,Cupertino,Ca. 95014 Page 1 41/ Telephone: (408) 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JUNE 10, 1985 SALUTE TO THE FLAG 7 : 3 0 P.M. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present : Com.. Mackenzie Com. Adams Com. Sorensen Vice Chr. Szabo Staff Present : Dir. of Ping. and Develop. Sisk Assistant Planning Dir. Cowan Assistant City Engineer Whitten City Attorney Kilian APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to adopt the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 28, 1985, after the correction to page 3 under Condition 17(a) "and those- :uses_ listed in Section 5, Paragraph B of the General Commercial Zoning Ordinance" to be inserted after the third word. • SECOND: Com. Adams VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. ApplicatImsl0-Z-84 and 21-U-84 of MICHAEL WEBER AND FRED MICHAUD: REZONING approximately . 51 gross acres from R1-7. 5 (Residential Single-family, 7,500 sq. ft . minimum lot size) zone to P (Planned Development with Office, Commercial and Residential intent) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; USE PERMIT to expand an existing single-story office building to a two-story office building equaling approximately 16,000 sq. ft . and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Miller Avenue and Richwood Drive. First Hearing continued. Tentative City Council hearing date - July 1, 1985. 1 PC-468 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 Page 2 Assistant Planning Director Cowan described the architecture as more in keeping with the neighborhood than the previous • plan, reminding the Commission that on May 13 the present plan had been discussed in general terrlis. He advised the site was underdeveloped presently for the trip end standard, and would yield at least 13,000 sq. ft. without the residence, which added would bring the total to 18/19,000 sq. ft . He listed the contensions of the Applicant as maintenance of the residential landscaping and construction and maintenance of the "gateway" improvements. RayRooker Architect on the , project, was concerned about his clients ' financial responsibility in having to provide improvements on East Estates and, lichwood intersection and thought the cost should be controlled, especially since it seemed a driveway on the Brentwood side might have to be relocated, he said. He described the utilization of slump stone and siding on the office building, since Com. Mackenzie was concerned about the mixture of textures . Com. Sorensen established the trash area had not been determined yet, and that there would be adequate lighting in the parking lot . Mr. Rooker had a problem with the maintenance covenant because of time and expense involved in recording and the possibility of sale of the residence. He contended that other PD* devel- opments in the City did not have such controls. Mr. Cowan advised this was a unique situation, since the residence to be maintained was not contiguous to the project . • Vice Chr. Szabo felt Condition 28 needed clarification, since it was not clear whether the covenant would run with the land or the residence. Mr. Cowan established that laving the office maintain the residential lot was the intent, ; and suggested some wording should be added to make it clearI, to any future owner. Mr. Rooker expressed their view that the office and residential were two separate p parcels; that they wanted the option to sell the residence and therby discontin e the maintenance. Com. Adams observed that the Applicant had tied the residence to the office site for trip end pu poses. Steve Fleshman, 10171 East Estates Drive, emphasized the Applicants seemed to be stripping the residence of its trip ends, planning to sell it to discharge their maintenance responsibility. He felt there should be one lot, to include the house, which should remain residential, and was against a two-story office structure. Tom Weber, 10530 East Estates Drive said he had heard from the Commission several times that the office development already there was a mistake, andlt is compounded it, he said. He reiterated Mr. Fleshman' s concerns and felt the discharge of the dwelling maintenance by the Applicants should not be 411 allowed. He emphaized traffic vol me and accidents in the neighborhood and was not in favor f the island improvement . *Planned Development I ft PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 PC-468 Vice Chr. Szabo explained the practice of transferring or Page 3 selling trip ends between sites. Fred Morello 10199 East Estates, felt it would be advan- tageous to rezone the whole site residential,but thought the office building shown was an improvement over the last one. Frederick Michaud, co-Applicant, advised they would not be adding new tenants, but space for the existing tenant and themselves, and felt they had a right to do something reasonable with the property; this being a major improvement . He was concerned about the island, both financially and because the neighbors did not like it . Mr. Rooker questioned the Exhibit A-i attached to the Resolution, since they had submitted a drawing wherein the improvements were half the size,obviating driveway relocatio' . Mr. Cowan advised that Mr. Rooker' s drawing had not been quite satisfactory, and that Exhibit A-1 reflected roughly what the Traffic Engineer wanted. The driveway served as a truck turnaround, and could not be closed, he said. He suggested the Commission give Staff lattitude to redesign the street for improved safety. The consensus of the Commission was that it be settled at Staff level which drawing the Applicant should adhere to. • Corr. Mackenzie, exploring Mr. Michaud' s feeling regarding merging the parcels to one, established that Mr. Michaud wanted the option to sell the house. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) Com. Mackenzie felt that selling the residential lot after deriving trip end benefits was a distortion of the Commission' s desires and that the solution was to merge to one parcel, or to require the ownership to run together for a period of time. City Attorney Kilian advised that if two parcels were involved there could not validly be conditions on the sale of one related to the other. He advised it would be legal to require the landscaping of the smaller lot to be main- tained by the larger lot owner, but that there might be enforcement problems. Corns. Adams and Sorensen felt that to transfer the trip ends required such an arrangement . Vice Chr. Szabo observed that the Applicant had stated in the past that the residence was run down because the location made it suitable for rental only, and so also felt • this action had to be taken. d PC-468 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 P-Pe 4Assistant City Engineer Whitten, discussing the installation 111 and maintenance of the island area, advised the City preferred not to have to maintain such small areas . Com. Mackenzie wanted to leave the Brentwood side out because of design uncertainties. Mr. Cowan and Mr. Whitten advised ,that this was not entirely possible, since some pavement removal and curb line relocation would be involved. Com. Adams felt that the island could be left until the Applicant could participate with the future owner of the Brentwood market . Corm. Mackenzie pointed out that Brentwood participation involved undergrounding powerlines, which would be a major expense. Vice Chr. Szabo suggested the City might install the island and the Applicant maintain it, but the Assistant City Engineer felt this was too complicated and unworkable. He observed that the cost of this improvement was far less than the powerline obligation. Mr. Cowan suggested the compromise that the future Brentwood owner could eventually reimburse the applicant for half the island improvements . There was a short discussion on whether the island was favored by residents. MOTION: Corn. Mackenzie, to reopen the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) Tom Weber felt the island would not address the traffic flow pattern and was not necessary to slow traffic , since there were already stop signs. Mr. Morello liked the island concept since it gave a neighbor- hood feeling. Nancy Burnett, 729 Stendhal, felt traffic coming from Miller would experience difficulties, and observed that when Brentwood market had existed, this was the only way to get straight through to it from Miller. Vice Chr. Szabo reminded that the island was to delineate the commercial/residential boundary. Mr. Cowan added that it would also straighten the- curve at East Estates and Richwood. Mr. Weber felt Ms . Burnett was symbolic of their traffic problems, and that Staff' s suggestions would make it easier for such cut-through traffic to enter. In discussion, the Commission felt that maybe the stop signs could be retained and maybe the plan should involve a left turn pocket . They were agreeable to a smaller gateway, the Brentwood side not necessarily included, or with reimbursement at the time Brentwood redeveloped. I PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 PC-468 Mr. Cowan advised that more Staff work on the island situa- Fage 5 tion could be done before the City Council Meeting. • MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend approval of Applicatio. 10-Z-84, subject to the Findings of the Staff Report with two Conditions; 1. as in the Staff Report and 2. "The permitted land use activity within the zoning boundary is single family residential. Future construction and land use activities in the zone are regulated by the R1 Zoning District Ordinance. A 16 trip end perfor- mance standard (TIPS) applies to the site. The transfer of residual development intensity is limited. The transfer can only be made to the immediate adjoining .87 acre office development . " SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend approval of Appli- cation 21-U-84, subject to the Findings of the Staff Report and Subconclusions of the Hearing, with specific Findings that the tying of the • maintenance gf the residential property to the offic - property was very important to the Commission, and subject to Standard Conditions 1-15; Conditions 16;17;18;19;20 modified at the end of the first sentence to delete "as depicted on Exhibit A-1" and adding a second paragraph indicating that at the time the Brentwood property is redeveloped that property owner may be conditioned to reimburse half the cost of the gateway treatment; Conditions 21•;22;23;24;25;26;27;28;29;30;31. • SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 • (Chr. Claudy absent) 2. Application 19-U-85 of HOME DELIVERY PIZZA: USE PERMIT to operate a home delivery and take-out pizza business and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is categorically exempt, hence, no action is required. The subject property is located in the Bollinger Plaza Center on the north side of Bollinger Road approximately 150 ft. west of De Anza Boule- Vard in a CG (General Commercial) zoning district. First Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FINAL APPROVAL. Director of Planning and Development Sisk described the nature of the business as a complete take-out and delivery service, with no interior seating, open until midnight. Brian Williams, 35 Alma Court, Los Altos, the Applicant, answering Commission questions, advised it would be difficult to change the number of employees, and preferentia to restripe the parking lot. It was satisfactory that delivery vehicles not be in the back between 11 and 12 p.m. he confirmed. . i • PC-468 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE- 10 1985 Page 6 Com.• Sorensen . raised questions re0arding dumpster location,and III whether noise from it would equal v'ieh,icle noise. • Ed Vargo, 10940• Kester Drive;Cupertlin ,advised it was located in an enclosed area along the back, 125ft . away from residences. MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Mackenzie ! VOTE: . Passed II; 4-0 Mr. Sisk advised that no complaints[ had been received about dumpster • noise, etc. , in the center, even though the bakery Commenced at 3 a.m. MOTION: Com. Sorensen to a pprove ;Application 19-U-85,subject to the Findings of the Staff .Report and Subconclusions of• the Hearing, with StandardlConditions 1-15;16;17;18;1.9;20.SECOND: Coma Mackenzie '. VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) ';I • 3. Application 5-TM=85 of PAN CAL 'IINUESTMENT COMPANY: TENTATIVE SUB- DIVISION MAP .to subdivide approximaite equaling. 6,000+ sq.ft. each and ENVIHPUMENTALy 1.73 dREVIEW: Thecres into o project waspreviously assessed, hence, no action is necessary. The subject property erty is located on the southeast corner of Blaney Avenue and Pr ce Avenue in a P (Planned Development with residen ial 5-10 dwelling units per gross acre intent)zoning district. Firstp1! arine. Tentative City Council hearing date - June 17, 1985. III Director of Planning and Development Sisk,giving the Staff Report, advised the property had been zonecOn. a previous Ilearin there had been discussion at Council level whether to align the�newnstreet east of Rodrigues with Rodrigues. • Joseph Choi, Panca1,4125 Blackford Avenue #200,San Jose, appeared to • answer questins. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Sorensen H VOTE: Passed 4-0 MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to recommend' approval of Application 5-TM-85 subject to the Findings and Conditions 1-15; . 16;17;18;19;20 of the Staff Report. SECOND: Com. Mackenzie II VOTE: Passed (Chr. Claudy absent) 4-0 4. Application 20-U-85 of CAMARGO AND to construct aq. ASSOCIATES, INC. : USE PERMIT third floor7element)tand wconsistingxof 5,450usq.iift. (oft office space, 1,000 sq. ft. of commercial space and two residential units and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Pasadena Avenue in a P (Planned Development with Neighborhood Commercial, Light Industrial and Residential 4-12 dwelling units per gross acre intent) • zoning district. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date- dune 17, 1985. ' Director of Planning and Development' 'Sisk described projects under construction in the area and advisedthat the project in question was consistent with the Monta Vista Plan!; IHe raised three issues; 1. • relating to colors; 2. that the elevations required that steps be used • for•access, even though it was a goal to have direct access, and 3. questions of reciprocal access which ;would probably arise in discussion. • • . • PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 PC-468 Page 7 Maurice Camargo, 20 S. Santa Cruz Avenue, Los Gatos, described the color scheme of dark green, terra cotta and sand beige, materials of wooden horizontal siding and the walkways and plaza area. Com. Sorensen, establishing that the plaza area would be open to the public, wondered if there might be problems at night . Mr. Camarga felt that this potential problem would be addressed by the mixed use aspect . Com. Adams established that the two residential units would be located away from Stevens Creek Boulevard, and would consist of a studio and a 1-2 bedroom unit. Ann Anger, President of the Monta Vista Improvement Asso- ciation, liked the architecture, which she felt complimented other buildings under construction, but was concerned that the colors, especially the green, might clash. William Kinst, 1146 Quince Avenue, Sunnyvale, part-owner to the south, felt the building would make a good neighbor and the colors were not offensive, but brought up the question of the reciprocal access, since they had been requirbdto file such a covenant, but the previous owner of this property had rescinded his verbal agreement. He asked that a similar covenant be required on this proprty, so that he could be partially reimbursed for the construction and engineering of the access. Director of Planning and Development Sisk advised that he • had talked to the developer, who had indicated that he would reasonably reimburse the neighbor to the south. Mr. Sisk suggested that the parties meet to resolve the matter before the City Council Meeting of June 17, 1985. MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 4-0 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend approval of Application 20-U-85, subject to the Findings of the Staff Report and the Subconclusions of the Hearing, with Standard Conditions 1-15; . Conditions 16;17 modified to include the colors of sand, green and terra cotta; Conditions 18;19;20;21;22;23;24;and new Condition 25 requiring that the devel- oper reach a reimbursement agreement with the property owner to the south to share in the cost of constructing the easement of benefit to both property owners; if those parties cannot agree, participation will • be determined by City Council. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) PC-468 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 Page 8 There was a question from the audience. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to reopen the Public Hearing • SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 Don Utz, Civil Engineering Associates, 455 Los Gatos Boulevard, Los Gatos, referred to Condition 23 and stated they could not lower the building as required, because of existing gutter and catch basin improvements in the area. Com. Adams established that it could probably be lowered enough to allow for two steps up instead of three. Com. Mackenzie suggested a modification that was acceptable to Mr. Utz. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to amend Condition 23 in the previous Motion to be replaced with a Condition requiring that the Applicant work with Staff to attempt to lower the pad height of the building as much as possible. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) BREAK 5.. Application 9-Z-85 of YAGIL HERTZBERG: REZONING approxi- mately . 65 acres from A1-43 (Agricultural Residential) , 43,000 sq. ft . minimum lot size) zone to R1-20 (Residential Single-family, 20, 000 sq. ft . minimum lot size) zone or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is a flag lot located at the end of Mt . Crest Place. First Hearing. Tentative City Council hearing date - July 1, 1985. Assistant Planning Director Cowan explained the history of the present zoning and advised that the three different zoning options involved different heights and relatioships to the surrounding topography and residences, though the Hearing did not involve the selection of a building site or design, the pad height would put the house approximately 30 ft . below those at the top of the hill, he advised. He described the R1* zoning as allowing the greatest flexibility of height and stories and Staff supported it, since it reflected surrounding zonings and the present zoning was archaic, he advised. Questioned by Com. Mackenzie, Mr. Cowan listed setbacks possible in each zone, but felt because of the size of the site, these would not be a problem, the applicant probably trying to get as close as possible to the northerly property • line because of the driveway location. *Residential, single-family 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 PC-468 Juanita McLaren, 22101 Lindy Lane, was concerned about land- Page 9 slide possibilities, and also for her view, though she had seen the plans and this did not seem to be a problem. She stated there should be nouaccess off Lindy, since her drive- way was already hazardous,and mentioned a piece of "no-man' s a d"in• the .area. Dill Guiagerich, 21950 Lindy Lane commented, as had Mrs. McLaren, that Mr. Hertzberg had been considerate and had appraised the neighbors of his plans . His concerns were access to Lindy, since the seller had mentioned a possible access easement there; that neighbors ' views be considered; that slide activity be prevented; that heavy equipment not use their private driveway. Yagel Hertzberg, 655 Carlisle Way, Sunnyvale, the Applicant, agreed to all points made. He needed more flexibility to enable him to build a Spanish-look tower, and the R1 zoning had been suggested by Staff as a means to that end, he explained. He advised he was using Mount Crest as access and that he had had a new soil report prepared and approved by the City geologist . Vice Chr. Szabo established that Mr. Hertzberg, to his knowledge, did not own an easement onto Lindy Lane and therefore felt the neighbor s' fears were unfounded in that direction. Mr. Cowan, regarding Ms.McLaren' s and Mr. Guiagerich' s ® concerns of view and slide activity, advised that the Commission was purely considering a zoning change that these issues would not pertain to. Assistant City Engineer Whitten answered Commissioners ' questions on procedures to be followed for geological reports and grading, stating that the neighbors were welcome to review the material or have their soils engineers do so. Chr. Szabo clarified that the only issue that could be touched on was that the zoning options could affect the set- backs and height, and consequently the view issue. Com. Mackenzie had heard both nieghbors say they were satisfied with the view. Mr. Hertzberg, advising the house was already designed, said it would adhere to the 20 ft . setback requirement, but that he could build without changing the zoning,if necessary, which would mean a higher foundation grade and a part of the house being closer to Ms. McLaren' s property. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration 411 SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) Pc-468 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 PC-468 Page 10 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend approval of Page 10 Application 9-Z-85, subject to the Findings of the Staff Report and the Subconclusions of the Hearing. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) 6. Applications 10-Z-85 and 6-TM-85 of LAWRENCE C.MAYERLE: REZONING approximately . 36 acres from RHS (Residential Hillside Development) zone to RI-10 (Residential, Single- family, 10,000 sq, ft . minimum lot size) zone or whatever zone May be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP to consolidate six parcels consisting of approximately 1. 5 acres into three parcels ranging in size from 14, 600 sq. ft . to 36, 500 sq. ft . and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration. The subject property is located on the north side of Mercedes Road 500 ft . west of Cordova Road and 100 ft . west of the terminus of San Felipe Road. First Hearing. Tentative City Council Hearing date for rezoning application - July 1, 1985. PLANNING CO.+IPIISSION HAS FINAL APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP. Assistant Planning Director Cowan explained the history of the zoning issue, and that there had been floating lot boundaries in the area because of past survey errors,which had now been well resolved_ though there was still a zoning boundary and lot line that traversed Dr. Mayerle ' s property and went through his house, he said. The request was to shift the zoning boundary between the Ri and the RHS portions and consolidate 6 lots into 3, with the upper lot having access to Mercedes Road, he explained. He advised that basically the same action had been taken in 1981 but that the Map had expired, and compared the 1981 Map with the present one. Com. Mackenzie established that the proposed building site for Lot 2 was now closer to San Felipe Road and was steeper. Discussing the Conditions of Approval, Mr. Cowan advised a letter had been received from Mr. King, San Felipe Road regarding possible drainage problems and setback concerns. He advised that the only control over design would be in establishing a pad height for the two new structures,with a 5 ft deviation, in determining the appropriateness of the zoning change and configuring the lots. He also advised there was a procedure whereby the drainage issue would be reviewed by the Engineering Department . Assistant City Engineer Whitten said that Staff had been very successful in such areas in reducing, if not eliffiina- ting flow. Com. Adams, whilst agreeing the Commission did not have precise control over pad height,' noted a 20 ft . differential in down contour elevations on Lot 2, which he thought would involve enough cut and fill to create a potential drainage problem. He noted that the Applicant had moved his garage PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 PC-468 to make more width available to Lot 2 and wondered if it was Page 11 enough to make a flat pad. Lawrence Mayerle, 22821 Mercedes Road, felt the current Map represented a better use of the land than the previous one. He introduced his architect to answer further questions . Dennis Burrow, 23895 Summit Road, Los Gatos, confirmed that Pad 2 would be notched into the hillside with some cut and some fill and described his concept of the building,with the garage closest to San Felipe, the main level stepping up the hill at the garage roof height, and a third level stepping up to the northwest corner. He described retaining wall at the south turning area and cut on the upper southwest corner, and maybe a staggered terraced retaining wall. He advised he had developed similar plans for other parts of the Bay Area with much steeper grades . He and Dr. Mayerle were aware of the drainage problems, he advised, and he planned to maintain the channel, bringing the water down the driveway out to San Felipe Road. Com®Adams ascertained with Dr. Mayerle the pool at the present residence had caused no problems, and there was a possibility for a pool at Site 3 eventually. Com. Mackenzie determined that the geological report procedure did not differ between Rl*and RHS#zones. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to close the Public Hearing SECOND : Com. Sorensen 111 VOTE: Passed 4-0 The consensus of the Commission was in favor of the zoning change, though Com. Sorensen commented that it was a shame the creek had to be filled in there. MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to grant a Negative Declaration SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to recommend approval of Application 10-Z-85, subject to the Findings of the Staff Report and Subconclusions of the Hearing. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) Mr. Cowan was unsure what the Commission required in the deviation of pad grades . MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to reopen the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) Mr. Burrow, establishing that the rough pad for the garage would be involved, thought that a deviation of plus/minus 5 ft . would be workable. Assistant City Engineer Whitten suggested a requirement of maximum 5 ft . of cut and 5 ft . of fill be substituted, since he saw potential problems . *R1-Residential, single-family *RHS-Residential Hillside pC-468 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 10, 1985 Page 12 Com. Adams felt it would be helpful to give Staff lattitude to work with the geological and soil analyses to determine how much cut and fill they could accept . 410 MOTION: Com. Sorensen, to close the Public Hearing SECOND: Com. Mackenzie VOTE: Passed 4-0 MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to approve Application 6-TM-85, subject to the Findings of the Staff Report and the Subconclusions of the Hearing, with Standard Conditions 1-15; Conditions 16;.17;18;19A20;21; 22;23; 24; with Condition 25 added requiring that the building pad configuration and elevations are to be reviewed and approved by Staff before a building permit is issued. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 7. Interpretation of General Plan Land Use Diagram Relative to the Valley Green Apartments. Assistant Planning Director Cowan explained that action was required to direct Staff to make a correction., MOTION: Com. Mackenzie, to adopt a Minute Order instructing Staff to correct the General Plan Use Diagram to reflect 10-20 units per acre range for the Valley Green Apartment Complex. SECOND: Com. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 4-0 (Chr. Claudy absent) REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Vice Chr. Szabo, on behalf of the Commission, thanked Director of Planning and Development Sisk for his many years of service and time given to the Planning Commission. Director of Planning and Development Sisk thanked the Commission, advising that Assistant Planning Director Cowan would become Acting Director of Planning and Development after July 1, 1985 but that he would be helping out through the summer. Com. Adams complained of the temporary signs in the windows of Johnson and Scanlan Appliance and T.V. Store on Stevens Creek Blvd. Assistant Planning Director Cowan undertook to check on the situation, though he noted there was a certain percentage of the window space that could be used. for that purpose. Com. Mackenzie noted the "Grand Opening" signs at the Nite Cap! REPORTPLANNING DIRECTOR ADJOURNMENT 11 : 01 P.M. APPROVED: • /07 ,/ e'f- Kcjwsci4 - Cit C'_erk _Chairperson