PC 01-27-86 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA. 95014
(408) 252-4505
• MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON January 27, 1986
(Meeting Held in the Council Chambers of Cupertino City Hall)
SALUTE TO THE FLAG; 7:30. P.M.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners Present: Chairman Claudy
Vice Chairman Szabo
Commissioner Adams
Ccumnissioner Mackenzie
Commissioner Sorensen
Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Planning & Development
Steve Piasecki, Assistant Planning Director
Charles Kilian, City Attorney
Sonia Binnendyk, Planner II
Glen Grigg, Traffic Engineer
Election of Officers
Chairman Claudy stated that the first order of business was the election
of a new Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson.
MOTION: Conn. Sorensen moved to elect Cann. Szabo as Chairman
SECOND: Chr. Claudy
• VOTE: Passed by acclamation.
Com. Szabo then assumed the duties of Chairman.
MOTION: Cam. Sorensen nominated Cam. Mackenzie as Vice Chairman
SECOND: Cam. Claudy
Chr. Szabo asked for other nominations; there were none.
MOTION: Cann Claudy moved that the nominations be closed.
SECOND: Corn. Adams
VOTE: Passed 5-0
•
MOTION: Chr. Szabo moved that Coin. Mackenzie be elected Vice Chairman
VOTE: Passed by acclamation.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION: Cam. Sorensen, to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting of
October 28, 1985, as submitted.
SECOND: Cann. Adams
VOTE: Passed, Chr. Claudy abstaining. 4-0
MOTION: Cam. Adams, to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting of
November 12, 1985, as submitted.
SECOND: Conn. Claudy
VOTE: Passed, Cam. Sorensen abstaining. 4-0
I - ,
I '
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, fL986411
APPROVAL OF MINUTES (font'd.)
MOTION: Com. Adams, to app a the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
December 9, 1985, as submitted.
SECOND: Com. Sorensen
VOTE: Passed 5-0
MOTION: Cam. Adams to ap
prove the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
January 13, 1986, as submitted.
SECOND: Com. Sorensen
VOTE: Passed 5-0
EDITION: Com. Adams, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
January 15, 1986, as submitted, with the following changes:
- Page 4, paragraph 7 -- the question of whether we have a hazard
control plan to dPa1 with such problems as an earthquake be
inserted. Cam. Adams does not feel the issue was addressed
adequately by the applicant.
- Com. Mackenzie asked that on Page 6, the second motion be
changed to state that Cam. Adams made the motion and Com. Szabo
seconded.
- Cam. Claudy requested that on Page 4, paragraph 9 the wording
be changed to reflect that he did not feel that "Cupertino
residents would look favorably upon the proposed Marriott
sign".
SECOND: Com. Mackenzie
VOTE: Passed 5-0
POSTPONEMENT'S/NEW AGENDA ITEMS
ITEM 2, 28-'Ili-85, Whaley and iates has been withdrawn at the request
of the applicant.
ITEM 7, listed under New Business, pertains to the same property. Mr.
Cowan stated that this matter is not a public hearing, but is submitted
for an interpretation on the
tarp of the Commission for General Plan
consistency.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Chr. Szabo stated that the one letter that had been received pertained to
Item 6, 49-U-85, Monta Vista Inn, will be discussed at that time.
Mr. Cowan stated that Mr. Sam Test had submitted a pamphlet concerning
housing for the handicapped, for the information of the Commission.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
- None
CONSENT ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
- No Consent Calendar Actions. �.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986 .
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
ITEM 1. CITY OF CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN ANIENE ENT (1-GPA-85)
The subject General Plan Amendment involves revisions to the Housing
and Land Use Elements:
(a) Amend the Housing Element to update demographic data, reassess
housing need and amend various housing policies and programs,
including the Below Market Rate (BMR) program.
(b) Amend the Land Use Element to allow a portion of the Vallco Park
hotel room allocation to shift north of Interstate Route 280 in
the Vallco Park Planning Area.
(c) Amend the Land Use Element to designate as a "residential" use
area those lots situated at the easterly terminus of Blossom Lane
backing up to South De Anza Boulevard.
The Planning Commission will also consider applications 23-Z-85
and 43-U-85 (Hunter Properties) :
REZONING (23-Z-85) of approximately 0.21 acres from R1-10 to P
(Planned Development with General Coimnercial) . USE PERMIT
(43-U-85) to expand a previously approved commercial center by
2,300 sq. ft. LOCATION: Easterly terminus of Blossom Lane,
111 adjacent to South De Anza Boulevard and southerly of McClellan
Road.
CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING OF: January 13, 1986.
ENVERMEMIAL REVIEW: Negative Declaration
TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: February 3, 1986
Chr. Szabo stated that these items have been partially discussed in the
past but are still on the agenda.
ITEM 1 (a)
Mr. Cowan stated that following the last hearing on the General Plan
items, staff has prepared same resolutions and incorporated all
recommended changes in the Housing Element and Background Report. The
staff report of January 27th duals with targeting of monies for
expenditures in the housing plan; the second page deals with Chairman
Szabo's concerns. If agreeable, these concerns can be addressed in one of
the policies of the Housing Element: basically, he is asking to target
funds more specifically within the ownership and rental categories.
Chr. Szabo clarified that the plan would target three groups of people for
housing assistance:
a) Elderly Cupertino residents
b) Single parents who either live or work in Cupertino
c) People who either live or work in Cupertino and who need assistance
in the purchase of moderate cost housing.
PLANNING CESSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 1 (a) (Ccnt'd.) •
This allocation would be divided equally between rental assistance and
ownership assistance. He then referred to the San Jose Mercury News Series
currently running about "The N Poor."
The Public Hearing was then opened.
Mr. Charles Newman, Vallco 'Park Limited, paraphrased their January 13th
letter to the Council. Vallco Park Ltd. is opposed to the proposed new
subsidized housing program and funding source which is also being
proposed. The existing programs are adequate and comply with any state
requirements in force. The General Plan has a number of topics that
address the housing needs in Cupertino; for example, rent mediation and
incentives such as zoning credits. The BMR program has not worked and
should be eliminated.
Adequate housing is a regional problem and must be addressed at this level
with funding coming through county, state and federal sources. If
Cupertino implements these programs, it will increase the cost of market
housing and those without subsidies will be further away from ownership or
even rental.
Ms. Ann Anger, Citizen Goals Committee, Cupertino, stated that she has
statistic
s on the number of 1 income housing units in Cupertino and has
asked how much does Cupertino have to do to meet state requirements for
providing low income housing. Does want to be another Berkeley i.rig Cupertino
or Santa Cruz?
Ms. Sally Brennan, Director, Cupertino Community Services, stated that
what needs to be addressed is Cupertino taking care of its own people. She
praised the Commission for taking time to study and to act on this issue.
Ms. Nancy Hertert, resident, tated that the motion is very well
written and is proud of a city the General Plan's conscientious effort to
help those who need help.
Mr. John Vidovich, De Anza ies, stated that the BMR program has
been unfair; 1) it has placed the complete burden of providing this type
of housing on a small n of developers who have been recognized
already by the City Council for providing significant low cost housing
opportunities; 2) there are abuses of the program by some participants.
De Anza Properties is in favor of a construction tax to replace Hit
funding, and requested adopti of a moderate tax to accomplish these
goals.
Ms. Iola Hendreason, Cupertino resident for 23 years, quoted specific
statistics on applicants for housing; these applicants are primarily
local. The elderly have special needs in this area and should be given a
share of the housing.
Ms. Beverly Laurence, Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing, spoke of
the well known cutbacks in housing; use of a new system of fees for
housing is appropriate. 41,
Com. Sorensen agrees that single parents are the new poor and requested no
further delays in assisting this group.
0-9 •passed :2I0jn
'suxp j m100 :MOMS
•burzeag oTTgnd atpq asoTo oq panout ApneTD 'w03 :IQOIJOi4
410
•saexaads ON •peuedo
buTzeaq amnd 'Pale duel umsso1g atpg go uoTgaubTsep quamaTa esn pueI
'atpq buTuzeouoo T mu 3o geed prTgq. atpq uo uoTssnosTp pagamu[ ogezg *to
(o) T NEMI
•saaxeeds off •peuedo butaeatp
OTTqnd 'xaed 00TT1A trr snood Te OH 3o UOTgaDOTTe quawera den PU8I ate
buTuuaouoo 'T I42JI jo q-'d pumas eta uo uoTssnosTp pe4eT;TuT ozS 'atp
(q) T HUI
'„Avail o. pebuetp gDeaquoo HTTTMu PTO ettiTi 'tldeibezed
gSeT 'Tip abed 'gzoded punoaft.roas eqq uT abuego a pagsabbns uemoo •ayi
'buTsnou aTgep ogga ATddns lidTau1, oq.
pesn eq spun; AqTo geqq :abuego TeUOT; Pe UP eqq. pe sanbe. nvTD 'uurJ
u'splogesnotj
amoout agezapout pue zaMoT uaaMgaq ATTenbe A ageumtoadde pauoTgzodde
eq PInotls buTPtnl3u : xeq. eqq. go uoTgaod aeLoT aq4 uT 'ATpuooeS
u'egep aaqgo pue snsueo
tzbnoogq paeu AgTiapT TTTM PTO ate, •bursnoq sTt;g ATddns og salsTuetaut
zaqgo qs ggegsa ao uoTgezTuablo gTgazduou a gwpt goeaguoo pie spTotlasnoq
awoouT ag-awl u pue MoT og buTsnot; aTcteE o; a ATddns gem sweaboad pun; •
oq. spun; A4To esnu :peat og pebuego eq TT-£ tidezbezed 'Wawa-TO buTsnoH
aqg uT pT abed uo •buTpzoM ur sebuetp oMg pagsenbax aTzuaxoew •uu�
'ATTeooT auop eq qsna gT 'pessaappe eq og sT aaggeuz sTtpg
;I Lgebpnq Aue seq getpg Aouebe TeuoTbea a sT amp axagm paxse 'uraTgozd
TeuoTbaa a sT buCsnot; get;q swam-424s aqg og asuodsaz uT 'ogezg •aqO
•ouigaedno uT ][1OM otrM 9s0t44 dog pue squapTsa z ouTgaadn3
.zo; aq TTTM ueeboad sir lag; exrsep sTtp pagegs aagpgzng ApneTO 'uO
'kkTurwnuoo guawdoTai ep etpg go guambas news Axan duo buTxeq 'aTeeun ueeq
SPIT XE4 2i<nH buigsTxa atlg AT.zeaTO •dTgsuoTgeTaa T:T e aq gouueo 'MeT Aq
pue 'you sT aaaqy •pur j TezaueD s 1 dgio at;q tlbnoagg gnq xeq UOTgonagsuoo
e tIETIOaq4 dun o you TTTM burptmg aq1 •xeq uoTgonagsuoo e tibnoagq. burpung
go ens etjq uo epeut eq og speau uoT4e3TJT.TO •saaumgsno aTaqg oq uo
passed eq rum gsoo sTtpq :Aeuout AgTunuuao guauuIoTanap aqq. gsoo ATTeTguago
Aeuz ueid sTgq go uoTgeeodaoour gegq aaet a sT ate gegq pagegs ApneT3 •un0
•suoTgdo xetpgo agepauu 000e og peuepeoaq eq buTpaom et;q gegg
pe sanbaz aH •soTJToeds eui;ap oq see4qTawoo atpg Jo gn4 'ueTd Tezaue
ate. Jo eoeTd ate, you sT gI 'gno pain eq 4ou pTnotis tPTt M suoTgdo .etpgo
ale atatpq 'suoTgeziuebzo gTgoaduou tplTM goeaquoo O . AgTO at;q saxTnbaz
ueTd bursnOH atlg 3o ebenbuei at;q aITI gem pagegs . aTzuaxoeN •umD
magsAs eq . 3o asnsTu
gsuTebe pauoT neo gnq swauno anoge e;q gq-cm paazbe osTe sutepy mro
(1)1Lo3) (e) T Y,II,LI III
986T 'Lz Aaenuer 3o &rpeeY' zeTnbad
S Jn= HOISSIW OD OAIINMY1d
410
o-S pest :aMOn
uasuaaoS *woo :QAIOOSS
'a 8Z Jo ggaoN coeds Tagot;
buTgeooTTeaa 't qdeabeaed Z•d9 ATTod PUe 't ZZ'Z A3TTod :sabueq0
TWTuWPa4 snoTaen buTPnIouT ueTd TvaeuaD ;o guamaTg aagoeaetp
0 AgTutuuuroo /asn Pus, PeSza ata gdope og penau ApnnTo 1u1D :Noma
0-S PaSSed :
uesuaaos 'unop :MOMS
SWIMAXIMAr qUBOBTa esn Pug' pesodoad
buTuzaouoo u0T4ea2Toac anTgebaN a guea6 og penau KpnnTo neX) :iMIICR
0-S Passed :au
uesuazos •uupD :QHppSs
'A4T3 eqg uT xaoM ao/pue 3ATT owl saaAnq
auzoouT egeaapau eLU p gsaTg ao3 pagabaeg Big sgTun dTgsaauro (P
AC oat. uT xaoF ao/pue eATT mint spIotZasnotl sguaaed albuTs
pup Agio aqg uT Eta
TATT saoTuas og pagabaeg eq sgTun Teguag (O
aouegsTsse dtt4saaut o pue Teguaa
ueam4aq buTpunj uT gTTds Tsnbe AIageurrkoadde ue apnnoul (q
'anoge passnosTp se 'TT-£ A0TTod '0T abed (e
:se oTTo; se peTJTpout
buTaq quauDaTa att4 41odei txtrloaforaell aug tr4Tit buoie guaulaTa
buTsnoH UTd TRaaueD PaT;TPou a gdope penau ApneTo '11100 :IQofla
0-S Passed :M O&
uasuaaos 'uuPD :Q11OZES
'guar um-Ed TEaeuaD eqg 3o oTgaod guautaTa bursnoH
et.14 uo uoTgeaeToaQ anTgebaN a ;o buTguea6 a 3 pan= 1 meTO 'u100 :k oIS,M
(-'Pi4u00) I Hui
9861 'LZ Ax nuer ;o butgaag aeTn6ag
=NM NOISSMICO DNINNVId
PLANNING COWESSIONMINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
• ITEM 1 (Applications 23-Z-85 and 43-U-85: Hunter Properties)
REZONING (23-Z-85) of approximately 0.21 acres from R1-10 to P
(Planned Development with General Commercial) . USE PEEN (43 U-85)
to expand a previously approved commercial center by 2,300 sq. ft.
LOCATION: Easterly terminus of Blossom Lane, adjacent to South DeAnza
Boulevard and southerly of McClellan Road.
Mr. Cowan stated that this is a referral from the Council for a report
from the Commission. The Commission initially recommended denial of the
two applications.
Mr. Piasecki stated that the intent of presenting the Commission with a
specific Resolution was to say that if the Council acts on your earlier
recommendation, they would have then a specific resolution with specific
conditions to work from.
Chr. Szabo stated that this was not a public hearing but did allow the
following individuals to comment:
Ms Debbie Maclamara, 20544 Blossom Lane, Cupertino, repeated her request
that all three properties be developed together and added that she would
like to see the wall on the Blossom Lane side go up first to protect the
remaining neighborhood. Finally a request to be notified of architectual
and site review meetings.
• Mr. Dirk Hunter, 1625 The Alameda, Apt. 705, San Jose, stated that Lot B
is now secure; in regard to Int A it is to their benefit, as well as to
the neighborhood, to build simultaneously. As a temporary measure, a
cyclone fence will be put up as quickly as possible and no trucks will use
the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Hunter proposed changes in landscaping and setbacks and stated that
they are maintaining 1:1 ratio in the distance to the property line.
In response to Cam. Adams question, Mr. Cowan stated that the applicants
will be filing within the next week for Lots B and C. Despite the lack of
a guarantee on the part of the applicant to follow through, the staff
feels comfortable with the applicants' intent.
In response to Cann. Mackenzie's question on the 7 foot setback of the
fence requested by the planning staff, and Mr. Hunter's request to
eliminate the 7 feet, Mr. Hunter stated that with the 8 feet already set
aside by the city, this project will be responsible for landscaping 15
feet of property, which seems excessive.
Mr. Piasecki suggested that due to lack of time and without a guarantee on
Lots B and C, the condition remain unchanged, giving the Commission the
protection that it requires. Let the applicant refile the use permit and
review the matter again at a later time.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 1 (Applications 23-Z-85 a7d 43-U-85: HunterProperties)
11,
Cam. Mackenzie suggested that when the house on Lot A is demolished, the
applicant be required to put up a cyclone fence immediately to maintain
security on the cul-de-sac. This will be Condition 30.
Mr. Piasecki stated that (there needs to be a Condition 31 requiring the
applicant to sign an agreement to remove the driveway on De Anza Blvd,
should a revised development plan be approved for joint development with
parcels to the south. The driveways must be tied together in that
instance.
References in the resolution to A, first revision and to A, need to be
changes to Al.
MOTION: Cann. Sorensen moved that the Commission recommend a change in
zoning per 23-Z-85 subject to the Findings on Page 1 and the
subconclusion as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting of January 27, 1986.
SECOND: Cann. Mackenzie
VOTE: Passed 5-0
MOTION: Cam. Sorensen moved that the Commission recommend to the Council
approval of 43-U-85 subject to the findings and subconclusions
stated in the model resolution, with Standard Conditions 1-15,
Condition 16 changed to Exhibit A-1, Condition 21 to include a
temporary cyclone fence enclosure following demolition, and 411
Conditions 30 and 31 per the staff suggestions.
SECOND: Cam. Mackenzie
VOTE: Passed 5-0
ITEM 3:
Application No(s) . 21-Z-85,44 LJ-85, 25- -85
Applicant: DEBCOR Corporation
Property Owner DEBCOR and Associates
Location: West side of Stelling Road, approx. 110 ft.
north ofILilac Wav
Parcel Area (AC) 0.67 1
REZONING (21-Z-85)
From: R2-4.25 (Residential duplex 4,250 sq. ft. lot size per unit)
To: P (Planned Development with Residential Single Family, 5-10 DU
per gross acre Intent zone or whatever zone may be deemed
appropriate by the Planning Commission.
USE PERMIT (44U-85) I
To construct Six (6) single family homes.
TENTATIVE MAP (25-'IM--85)
To subdivide said property into six (6) residential parcels
with lot sizes ranging from 3,200 sq. ft. to 4,760 sq. ft.
CONTINUED FROM PLANNING CCMMISSTON MEETING OF: January 13, 1986
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Negative Declaration Recommended
TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: February 18, 1986
A
PLANNING C OMISSION NILNUT S
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 3 (Contid.)
Staff Presentation: Mr. Piasecki stated that the Planning Commission asked
the applicant to go back and restudy the site plan for this .67 acre
parcel. An aerial photograph was used to illustrate the situation. The
Commissions concerns included on-site guest parking Discussions with Glen
Grigg, Traffic Engineer and Burt Viskovich, Director of Public Works it
was determined that there would be parking on Stelling Road from the
proposed driveway to Lilac Way, accommodating approximately 8 spaces.
The applicant proposes a 4:1 parking ratio per unit. Staff feels this
ratio, along with on street parking, will be sufficient.
The applicants revised plan still utilizes the same site plan layout; the
Commission's direction to provide some common walls was given to obtain
the dual benefit of larger open spaces in the project and the potential
for greater setbacks. There have been same improvement in these areas,
namely in the setback issue. We suggest that the applicant accommodate an
additional 2.5 feet from the south property line to obtain the standard 20
feet. The setbacks on Stelling Road would be 12 feet and 14 feet.
The issue on the south property line relates to privacy. The applicant is
required to provide an intensive tree screen.
Redesigning the building styles is to the benefit of the project. Sloping
the roof reduces the mass of the building especially from the viewpoint of
the residents to the south. The use of stucco and cultured stone improves
the outer building.
Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Richard Childress stated that the goal was
to provide a transition between the Roundtree at 12.8 units per acre and
the detached homes to the south; this project is the same density as what
it would be if developed as duplexes under current zoning, with about 2%
credit. The layout is now a zero lot line configuration. Shared on-site
parking provided exceeds the required 2 1/2:1 ratio.
In terms of specific conditions, he requested clarification on the
following:
Condition 18, Tree Protection. There is only one specimen tree. Other
the large trees on the north property line, and the small citrus in the
center will be retained if possible. The required fences at drip line
and hiring of landscape architect should be deleted and the task left to
the developer's discretion.
Recording of easement of the properties. Request that it be put in the
CCR's "that on sale of the property an easement will be granted to the
new owner"
Requirement for 22 feet driveway for residential, single family.
Requested deletion of Staff's suggested 24 feet width, the requirement
for multiple units.
Request for curbing. He is opposed to use of full city curbing within
• the project. The requested on-site storm drain will be accommodated.
•gsenbaz sigueoTTdde aq; agEpommocOE PTA
sTqq. :seam 9144 Jo uo-pEnxasazd eqg zo; u2Td E buTgsanbaa pu 8T uoTgipuop
411 go souaguas puooes egg uT buipzoM eqg bu ora'sz pe4sabbns r asEta •.zw
•enssT sTgg uo abuego gsanbax s' WEOTTd& aqg gda000 sngg TTTM
pus sqoacood pooh butdoTenap ao; uoTgEgndaz S1gueoTTdde eq4 uT eouapTJuoo
sTq pe4e4s sq 'aanaMog :uotg0agazd eeaq. IIgo .uemsoaogua goTaqs S OAE3 aH
•Agaadozd E go guaudoTenap et . buTinp q.soT aaan Saazg ebaPT 'gsEd eqg uT
4E44 ATautpu 'enssT uotgoe4oad eaag aqg uo suaaouoo stq pe4eqs mew •wo
•Aemeniap exp. Jo uoTgEooT sqq. buTp ebea suotgsenb pesTea ApnnT0
'w03 'gou sT 'aattamoq ibupped dem SAT4P4US4 aae uotwegoxd
sea; PU2 ggpTM icemen-cap ' IIIr-5Z O. PXEbaz uT q.eqq. peqvgs ApnET0 'mop
0-S Pesg'd :HIOA
uasuazog *mop 43mag
sbuTzesq
snOTnazd pup STgg go suoTsn ouoo •
T P� �TPUT3 a� � 40a Cans
'uoTgnTossa j;EqS 91.4 UT SE LT P2 9T SUO=! puo0 'SE-T �TlTPuo0
pis ATM 98-Z-TZ 3o Tenoadde • - •. og pai u ApnnTO 'WDp =I°I,M
0-9 Passed :210A
uesuazog •ump :MOMS
98-NLrSZ Pup 98-f-fl '98-Z-TZ suot.EOTTddv
aog uon2xxTOac enT4ebeN E ;o buTgupab Rgq. panoau ApnnTp •uwp 4401 0K
'U2Td TeaeueJ a ggTM gua.STSUOO �C�aadrazd STq. doTenap oq. gsanbaz
E t uT ammo SEq 4ueoTTdd2 aqq :gT euozaa og Rzess9Oau sT gT ampew'
peuoTgsenb Apn2T0 *map •Agaadoad go eoeTd p epuegsgns E uo
STtgg moue O . auozaz oq. �T egeTadOzdde SEM s4T
, xaggegr� �E aTzua40Ey1 'wZD
•uopOagoad eau (o
{Dpggas ; SZ pegsabbns sqy (R
zTaad sT
:uotgeoTTdde sTgg pe
buTuasouOo n o (E
z
aqg pazTaEumutis gpzg •zga
0-9 passed :SIO&
eTzueN0911 'umJ :MOMS
'bUT 9H OTTqnd 914 esoTo og 'Apn2T0 •u :NOIMOR
•agTs gos Coad eqg go Azeptmoq ggnos agg u z3 NoEgga
wog SZ E pagsabbns aH •butddospueT ao3 spaepue4s DTI pue S 2q .as
zagEazb go suzag uT AEM 0E7I uo anTT oqM gg O . uaATb eq uoTl2aapTsuoo
geqq. P9}[SE qnq 'peA osaz uaaq seq enssT buT)[a2d agg 4egg paaabe eH
aea..4PUno2i 4e gunouta
agg aoTm4 Limp ae4reab sT buTPT?nq jo gunoute TEE sqy 'gee; 'bs 000Z
AT94emTxoodde eq TTTM Eaze sTgg uT Sauroq aq . :gae; •bs 006 'CT94emTxozdde
abpzanp sun eaagpunog egg 'aaoe aed sun ET eazgpunag aqg oq. pesoddo
SE eaop aad sgTun 6 ATagEutrxoadde sT Tesodozd sTt. eTTtuy 'buTuoz guano
egg aanp PemoTTE A.TSuap uT eseazouT og . uoT .Tsoddo iszoggbTeu
sTq pup sTtl pewaagTea 'ouTgaedflO 'AEM oeT1I SOLL 'Agdozg in •41
•pe uagg sem buraEaH oTTgnd et
S (•P► ) c Email
986T °LZ AXEnuer go butgaski ae nbaa
IflN M NOISSIW W WINNVId
1
PLANNING COMNIISSION NIINUTFS
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 3 (Cont'd.)
MOTION: Cann. Sorensen moved for approval of 25-'IM-85 subject to the
findings and the subconclusions set forth in the minutes of the
January 27th meeting, with Conditions 1-15, 16, 17, Condition 18
amended to remove the second sentence, Condition 19 to reflect
the applicant's change as submitted, Condition 20 setting the
driveway width at 22 feet, Conditions 21 and 22.
SECOND: Conn. Claudy.
VOTE: Passed 5-0
Chr. Szabo stated that the final issues on 44-U-85 are parking, set back,
tree protection and privacy screening trees, Condition 23. With regard to
parking, consensus was that extra guest parking spaces are not necessary.
Consensus on 20 foot setback from the south property line, and the tree
protection issue as resolved previously.
MOTION: Com. Sorensen moved to approve 44-U-85 subject to the findings
and subconclusions contained in the Planning Commission minutes
of January 27, 1986; Conditions 1-15, Condition 16 to reflect
approval of Exhibits A 1st Revision, B 1st Revision and B-1,
Conditions 17, 18 referring to Exhibit A 1st Revision of
Application 25- M--85, and deletion of the second sentence,
Conditions 19, 20, 21, 22 referring to Exhibit A 1st Revision and
with the changes as per the applicants suggestion, Condition 23
per the staff suggestion, Conditions 24 and 25.
SECOND: Conn. Adams
410 VOTE: Passed 5-0
Break: 9:55-10:05.
ITEM 4:
Application No(s) . 13 U-85 (revised)
Applicant: Terry Brawn/James Hemphill
Property Owner Terry Brawn/James Hemphill
Location: Northwest corner of Pasadena Avenue and Granada
Avenue
Parcel Area (Acres) : .48
USE PERMIT (13-U-85 Revised)
To change the use of a previously approved 2,250 sq. ft. building from
office use to a mixed use consistingof an apartment unit and a 1,900
square foot restaurant.
CONTINUED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF January 15, 1986
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration
TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: February 3, 1986
Staff Presentation: Mr. Cowan stated that this application is an
amendment of a previously approved use permit. The request is to change
the use permit for the third building from a two story office to a
restaurant space on the lower level and an apartment above. Changes to
• the building include the entryway, and addition of a deck.
• I,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 4 (Cont'd:)
As indicated in the staff report, there is a General Plan policy that is
designed to enhance the possibility of additional commercial development
in the Pasadena and Granada area by allowing the applicant to credit the
off-site parking spaces to meet the needs of commercial activity. Tally
of all the spaces required when the operations are in full use, i.e. both
the office and the commercial, is 16 on-site parking spaces.
There are some imposing constraints placed on this project; for example,
there is to be no separate bark a major problem of restaurants in terms of
spillover affects, nor will there be hours of operation past 11 P.M.
These constraints mitigate concerns in regard to on-site parking impact.
Applicant's Presentation: Ii William Plimpton, RMR Architects, stated
that they saw a surplus of office space in Monta Vista and a shortage of
support for the tenants and the adjacent community; thus they wished to
provide a service to both the community and the existing office tenants.
They have no problems with the constraints placed upon the restaurant with
the exception of Condition 26. As indicated in the Report, there were
made to the restaurant, i.e. orientation of the building on the
site and the entry. With these changes, additional diners can be seated
on the deck. They requested that the number of outdoor seats be raised
from 14 to 20.
In response to Cam. Claudy's question, the applicant stated that the As
restaurant will not be a fast food operation nor one that encourages night
life. It will at open 6:30 A.M. through lunch; initially no dinner will
be served. It will be a small, up scale restaurant similar in size and
decor to McHart's. There will be no separate bar, though beer and wine
will be served with meals.
The Public Hearing was then opened.
Ms. Ann Anger, Cupertino, stated that the restaurant would be quite an
advantage to Monta Vista.
Ms. L. M. Toensfeldt, 21640 Fitzgerald Dr., Cupertino, stated she was
pleased to see this project but questioned the limited number of staff
employed for the size of the restaurant. Mr. Piasecki stated that this
was the applicant's request and that planning 1 staff concurred since this
project was to be a fairly small restaurant.
Crum. Claudy also stated concern and pointed out that with the application
stated as such, the applicants lock themselves into 4 employees.
The applicant stated that they viewed 4 1 ees as sufficient for any
employees
given shift and have a surplus of 8\ parking stalls; they are favorable to
raising the employee number to 6 and will cover the parking for those
employees.
I '
MOTION: Cam. Adams moved to close the public hearing.
SECOND: Com. Mackenzie •
VOTE: Passed 5-0
gaag 9E og aura og sem 4146Teq buTpumq et4 AAiadozd ate
3o aaguac aqg gK 'Eu?PTTnq uTeu ate O . uompe Azogs yuccas p 3o waoJ alp.
uT 4aa3 'bs 0099 Me eg gsenbaa p tfTM DER ;set ;Tuned esn p 3o gceCgns
eq4 sEM agts oozes atp} gpzp} pagp4s ppeseTd ' w :uoT4equesa zd 33p4s
9861 'E Anagsa 9NIa 2H 'IIDNO0D AIM =AT,w aL
u°TgpzpTOea eAT;EbaN :NOIIVNTTn1?T.7Taa
9861 'ST Aagnupr :30 JNLI2I M NOISSINNOD JNIZ N Id MEd G DNIZNOD
•sazop 99'T 3o burgstsuoo 1e3x2d euo ogut staazed orng agpptTosuoo oy
(S$Iu-6Z) dVE,1 aAIIVINaI
'sbuTPTTnq aoT3;o 1L2c4s-atbuTs burzsTxe oop.
TePowaz We' buTPTInq aoT33o Azogs-aTbuTs 13 *Es 000'S p gcnagsuoc oy
(SS-n-8V) d asn
8•T : (sai ) eaay Tacaed
ppou uUTIaID3W 3o ugncs 'g3
Atpurrxoaddp 'PATS PZuvea 'S 3o apTs ;sem :uoTgool
sTNeloebueaa t geuuax 'aQ ammo mod
saap1Tng uosuaMS Aaapg :quezTTddd
S8-n-8fi '98-NL-6Z • (s)oN uoT4 TTddy
S N LI
0-5 pessed :aIpn
erzueN0e14 moD :MOMS
„•otpngs„ pzoM a ;o uoTge ep pup sacpds butxzed ee q . acuaaagaa
t tM 8z uoT4tpuo3 la uompuoO '8T Jo AgToedec bu 4ses ePTsgno
UP pue saaAardwa 9 40e14aa O . paEupTc 9Z uoTgtpuo0 'SZ-8T 'LT
'9T 'ST-T suoTRTpu°D tfTM 986T 'LZ Aapnuvr 3o sagnuiN uoTsstunwo0
EuTuusid uT pagpSs suotsnTcuoogns pup sbutpuT; ate O . gcacgns
(PestAa2i) SS-n-ET anozddp uoTssTwmoo et4 gp penout uasuaaog *ww0 :NOI,IAY1
0-S PeSSed :S O&
eTZumP W 'uo :MOMS
' (pesTnazi) S8-n ET
uo T4E0TIddyaog uoTgpapToaU eAfl EeN p ao; penouz saw/ •two :NOIJa
ii*xaP Pue Paaa actTT1 bu p iT et q uop Cp ao3 An-Pow-pads paubtsa ncc e
sacpds bupged aaaq4 at, " pa og paw eq 8Z uompuoo gpqg pa4se5Ens
pup sq.uaugapdp se sebpapb 3o aaqumu Tunbe up pegsenbea ApneTD *woo
"mot
et. pue uoTgpxado 3o sanoq eq4 go Toaguoo sT As4 ate gig pegs uemD 'AK
'pootizoqu&Teu et. uo goeduT eqg 'page su ecuoo sappy moo og esuodsaa ui
•s4pas aPTs4no 8T pue seeAoiduze
9 og s-p4o4 ate buTbuTaq snq4 s4pas apTsfno pup saaAOTduza Z 3o eSeazcUT
up 20J SMoTTE STTpgs bupxaed 3o SSe Xe ate gpt4 pgpgs eTZUe cpN ' D
(1314uo0) V MI •
986T 'a Azpnuer go butgask' .x [nbag
samo m NOISSIN OD SNINNV'Id
$'
PLANNING OCRUSSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 5 (Cont'd.-)
The present request is to remodel the existing 17,000 sq. foot buildings
(Buildings A and B) and toladd an additional building (C) , of 5000 sq.
feet for an approximate total of 22,000 sq. feet. This is consistent with
the General Plan. Conditions limit uses to "office" because of the FAR
which preempts commercial usage it f the property.
Issues raised in the staff report include primarily the access to Kirwin
Lane, the landscape setback on De Anza Blvd., and the condition that the
applicant go back to the Architectural Board for details on landscaping
materials.
On the question of access to Kirwin Lane, the request is made to place
Building C in the area that extends from the main area of the property to
Kirwin; this would sever the current acs. In the current General Plan,
an attempt to provide access \to secondary streets relieves stress on
ingress and egress to major bdulevards. In this case, access to Kirwin
does not significantly relieve De Anza; there may be a benefit to
residents of Kirwin by elimina use of Kixwin from De Anza. The staff
feels that the cumulative benefits in reduction of privacy intrusion
outweighs the community's objectivg for secondary street access.
Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Grjeg Smith, 201 N. 1st St., San Jose,
stated that there are two applications, the first being a Tentative Map to
merge the two parcels. This is aihousekeeping measure. The second is the
Use Permit for expansion. Presently Buildings A and B are in place, a 0
parking lot exists where Buildir C will be. The present buildings have
existing setbacks from property lines which pose problems.
With regard to the frontage of the property, the completed project on
Building A will be over 50 feet rare De Anza Blvd. Some parking spaces
are closer than the recommended 35 feet; to offset this, plans call for
removal of asphalt and replacement with a large landscaping feature.
He then asked the Commission to consider averaging the required frontage
setback of 35 feet. Encroachment only applies to the four parking spaces
and will be offset by the enlarged landscaping area in front of the main
building. Specific details can be worked out with the Architectural Board
if conceptual approval is granted by the Commission.
In response to Cam. Claudy's question regarding treatment of the street
frontage on Kirwin, the applicant and the planning staff have come to an
agreement that the proposed buildings will be kept in line with already
existing buildings.
Mr. Cowan mentioned the possibili \ of a condition requiring deletion of
the walkways connecting the building to Kirwin to avoid problems with
parking spillover to the residential prtion of Kirwin.
The Public Hearing was then opened; these were no speakers.
MOTION: Cam. Adams moved to close the public hearing. •
SECOND: Cam. Mackenzie
VOTE: Passed 5-0
PLANNING CCTnIISSION NIINUTFS
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
t
i
• ITEM 5 (Cont'd.)
Chr. Szabo restated the issues; doorway locations on building C; the set
back on De Anza Blvd.; roof overhang on the south property line; the
concept of averaging the required landscape depth.
Con. Claudy suggested the condition that there be no doors on the west or
south side of building C and elimination of the walkways front Kirwin Lane
to the side of the building. He commented on the improvements to the
buildings, and is agrccable to the concept of averaging the landscaping.
Conn. Adams agreed that this plan is an improvement of the area. He
expressed concerns about the treatment of Building C which faces a
residential area.
Conn. Sorensen was assured that a sound barrier will be installed as
required whenever commercial uses abut residential areas.
Conn. Adams stated that the trash containers are to be located in the
front, along the south wall; the treatment of the enclosure should blend
with the landscaping in the front. This issue will be reviewed by ASAC.
NOTION: Cann. Sorensen moved to grant a Negative Declaration for
Application 48 U-85.
SECOND: Cam. Adams
VOTE: Passed 5-0
411 MOTION: Con Claudy moved that Application 29-'IM-85 be approved subject to
standard Conditions 1-15, Conditions 16 and 17 of the resolution
as per the findings and subconclusions of this hearing as stated
in the Minutes of January 27, 1986.
SECOND: Conn. Sorensen
VOTE: Passed 5-0
MOTION: Cann. Claudy moved approval of Application 48-U-85 according to
the findings and conclusions stated in the Planning Commission
minutes of January 27, 1986, with Standard Conditions 1-15,
Condition 16 modified per the map exhibits presented, Conditions
17 and 18, deletion of Condition 19, retention of Conditions 20,
21, 22, Condition 23(e) modified placing the trash enclosure in
the southeast corner and 23(d) modified removing the reference to
the 35 foot average landscaping depth. Addition of a Condition
24 which limits entrances on Building C to the north and Past
side of the building only. Addition of a Condition 25 to
eliminate sidewalks front Kirwin Lane to Building C, and to extend
the landscaping mound continuously along the frontage.
SECOND: Cart. Adams
VOTE: Passed 5-0
PLANNING COVEIDISIONIENUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 6
110
Application No(s) . 49-U-85
Applicant: Monta Vista Inn
Property Owner Roy Warren, Glen Salmon
Location: North side of Peninsula Avenue, approximately 120
feet west of Highway 85 (West Valley Freeway)
north of Stevens Creek Boulevard
Parcel Area (Acres) : .24
USE PERMIT (49-U-85)
To add approximately 720 \ sq. ft. to an existing bar facility and
permit live music and dancing.
CONTINUED FROM PLANNING CESSION MEETING OF: January 15, 1986
ENVIRONMENTAL DETIIRMINATION: \ Negative Declaration
TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: February 3, 1986
Staff Presentation: Mr. Piasecki stated that the proposal is to add
approximately 500 sq. feet to an existing bar facility known as "Paul and
Eddie's." Presently the bar egtals approximately 1730 sq. feet; with the
addition, total bar area approximately 2230 sq. feet. An upstairs office
component equals 1560 sq. feet. \ Total area 3800 sq. feet, approximately.
The project exceeds slightly the net lot area allotment of about 3700 sq.
feet. With abandonment of some of the public right of way that extends in
front of their site, theywould fall within General Plan guidelines.
The application has been modified to delete their request for live music
and dancing. This has been the subject of a number of letters to the
Commission due to the potential noise and the draw of such entertainment.
Currently, there are approximately 32 seats within the facility; the
proposal is to add 30 more. The addition would occur in the area between
Paul and Eddie's and an existing garage which has already been connected
without approved building permits.
The staff report lists a number of General Plan-related concerns: the
allowable land use in this area and inconsistency with the neighborhood -
ccmmercial focus called for in the Stevens Creek Blvd./Monta Vista Plan.
The application is also inconsistent with the intent of General Plan
policy which indicates that bars should be located in major shopping
centers. It has not been demonstrated to the staff's satisfaction that
this expansion will not create additional problems.
Further concerns center around increased police incidents; the Sheriff's
office predicts a higher ratio of incidents if the square footage is
increased.
Parking fails to meet the technical requirements of the ordinance for this
site. Even with the easement format that allows patron parking to spill
aver into office parking lots, the applicant cannot assume the right in
terms of allowable building area on their property.
PLANNING T ISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 6 (Coned.')
In summary, staff is recommending denial; potential conflicts exist with
the General Plan in regard to neighborhood focus and the spirit of General
Plan policy relating to late evening activities. Staff feels this
application is incompatible with adjacent residential uses, will create
higher levels of police incidents, as well as noise, traffic and parking
problems. Basically this site is inadequate in size and shape and
inadequate in on-site parking.
In response to Cam. Sorensen's question, Mr. Piasecki stated that the back
section has a pool table and is already in use.
In response to Coma Mackenzie's question, Mr. Piasecki stated that the
building has been reviewed and the applicant has been notified of the
fairly significant changes that would need to be made to bring the
proposed building up to code. The current building is exempt.
Cam. Claudy questioned the 26 parking spaces required. This is calculated
by the number of seats divided by the number 3 and adding the maximim,
number of employees per shift.
Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Nick Rlipa, Manager, stated he has been a
bartender for four years at Paul and Raciie's. There are not six employees
on duty at any one time; 1 bartender is on duty.
Regarding the potential for traffic• problems, the bar is never full and with the problems associated with people drinking too much and groups
opposed to drinking, business has declined in the past year from $23,000
to $16,000 - $17,000 per month. They have seen no increase in business at
all.
The back room serves as a storage area for empty beer containers which at
any given time will be 100-110 cases. The pool table is also there and
may be removed since it isn't paying for itself.
In regard to neighborhood traffic and overflow problems, the closing of
Alhambra Street means that patrons cannot go through the neighborhood
anymore; they must go to Stevens Creek and Peninsula and then out.
As far as the police reports, the applicant questioned the basis for them.
In the four years he has been employed there, there have been
approximately 3 incidences in which he was forced to call the police.
The applicant stated that it is a neighborhood type of bar and didn't deny
that there was never a problem; there are always problems in bars and
alcohol affects everyone differently. Being a neighborhood bar, however,
patrons take care of each other.
With respect to bringing the building up to code, it would take 3-4 days.
In response to Cann. Mackenzie's questions, the applicant explained that
the building in the back was a storage space with an adjacent fence. The
411 patrons could then go outside to drink. The fence is no longer there. If
the application is denied, the old garage would have to be the storage for
the empty cases of beer.
411 0-5 pessed :H,I,OA
uesuazoS -map :moms
•AIeATsnToxe
sieTPP'3 Pue TRed Aq pageaao buteq qou sT tuaTgoad oT33ea4 9114
gegg &I?PuT3 a pagsabbns eH 'S8-II-6i" uoTgeoTTddEi ao3 uoTgeaPToea
aATgpbem a puaunuwoea uoTssTwwoo eq4 gegg pawn arzueNoeyl imp :Nomow
-sT gT FIRM atilt paAatdde eq PTn IuoT;Type eq4 'uoTgeoTTdde etpg azo3aq
pegs-0c�mo seM uoT.wPv eta gegg 40e3 atp} buTaoubi •enssT egeaedes e
sT uOTgengTs OT33ea4 eq4 gegq 'peaanouoo Oq@zs -ago pue 'pegs slueP6' .woo
I Temadde
eq gouueo uoTWaTTddd STt44 'euoTe brTXZEU 3o STseq eqa, uo spa ut Sqi
uo paggTurgns seM ptipdxa O . uo
TgeoTTddd etng :sgsTxe ApeeaTe gwww ;o sTseq
et14 uo you pagenTeAa eq .Stull UoT4e3TTddd slug gegq regmqs ApneTO imp
I -of) og seoeTd aTgepao33e aAeq og
eTdoed &inoA ao3 Pau a rue .t pooq togq&reu et.14 3o we'd eq4 sezTubooaz
ells t[bnoqg ueA3 uoTgTppe sTgq. anaiddd laouueo ells Pegs uasuaaos •umo
•gTtuTT uUTd Teaeuao etfg
go puoAeq ebeo3 azenbs 3o uomppe cult I 'f.rpped paepuegsgns 'uorgsebuoo
3T33eag og enp uorgeofdde sTgq anatdde .ouueo et; pages eTzuaXoeyl -moo
•peat eq4 ageTgobeu ueo s9IoTt;aA Aouef Lew a gegq pe. nsse sem pue eaq uegTy
uo s5ch.rJe eI3 qBA Aouabaeuia gnoge uoT4eoT3Taeto 203 parse ApneT0 -mop
• 0-S passed :awn
sump Imo :MOORS
•buTaeeq oTTgnd etng esoT i og pet= a zuaxoet4 •uxo :IQOI1a4
•aszOM buTggab sT tpT 0T33ea4 eq4 pue 'poogaogq&reu
ate. ;o ATTunb eta uodn go rr sqi pup Ieaae eq4 uT ebuegp et. gnogs
suzaouoo aeq pagegs 'OUTgaedno 1pTeiebma 0i'9TZ '4PTa3 PI 'w ''I 'SDI
•aTo n e I A uahtatua UP .zo3 uado gdej eq og
SEM eaquegTy •TIe'qe drag qou rum eTnsurued pro ;o qua uzopusge :anuaAy
eTnsuzued uo page5T.Tut eq oq seq oT33eas • teuaoo eq4 ao3 epeut seoueMoTT2
eq4 t xi peuaeouoo sT eqs 'aeq eq4 buTuzaouoo s.}oedse Jo aequnu a og
qoa Cqo qou swop ells eTTt[M gsgq pagegs '•aAV TeoN ZZ tOT 'TTeoaow Toaeo 's[4
I •pootizogg5teu
eq4 oq uoTgTpps AgzTenb a qou sT pue coeds undo eq4 seonpai Tesodozd
sTt1 gpgq pagegs aH -weds uedo 3o esn eq4 pup buTxzsd buTpaebat 33e4s
uma3 uoTgsutaoouT aeq r3 pe senbea 'guept i egsTA eguoyw 'aa� turr •ay1
•buTxzsd ao3 seaae peoaTTea pue gaatgs bursn suoaged
aeq ATTeToedse 'sseuTsng srq4 gnoge buTggAue op og sgtrepTsa1 Jo A4TTTcpuT
eq4 qe suaeouoo pesseadxe ate •uoTgoa cqo I ureui aeq sem sTuy •eouep
pup orsnul eATT ou eq TTTm eieqg geq} PadieTT i sT 'ouT�aedno '.zabuy' uuy •Sw
•peuedo um/4 SEM buTaseH oTTcnd eq1
111 (1P1 o3) 9 EMI
i M 9861 'LZ A'nusr 3o butgaew .zsrn
say= NOISSINNJO ONINNVId
i
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986
ITEM 6 (Cont'cl.)
MOTION: Cam. Claudy moved to recommend denial of Application 49-U-85 with
the findings and subconclusions outlined in the staff
reconattiendation. These recommendations adequately address the
concerns and issues raised by the Ccmmmission.
SECOND: Conn. Sorensen
VOTE: Passed 5-0
OLD BUSINESS
- None
NEW BUSINESS
ITEM 7
Report concerning City Council acquisition by eminent domain, 0.64
acres on Stelling Road (lands of Molander) for expansion of Jollyman
Park; request for finding by the Planning Commission of consistency
with the General Plan.
MOTION: Cam. Claudy moved to approve a finding of General Plan
consistency as outlined in the staff-recommended Resolution.
SECOND: Cam. Adams
VOTE: Passed 5-0
110
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Cam. Claudy requested a change in the left turn lane on Homestead Road,
heading west to enter the freeway.
Cam. Sorensen requested a similar change in the left turn lane on Blaney
and Stevens Creek Blvd. going east.
Cam. Claudy requested information on the Planning Commission's decision
regarding tree protection on the property at southwest corner of Rainbow
and Stelling. The trees looked as if bulldozed. Mr. Cowan stated that
the bulk of the trees were to be removed; many of them were diseased.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECIOR
- None.
S
PLANNING COMISSIM NINUTFS
Regular Meeting of January 27, 1986 f
ADJOURNMENT411
By unanimous vote, the Planning mission adjourned at 12:05 A.M. to 7:30
P.M. Monday, February 10, 1986. '
Attested:
Dorothy Cornelius, City Clerk
Approved by the Planning Commission
At the Regular Meeting of February 10, 1986
Nicholas Szabo, Chairman