Loading...
PC 04-14-86 CITY OF CiUPER INO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA. 95014 410 (408) 252-4505 MINUTE'S OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON APRIL 14, 1986 Meeting Held in the Council Chambers of Cupertino City Hall SALUTE TO THE FLAG; 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Chairman Szabo Vice Chairman Mackenzie Commissioner Adams Commissioner Claudy Commissioner Sorensen Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Planning & Development Steve Piasecki, Assistant Planning Director Travice Whitten, Assistant City Engineer Charles Kilian, City Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Cam. Sorensen, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of 41/ March 24, 1986, as submitted. SECOND: Cam. Adams VOTE: Passed, Commissioners Mackenzie and Claudy abstaining. 3-0 POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None CONSENT CALENDAR -1- I i ill ' Ili I,II PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ! ' 141 Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 2 - jo PC-491 I 1�' ITF ( 1 Application 34-U-83 (Revised) ='`Azzarello Associates (Donald Jones - Acadia Veterinary.. Clinic) - Rec es i n approval of a new parking lot plan for an existing veterinary Clinic located approximately 1,900 ft. from the northeast corner of ' othill Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard. I1'I 14, In response to Can. Cla s II an Mt% Whitten stated that upon completion of the Foothill Blvd � iaq#avement work, there will be a mediLmm preventing hazardous egress movementSifroat the new driveway. ii I MOTION: Can. Claudy moved for approval of the Amendment on Application 34-U-83 III SECOND: Can. Mackenzie III VOTE: Passed 5-0 I;V Igo ITEM 2 III • Application 34-U-85 (Revised) 1 !Beim and Jazaes - Requesting r amendment of Use Permit to raise!pad height approximately 18 inches. The property is located on the west side of North De Anza Boulevard approximately 130 ft. north of Valley Green Drive. • Cam. Claudy questioned the reason4 for raising the pad height and was assured that the pad height would be two feet lower than that of the previous restaurant building an this site, even with approval of the amendment. , 4 CaTO T: Can. Adams moved that the minor amendment of Application 34-U-85 be accepted it SECOND: Cam. Claudy � I" VOTE: Passed 5-0 11, ITEM 3 ° Application 2-U-84 (Revised) - IDS Healy - Requautim minor amendment of Use Permit to construct a!!:Carport structure for 5 vehicles. The property is located an the srsutheast corner of Pasadena and Granada Avenues. Mr. Piasecki stated that half of the proposed carport spaces will be located behind an industrial building. There is an appraximate two to three foot grade differential with the !adjoining site. • . I!I' iu ITV PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 3 - 40 PC-491 ITEM 3 (Coact'd) Chr. Szabo stated that any person who wished to address the Criasion on this Application could do so. Mr. David Hobson, 22655 Oak Crest Court, Cupertino, stated that the grade differential, by his estimate, may be three to four feet. The Applicant's building partially blocks the rear section of the adjoining property. Originally the Planning CO maission suggested, and Mr. Hobson agreed, there should be no fence between the property of the Applicant and his property. The proposed carport would dwarf the lot owned by Mr. Hobson. Three parking stalls would be acceptable; however, five stalls with an adjacent trash bin will block in, and detract fraan, the speaker's property. He stated that a new office building is being developed on the property at present and is about one-half completed. The property line is approximately five feet from this two story office build ing. Mr'. Doug Healy, Applicant, presented pictures to demonstrate the development of the property. He stated that originally this was a mixed use project which has been vastly improved. 40 They did not anticipate a problem with the proposed carport structure; all that will be visible to adjoining property owners are two support posts. The Applicants feel that this is an attractive addition to their property and will not harm the integrity of neighboring properties. Mt. Healy stated, in response to Can. Mackenzie's question, that the roof of the carport is at 4 & 12 pitch and will be completed in a similar finish as other buildings on the property. MOTION: Cam. Mackenzie moved for approval of the minor amendment to Application 2-U-84. SECOND: Cam. Claudy VOTE: Passed 5-0 Chr. Szabo stated that there is a 10 day appeal period for this action. Any appeal needs to be in the form of a letter addressed to the City Clerk's Office. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ITEM 4 Application No(s) 5JIM-86 Applicant: Alden Company Property Owner: DeAnza Cramp & Everett & Beverly Peterson • Location: West side of Festival Drive, approximately 325 feet south of Kenmore Court Parcel Area (Acres) .51 gross III 111, PLANNING OQt+IISSIa[d NIINUIES111 Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 II PAGE - 4 - PC-491 411 ITEM 4 (Conrt'd) III T'ENIlsiTIVE MAP (5-'II1K-86) .11 to resubdivide 3 parcels into parcels with lot sizes ranging from 9,400 sq. ft. to 12,800 sq. ft. !0 FIRST HEARING ENVIROMIENIAL Chi: Calorically Exempt ***planning Conission Action Final Unless Appealed*** Staff Presentation: Mr. PiaseckiHlstated that the Applicant proposes to resubdivide three parcels into two parcels. , Mr. Jahn Perusina, 10909 So. Stelling Rd., Cupertino, stated that he was the owner of the property in question until 1958. The DeAnza Group and Everett and Beverly Peterson purhaseid this property last year. The Perusina's approached the Publicl!'Works Department to determine how the Peter's acquired this property. 'Heystates that this property was never offered to them for repurchase rior, was he notified by mail of the agreement between the Alden Company land I the Petersons. The section in question is a 20 foatlajoining parcel and they feel first option to buy should have been given tp them. • Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Jlohni Shoulupole, civil engineer for the Alden Company, stated that the question seems to be whether Mr. Perusina has right of succession or an optionjtolpurbase the 20 foot parcel. jV! The dispute arose when the Alden chose in favor.of using the Peterson's property to access existing sewer facilities rather than going across state property. After cyOpletion, the question of compensation was decided when the Petersons settled in favor of acquiring an extension of their property, namely, the parcel'alin question. jl I This Application proposes, in effect, that the existing Lot 31 be subdivided into two parcels. Mr ;Peterson feels that this 20 foot wide strip is of great value to the', future use of his placement of the street. I' property given the In response to questions by theOcOmissioners, Mr. Shoulupole stated that both the Alden Company and the Petexsbns have joined in this Application. Mr. Perusina stated that he is , making no claim to ownership of the property in question at this time. io The Chairman stated that any dispute of ownership is aitside the authority of the Planning Ci-cion. 1 1; 11,11 • II, III i , 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 5 - ® PC-491 . - ITEM 4 (Cont'd) Mts. Clara Perusina stated that she was present at former Planning Commission meetings where the suggestion was made that previous owners be approached and offered an opportunity to repurchase the parcel in question. The Minutes of this meeting, however, do not reflect this nor were previous owners ever approached with an option to buy. Mr. Piasecki stated that the City has no jurisdiction over whether the Alden Company offers this property to former owners or not. In response to further questions by Mts. Perusina, The Chairman suggested that a lawyer be consulted by them if a dispute of ownership exists. In response to Mr. Perusina's comments, Cam. Claudy stated that he saw two issues of concern: 1) The Perusinas belief that the rights to the property should have been offered to them with a first option to buy the parcel. This will need to be settled with the Alden Company. 2) The concern by the Perusinas that the City has not been forthcoming with correct information. The City Manager would be the appropriate person to contact in this case. MOTION: Cam. Adams moved that the Public Hearing be closed. ® SECOND: Cam. Claudy VOTE: Passed 5-0 MOTION: Cam. Sorensen moved for approval of Application 5--86 in accordance with the model resolution. SECOND: Can. Adams VOTE: Passed 5-0 ITEM 5 Application No(s) . 8-U-86 Applicant: J. T. Kantrabecki Co. Property Owner: J. T. Kontrabecki Co. Location: Northwest corner of Miller Avenue and Rich- wood Drive _ Parcel Area (Acres) .89 gross USE PERMIT (8-U-86) To remove an existing restaurant and construct a 10,000 sq. ft. office building. F1RST HEARING ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL DATE: April 21, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 6 - PC-491 • ITEM 5 (Corxt'd) Staff Presentation: Mr. Piasecki stated that the applicants have worked extensively with the Staff on the issue of the trip count, building size and development of a style that would mesh with existing residential structures. Ample parking has been provided. Condition 26 provides for tree protection. In response to questions by the C rmissioners, Mr. Piasecki stated that he had no knowledge of problems of drainage on site. The Staff left the decision regarding the roof overhang to the discretion of the architect and views the proposed roof as consistent with the style of the building. Applicant's Presentation: Mr. Bill Hagman, project architect, made himself available for questions. Mr. John Kontrabecki, developer of the project, stated that their company's offices will be moved to this building, and will comprise 25% occupancy. In response to Com. Adams' question, the speaker stated that a review of the office market in Cupertino shows that the needs of the corporate user are being adequately addressed or oversupplied. This project will be better suited to professional office use, i.e., lawyers, dentists and other professionals. MOTION: Cam. Adams moved to close the Public Hearing. SECOND: Cam. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 5-0 Can. Sorensen commented that this 'Application represents a notable improvement over the present site. Chr. Szabo stated that even with the 30% office vacancy rate, the Ccsmnission cannot deny such applications if the requirements of the General Plan are met. MOTION: Cam. Claudy moved to rem granting a Negative Declaration for Application 8-J-86. SECOND: Com. Adams VOTE: Passed 5-0 MOTION: Coan. Claudy moved to recommend approval of Application 8-U-86 subject to the findings and subconclusions of this Hearing, Conditions 1-26 of the model resolution,and the second Condition 26 thereof being renumbered to Condition 27. SECOND: Cam. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 5-0 111 41) •squemeaTnbe z f crrxzed A4ip gem o4 aanTTeg uT 4Tnsea TTTM Pup STt4. t STTdw000p 0 AgTTTg XeT3 etf elPeT egTS etzi •Agaedoid al4 up aaetMesta PeoeTdea eq PTo saoeds &xTxaed eseta 3o uaAas :pedpos ueT act PTA''► saoeds buPtapd '11 'tJ et. 3o TT 'TpAoZddy 30 s o px D et. ui °TeuoTndac xe ATgpgoad sT '.zode i etp} uT PegT° 'eopTd4e5geK AeTTpA P PaO gp eopds TT p'gaz deep wog Zip eqi 'deep We; OOT ATTpuotse000 pup chap gee; SL ao 99 eq pit tadep coeds TTpgea TeoTdA4 'qop3 u2 .TpoTdA4 eq Apta semis TTpgea deep wog Sb Pup Et gpcq4 saTTdurr u'aoupp , e 4 gsuTpSj squauthxy. PefTgue uoTe laodea 33p4s e41 'pepuame eq og paeu A to Noaqqes Moog 0S a buTaTnbaz eoueurpxo et. gpt4 Teel TT no AgTD eta gp uoTgsaab6ns p seM saw', .suompuoo egTS og enp aoupTaen p go buTpue26 eta ATge1oneg peMaTA uDTSSTTSIDD etjg 'Pswesamd ATTTTlTuT gem qoapold eTqq. uewt 404 pe z 'qoacoad eta ao3 qoa4rqoap Wog moT •214 :uoT4equesam s queoTT ' -map Etrpged et. uT buTdeospueT Te°TPTPPe eaTnbea prflom TPTq' ueTd egTS eta O . suoTgeoT;TPA aepTsuoo og tRSTM Amu uoTeePteLp 914 'Pague16 31 'aou1T.z2A sTta 3o &rrpuezh PeSOddo swewribap Pup Jo aonp3 uT squawnbie al4 sqsTT geode i 33pgs eq1 •eoueT1SA a WIXOes MU ST gupoTTddY e i •guawalTnbaz goo; 410 OS 914 ATM buTATdtuoo ao eoupTzeA p buTuTewo Loon guebuTpuoo san Temxdde pue SwameaTnbed buTUOZ TTM guagsTsuoout sem 3fopqqas attL •euTTgano aca3 peq1as WO; S£ a taTM Peed SEM gT 'STD eta Aq pei o dde SeM qoecoad step. USIIM 4m14 PelEls TjeSpTd '44 :uoTlequesazd JJEW 9861 'TZ TTack :2,1VIG 'IIDxmD �AIaya1 L qdwaxa ATTeoTiobageD : T,rp a Tarr MD:WM SH I •Novqqas '43 0S peaTnbaz eta 3o n9TT uT 3ropqqas pedpospupT •43 SE p mite 04 £ZZT S TPIO 3o L uompuo0 Uj (98-A-T) SDxViaw ssoab S'Z (sad) vary Teed pzpnaTnog pzuy*ea 3o see •43 00t ATe uxT -Xoacide 'pm/al-nog }eozo suaAa4s 30 epTs t1Ox :uoTgp: 'I saT4zadaza ezuu*aa :ammo A4aadoad (seTgaedazd ezuvea) tPToPTA WPr :gueoTTd1' 98-A-T • (s)ox uoT4e0TTddd 9 1nII,ILT T6i'-Dd 411 - L - SE6'd 986T 'la TTadY 3o .Tgeew asTn2i salami NoissmN0D 501ENNVId 0 II 411 'panes eq oSTe PTnOUS g aazq gonads enTq E St a'aaqq uoTgTp e UT 'Pam ag PTnots pue PTo saeaA, 06 Pue SL uaem4aq St aazq sT44 42t3 Pew a'u8 ' aadoad Luc ag4 uo ea4 aaddad 9q3 uo upT42utzo3uT pa sarbaz 'so4Tv soj 'ate buTTa2,S SLllZZ 18440axs14 244aTauaH •sw 'Azessaoauun ST saouetaeA sTt4 Lxrriueib :RTaoreiedas tpeoadde STgg 'Pebuep aq oq speau, eouetr!p o �uoz e T '40T420Ttdde ST14. McTAaz ATTR;aae3 Og UOTWbplUALO buFuuETd etlg Psgsanbei uuuki 'sw 'seaag burgstxe pageaodzoOUT ToTgm aaguao TT24aa e go atduzexa ue Se Pagto sent aagueD butddottS s%20 ate; 'a.TS etlq up seazg etlq go uoTgeaxasazd og Pzebea t1TM eATg2.zad000 nl ueg 221 4u20TTd ' 944 'utzFg.PP2 uI '4USOU.O tnua ATT2nb E ePTAazd 04 A TO at4 pue uoTs�puluJ btrruuetd 944 'ON/MI/Kg 240P 410114 et eeu sEoPueTaeA 'AT0 at 30 Equa arrnbaa aq4 u4TM ATdooO oq qoe cazd STq4 u5TsePez quepTiddv eq4 S4sab6ns tuieyz 'S1'1 'ueTd buTuoz TAD 244 43?M PaTTO SAW aza'PT t a944O 'ATsurequF sTg4 aqmpowmpope gotuleo azTs qoT 944 3T vane aoEds TeTpiampopue aoT330 go aa; aaenbs 000'0E oq dh pTTnq oq aaTsee SigveoTTddv aq4 uo paseq St qI 'dTttspzeq uo Peseq you ST aouETaSA STtr4 q pauzaauoo 'Lzan E 242 41244 P ' 4 Tenixukk ITS pie Tean409471 i s44 go aed 'uu2141 A4498 'PK peuedo uetp. seM butaeaH oTTgnd L og goa Coad etlg saigeua pie aaxoTnb' a uo uTpgs TTeTgtl2gsgns sT aotleTaeA E .aoueuTpzO A4TD etl , go quampuaure tie oq 20 aouetzeA 2 og a geume 82E sgueoTTddy at{g 4r114 Peres p co %44 isquapimpo s 1 aTzuas{De( 'uo oq asuodsaz uI bttn{aed aq4 ut totgonpea E aapTsuoo osT2 pTnoM lueoTTddv guy 'atgissod st -prag eqq E ioie seoods buts{aed t go upTgeuTurrTa (peaTn az saoeds buptzed KT) seoeds hipped 0tT s['qs uetd pes i e s41 'buTpued sT U Tsep adeospueT au4 uo OVSV Aq MaTAaz 281442113 'TTouto3 STD aqg Pue upTssTunoD fuT ueTd et1. 'butgaaat DVS' aug u suoTsTAaz at4 buTgoatuaa pequasazd sem ueTd BITS PesT V (101D) 9 YII►LI S t6t-Od - 8 - 5 'd 986T 'VT tTady 30 arrlaeli .zern5911 ictm NOISS1WHOD JN aIM Id PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 9 - PC-491 ITEM 6 (Cont'd) Ms. Marootte stated that the traditions of Cipertino are not being saved and asked the Commissioners to save same of these landmarks. Mt. Piasecki stated that allowing removal of the trees is in conjunction with the Site Plan as has been the case with this Application. However, the blue spruce tree, mentioned by Ms. Marcotte is to be retained. Cam. Mackenzie requested a review of the original Site Plan; Mr. Piasecki stated that there was a notation in the Staff Report that addressed Tree Preservation and noted that the Applicant proposed to preserve only one of the thirty trees on the property. In response to Cam. Adams' comments regarding trees on the property which now are budding, Mr. Piasecki stated that the Plan noted that the Walnut 'Dees were dead. In addition, a number of other trees were scheduled to be removed. Mt. Martin Miller, Architectural and Site Approval Committee Memmber, stated that the single most important unifying elements of Stevens Creek Blvd. are the landscaping and the setback. 411 Granting a Variance is done to relieve a hardship beyond the making of the developer; in this case, the depths of the lot were set when the original application was filed by Mr. Vidovich. Applicants for a similar shopping center were extremely acooamtrodating in making sure that the Site was developed in a way that preserved the integrity of the neighboring residents, net the setback requirements and made allowance for limited depth of retail space. Mr. Miller does not see justification for a variance in this case; he urged the Commission to maintain the unifying elements of Stevens Creek Blvd. Mr. Boyd responded that the Site Plan will be reviewed by ASAC and that a report from a landscape architect will be submitted. The Applicants have every intention of saving trees where possible. The landscape architect has identified two trees that he considers significant and worth saving. Specimen trees can be put in to replace the trees removed. Mr. Piasecki stated that final approval of the tree removal plan rests with the Commission. MOTION: Cam. Adams moved to close the Public Hearing. SECOND: Cam. C,laudy VOTE: Passed 5-0 • PLANNING CO IISSIM POIUTES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 10 - PC-491 i ITEM 6 (Cont'd) Cam. Mackenzie favors a review of the Zoning Ordinance. This Application does not meet the requirements far a Variance, although there are compensating factors in this case. Can. Claudy enumerated the conditions for the Variance: necessary granting of a 1) extraordinary circumstances applicable to the land, building or use which do not generally1 to otherproperties apply , in the Zoning oning District. 2) granting of the Variance is ,necessary to preserve the applicant's property rights. 3) granting of the Variance will not adverselyaffect the health, safety, welfare of the person residing or working in the area. Comm. Claudy opposes granting of the'Variance, as he could not substantiate the foregoing conditions are present in this case; Chairman Szabo, Commissioners Adams and Sorensen concur. MOTION: Cam. Mackenzie moved to recommend denial of Application 1-V-86 based upon findings that the Application lacks the necessary requirements for gaming of a Variance and the Variance is not • necessary to preserve the Applicant's property rights as found in information in the Staff;" Report and subconclusions of this Hearing. SECOND: Can. Claudy VOTE: Passed 5-0 NOTION: Can. Mackenzie moved to send a Minute Order to the City Council stating that the Planning 6•n ' --ion requests the City Council to initiate an went to the Stevens Creek Blvd. Conceptual Zoning Plan permitting variations from the 50 foot landscape setback, according to circumstances which would be outlined in the Zoning Plan. Incidents where variations might be permitted include cases of redevelopment or where unusual site,/architectural oons'tra'ints make compliance with the full setback infeasible. SECOND: Cxm. Claudy VOTE: Passed 5-0 PLANNING COM MISSION MOLU'ES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 11 - 410 PC-491 ITEM 7 Application No(s) 80,004.18 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location Citywide TO AMEND provisions of the R1 (Residential, Single-family) Ordinance relating to setbacks, yards, height, definitions, permitted uses and lot area. FIRST HEARING ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pegg TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL DATE: May 19, 1986 Staff Presentation: Mr. Piasecki stated that the changes to the R1 Ordinance were triggered by concerns of non-conforming buildings extending along building lines in cases where the setback of the structure may be as little as 1-2 feet. The Staff took this opportunity to suggest housekeeping The Report - provides same discussion - suggests wording for sections that were defined the definition of Substandard lots to be consistent with the General Plan - establishes a Use Permit Procedure for existing illegal second units - suggests a formalized administrative interpretation procedure for the Director of Planning which currently does not exist in the R1 Ordinance. In "PROPOSED AMEN MENTS," AL Section Section 5.16, Height of Building, add chimneys. Chr. Szabo stated that the consensus of the Planning C mmission is to accept the recommendations of the Staff. MOTION: Can. Claudy moved for continuance of ITEM 7 until April 28th Planning Commission Meeting. SECOND: Cam. Adams VOTE: Passed 5-0 OLD BUSINESS Cam. Adams questioned the placement of curbing on the recently approved Derk and Deice Hunter project, which appears to be perpendicular to DeAnza Blvd. Cam. Claudy concurred with the observation being made and Mr. Cowan stated that the Planning Department will look into this issue. 410 11, 11, PLANNING OCMMISSION N12NU1'F5 � Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 i; PAGE - 12 - PC-491 NEW BUSINESS: - ITEM 8 Application 9-U-83 (Revised) -Seven Springs Ranch (Gregory Group) - Revised Phasing Schedule. Staff Presentation: Mr. Gowan stated that the Planning Ccamaission, upon approval of the Tentative Map for the Seven Springs Ranch subdivision, adopted a Minute Order which established a phasing plan for construction. The Applicant has submitted an application for a change in the phasing plan; the original Phase I plan, Wasto build the model homes area near Stelling Road access and same of : the peripheral landscaping along the eastern boundary. pu . The Applicants have defined some i of the timing problems they are encountering. They are requestingl'pemission to build the Upland Way and Rainbow Drive area in the first ;;'phase and the model homes area in the second phase. The Staff is favorable to the charges requested, with the following recommendations: 1) in _conjunction with approval of the Revised Phasing schedule, the two IIIhome sites closest to theSatthiern Pacific Right-of-Way be delayed. This allows the Planning Commission to review the access configuration if difficulties occur with ,,;the Public Utilities Commission in completing the grade crossing. 2) financial guarantees be obtained to ensure that Phases II and III will be completed as approved 1 i,11 The final issue is the Up Applicant's proposal to exclude or give limited membership in the Homeowners Association the perimeter hhos es on. land Way and Rainbow Drive. I In response to Cam. Mackenzie'sAuestion, Mr. Cowan stated that the Planning Commission permitted and the City Council approved a Tentative Subdivision Map of the development; the Commission subsequently approved the Phasing Plan in a Minute a;'' •1 . Thus the Tentative Map will be recorded based on the Phasing Plan. 1; Cam. Claudy stated his concerns ,about the phasing of projects; the Staff Report infers future plans and i 1changes. There were numerous hearings which resulted in decisions that effect the community regarding the layout and the design of the development Of this property. The Commissioner will not give approval to requests for significant changes in this development. Mr. Piasecki stated that the Applicant has not indicated a desire to change the approved plan. A ,, PLANNING CESSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 13 - PC-491 ITEM 8 (Ccnt'd) Applicant's Presentation: Mt. Harry Lalor, Civil Engineer and Representative of the Gregory Group, presented two exhibits for the Commission's review. 1) The first exhibit showed the Conditions of the existing Phasing,i.e. , the initial Use Permit. Initial phasing would have developed the model hones and the recreation areas first. The City requested that major perimeter streets be constructed; thus Rainbow Drive, Stelling Rd. and Prospect were developed in the first phase. 2) Once the models were constructed, the landscaping and the sou dwa11 along the railroad tracts were to be built. 3) In order to provide protection to the neighboring residents, the project was to be started in the northwest corner and develop in a southeasterly direction. The Gregory Group wishes to begin immediately and to construct the project as it was approved, with the guarantees provided to the CLmission, the City Council and the neighborhood residents. The Application to the Public Utilities Cnission for the grade crossing was filed April 10th. Under the Revised Phasing Plan, the Applicants propose the completion of the single family hones on the perimeter lots adjacent to Rainbow Drive and Upland Way, construction of perimeter improvements on Upland Way, installation of the off-site improvements on Stelling Read and Prospect. All of the off-site infrastructure originally proposed would be completed. Construction of a road crossing over the railroad tracts will not be done at this time. This is the only change and is being requested since approval for this construction has not been given and probably will not be obtained until completion of the first phase of this project. The next phase, in 1987, will be construction of the model homes and the recreational facilities. Finally, construction of the soundwall and perimeter landscaping along the railroad tracts will proceed along with construction of the production models. They wish to start construction of the production models in and adjacent to the model home telex (starting on the easterly side of the project) to establish better traffic flow. i .II • oI� 4 'up?4Isoddb 3o Novi aTeg4 buT4ess and et. o3 oT;Toed uaatnnos moa3 asq4sT g 4322T;;4g eq gsnm azatp. '4Tm ed buTPTTnq go eOuenssT O . aoTad 'aioOazag3 :4TIt[TeCeg3 4uei5 cT4ecoad rum UoTssTmmoo saT4TTT4n OTTgnd eq4 'EuTssouo stn. esoddO 4ou seop oT3Toed uzeqln0S 3I 'eoeg TTTM Aeq4 401 04 Pootoggb a.z EuT4e703 eq4 - TR weibequT rum sand; emu 'eaxe a uT s uaPTssa eq 03 eixnuenpe ue e4 'we; ur 'rum saoott diem P 2 C( / Pue sATaa MOquTeH eqq. buTPTTnt ueTd bursegd pesTAug at4 o4 eTgeeazbi sT eq 4q Pa4egs AmpTJ 111010 Coad 1 i odn peazbe se pedolehap sT at14 4eg3 9es o4 ATes°TO &tF aM eq TTTm squepTseg •9AT. MoquTed go 3uawdoTanep 944 aog peqoesaSemquemseabe ue suoTssnosTp Aue t ualoaq4 geq4 Pa4e4s eH 'b*tTaeeH eq4 301 eoT3ou buTATeoaz aog uoT4epeaddd pessaadxe osTe 'ouT U 'atipa RiCaureM 6tZT 'eToueS PTUCQ 'alni Ilil 33v45 'To Act Pe204TU,a9! TTTM Pug au¢r4 antes eta 4e Pe33TdWoo act TTTM s3uauanoaduT e dxe I s3uepTsaz eta '4TTng btrteq sae seua�t; eATaU MOquTed eq4 3I '4utod sT114 q4L"�I; ' P seTo 'u PamoTTo3 e4 ueTd uodn Ptbe eq4 4?t 1 sT uraoum ao Cemt s a uia4sdL •sw ' cold V eeeTo • e eq PTA 3oetoad sq4 4 Pug anxoo 1:pnnan luawdoianap go sTTelap buc eta pZebaz paznsse aamm As '4oac hazd eta 4nage PTo4 aze gaze sTu4 go , S3uePTeea eq4 ua '1.10TleToossv szauM suuH eq4 moa3 A1M Puetd11 Pue enTIC MoquTed up saatrrra®tq eta go uoTsnToaca►;j eTgTssod e44 4noge buTT4Aue Cgs 4ou PTP PeA eOaz eoTgeu eq4 'etdWexe 40a ilqmpaxd TTeaano ell; go ATaba4uT ago t tz qn4 4oecoad 914 go buTmT3 ate'i ATM qou sT uzaocmo Azemrad aSH •eoz3Ou 4u2T0T33nsuT sT STqL 'AZT 'Taftuo peATeoaa sem aa34aT eq4 aatismaq :buta5eH FTt;3 30 u0T120T3T4ou buTATepaa go uoT4eToazdde aat; pege3s •'off iaRTaa MoquTed SZ6L 'irre.sd`3 =Tetia 'SW •uotssTanop eq3 ssaapps 33 Needs o4lpegsTM oqM euoAus pe3TnuT ogezS •atc pTlepossi sasurosmoR Ps4TuTT log s4Tun ese'g4 Ib�,TionTouT o4 u9ATb �TleaePTSUOp •aamogsno go edA4 3uaxe33TP a e4e2 TTTA Pue 4oe load eq4 go s4xed . eta ueg3 ATquazeggTP peubTsep az Taut meta :AsM PueTda Pue eATaU moquTeao3 ;no som3 s3Tun ezTs mnr,pI a1:6T eq44 ��P saaneeS mTr '5Tnpetps uo Pa4eTcho eq rum q09cOad sTg4 leg; pue seT4TTT4n 3TTgnd eq4 A4 iesoddpun eg TTTM j buTssozo Aempeoa leqq. guspTguoo sae Asg4 :I eSEtid UT SgOT 6T gonagsuloo o3 Tgnozdde . t FM s uepTTMV eql (P14u ) 8 hIILI I,I • TO-od .11 - tT - Edd 986T 'i'T "'Tidy go btrpeew aeTn6eg aunts I NOISSINNO0 INMY1d pI II�' i PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE - 15 - 0 PC-491 ITEM 8 (Cont'd) Mr. Lalor stated that they would be happy to have the 19 lot subdivision recorded and give the City a covenant or a deed restriction for the two easterly lots that they would not be built until the PUC permission is obtained. This would be a sufficient guarantee. Comm. Mackenzie suggested the statement, "no transfer in ownership until PUC approval is received." Mr. Cowan asked for confirmation that interior production in Phase III will start at the northeast corner of the property and consist of approximately one-half of the frontage on Rainbow Drive. Comm. Mackenzie suggested the following wording of the resolution: In Phase III, the remaining ni dwelling units will be built out proceeding from Rainbow Drive in a southerly direction. Comm. Claudy suggested a change in wording in the First Phase: Construction of 19 dwelling units along Rainbow Drive and Upland Way is approved. Construction of the 2 easterly units is contingent upon either: - Approval of the Public Utilities Commission for a grade crossing, or - A letter to the Public Utilities Camaission from the Southern Pacific Railway on file showing that Southern Pacific is not in opposition to the grade crossing. - A covenant recorded on the Tentative Map. IVTION: Comm. Mackenzie moved for approval of a Minute Order concerning Application 9-U-83 (Revised) authorizing modification of the approved project phasing plan. SECOND: Comm. Sorensen VOTE: Passed 5-0 REPORT OF PLANNING commissiaN Cam. Sorensen stated that she attended a conference on earthquake preparedness. She suggested that as part of the Planning Omission, they need to be aware of disaster preparedness. Cam. Adams thanked Et% Jose Batto, a Representative of P.G.& E., for attending the Planning Mnmigsion Meetings. Mr. John Kruge will be representing P.G.& E. in the future. REPORT OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR - None • PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE: 110 Regular Meeting of April 14, 1986 PAGE 16 PC-491 • ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded its business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 9 : 55 P. M. to the next Regular Meeting of April 28, 1986 at .7 : 30 P. M. Rcspr. tfu i l y suhm it.tet 411(/,‘ Caro i A. Probst-C,augh , • Recording Secretary Approved by the Planning Commission At the Regular Meeting of 1986 : Nicholas Sabo, Chairman