PC 11-09-64 411
so,o00.4
CITY OF C TJ_PE R T I N O
CALIFORNIA-_
1.0321 So, Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (City. Hall)
Cupertino, California , 9501.4 Phone : ?7;2 '!;
{j✓
MINUTES O.F TIE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PL.f.NNING COMMISSION, 8:00 P.M.
November 9, 1-964; _Board Room, Cupertino School District Office
SALUTE TO TILT FLAG
II ROLL CALL: MINUTES OF TFtT, PREVIOUS MEETINGS : October 22 & 26.
Comm. present ; Frolich, Gates , Hirshon, Sma ll , T aeu '.er , Thomson
Comm. absent : Johnson
Staff present : City Attorney Sam Anderson
City & Traffic. Planner Adde haurin
Recording Secretary Lois Inwards
It was moved by Comm. Gates , seconded by Comm. Traeumei° to '
approve the Minutes of October 22nd.
Motion carried, 6-0
Correction to October 26th Minutes :
Comm. Small said that on Page 4, Para . 3, he would like to
clarify his statement that the reason he felt this would be
an excellent service station is that the bays would not be
facing the street.
It was moved by Comm. Traeumer , byseconded Comm. Small, to
approve the Minutes of October 26th as; corseted.
Motion carried, 6_O
III COMMUNICATIONS :
A. Written --- None
B. Verbal
1. The City Planner recommended the Planning Commission
invite the City Attorney to the Thursday, November 12th,
work session on the Cluster Ordinance .
MINUTE ORDER : It was moved by Comm. Gates, seconded
by Comm. Frolich to direct the City Attorney to be at
the work session on Thursday, November 12th, 8:00 P.M. ,
at City Hallo
Motion carried, 6-0
41, IV BEARINGS SCFFT)ULRD
A. 11-U-61I, C . M. BAER : Application for a Use Permit for a service
station at the NW corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Saratoga-
TT 7
Suizziyva ll.: Road . Se n c,.nd
-1
. o
1 !
Mr. Baer said he had made his presentation at the First Hearing
and asked the Commissioners if they had any questions at this
time .
The City Planner said this s iterl Ilas been discussed at great
length at City Hall and the following factors were considered :
The owner of the "lot for which a Use Permit is requ. sted also
owns the lot adjoining on the north side , on which there is a
IIP
restaurant. It seems that traffic sa e,:y, as well as the
economic welfare of the City Auld require that sidewalks be
constructed on ma jor thoroughfares aid that the neighborhood
around the intersection of Ste4ens. Creek Blvd. an Saratoga-
Sunnyvale Road be upgraded.
Therefore , it is the recommended condition that the municipal
improvements and dedications a .-e required, as stated in Exhibit B
and as directed by the City Engineer; this shall apply both for
the lot for which this Use Permit is requested and also for the
lot adjoining the aforementioned lot to the north.
Mr . Baer said he thought this was a mild case of blackmail. He
said he would agree to these conditions when the property to
the north of him is improved also.
It was pointed out to Mr. Baer that this condition applied only
to the service station site and the 38 ' in front of the res-
taurant, not in front of the adjoining lot he owns .
The City Attorney said he understood the property to the north
of Mr . Baer es property on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road was used as a
41)
residence, even though it is zoned Commercial. He said he
would be glad to go into this more thoroughly if the Commission
so desires .
Comm. Small asked the applicant how difficult it would be to
rearrange the entrance in order to have it on the north. side . '
Mr . Lou Endicott, Ameri.ca.n Oill Comb� ny Terre enta"ti %e� submitted
at this time a new, contemporary design that he Felt would be
more in keeping with Cupertino °s image . He said the pitch of
the roof would make it very d i_fficalt to have the bays at the
side . He also pointed out that there is not enough maneuver
room to have the bays open at the rear .
Mr . Endicott said the plan included a steel shell with brick
facing, plywood , and shingle roof ., The restrooms will be tiled.
There will be a steel board-on-board facade .
Chairman Thomson asked Mr. Baer if he had considered any otter
use for this property. Mr . Baer said he has had offers , but
does not want to sell.
Mr. Baer said the State has forced him out of his present business
He really does not want to do anything different with this pro-
perty because it will cost him money.
Comm, Gates was concerned about the traffic hazards involved in
having a service 'station on the corner where there are right-
hand turn islands , etc .
.L
1,
•
Comm. Frolich commented that this would be a good opportunity to
open up this corner He reminded the applicant of the dim view
the Planning Commission, H-Control and City Council take of
revolving signs . He asked the applicant if he didn 't' think he
would be money ahead to have the extra. 38 ' .in front of the
restaurant improved at the time the corner is . Mr. Endicott
• agreed with Comm. Frolich.
• Comm. Hirshon wanted to know what other types of business have
been offered for this location. Mr. . Baer said nothing has come
up that would even pay the taxes . He said this corner has had
a service station on it for fifty years . •
Chairman Thomson asked for comments from the audience . There
were none , .
It was moved 'by Comm. "Gates and seconded by Comm. Frolich to
close the Second Hearing.
Motion carried, 6-0
Comm. Traeumer commented that he has riot heard of any other use
for this corner. Also, he feels that the sidewalk should
continue to the northerly let line of the restaurant.
The City Attorney commented that at one time he had an- office
at this corner and it was so noisy it. was impossible to work.
Chairman Thomson reviewed some of the things "coming to Cupertino--
DeAnza College , Valico Park, etc . -- and he was concerned about
• having this corner developed into a .frst-rate business estab-
lishment commensurate with this prime location.
•
Comm. Small was concerned about the need for so many service
stations in Cupertino in view of the fact that freetiday traffic
seldom stops enroute for gas or other service ,
Comm. Frolich agreed that freeway traffic seldom stops for gas'o '
On the other hand, however, he did not feel that Cupertino 's
traffic will drop off . An office building would probably be
more hazardous here because the traffic coming in. and out would
be all at the same time . He also brought up the fact that the
Planning Commission saw fit to approve a service station for
that corner when there already was one at this location. And,
finally, Comm, Frolich was . not at all sure. that the station
exhibited at the First Hearing was wrong. He suggestt.ed both .
styles be submitted to the H-Control. '
Comm. Hirshon said this was a fine proposal but , at the ,present
time , he does not feel the City can stand another service station..'
Mr. Baer asked the City Attorney if "they" could put him out of
business . The City Attorney said the matter would have to be
110 turned over to 'him for study before he was prepared to voice an
opinion. •
Chairman Thomson reminded the Commission that Mr. Baer 'has been in
business at this location for over 20 years and this is not the
stationll to turn down; not
this
will change the number of service
stations in Cupertino,
-3-
It was brought out that the County of Santa Clara condemned the
building presently at this loci tion. They bought the building
from him and gave 'it back to him.
The City Attorney said he was asked about the propriety of asking
for a Use Permit here . The street improvements are sub-standard;
however, as long as he can rerrember, this corner has had a
service station on. it. The ilojise" level here is unbearable , which
limits this location for a nur;ber of uses .
It was moved by Comma Frolich and seconded by Comm., Traeumer that
WHEREAS, a critical corner would be vastly improved as to
amenities and offer visibility and,
WHEREAS, it replaces an existing similar but less desirable use;
NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED that approval of application
11.-U-64 Is recommended, subject to the 12 standard conditions
where they apply. and,
13 . Improvements per the City Engineer 's recommendations,
l4 . Additional frontage 'imprOvements on existing restaurant
parcel only,
15 . Building drawings to accompany application to H-Control,
as well as the previous concept shown at the First Hearing.
AYES : Comm. Frolich, Traeumer, Thomson
NOES : Comm. Gates , Hirshon, Small
ABSENT : Comm, Johnson
Motion tied, 3-341)
Chairman Thomson said the Second Hearing would be continued to
the next regular meeting, pending the vote of the full Commission.
B. 13-V-64 '.HARRY CHOW: Application for a Variance in lot size;
four lots adjoining 20686 IRodi'igucs Ave „ Second Hearing.
Mr . Harry Cappel, of Cupertino,, Realty, represented the applicant .
He said he had nothing further' to add to what was brought out at
the first Hearing. He asked for questions and/or recommendations
of the Planning Commission.
The City Planner said the yard requirement would restrict the
main building on the lot in question to a width of 87 ' and a
depth of 30 ' ; these dimensions' make a nice building possible,
however. The garage on the next lot must be fireproofed as it
adjoins the property line . This should' not be very difficult .
The City Planner recommended approval of Record of Survey, pro-
vided the Planning Commission recommends and the City Council
approves the necessary variance for less lot size for Parcel C IJ 4
than" required in an R-1 zone, and under condition that the
existing garage on Parcel D be fireproofed to the satisfaction
of the Chief Building Inspector,
A
411
S
Chairman :Thomson na lfi tha , if the P].ann_ing Commissi ou. does not
go along with the City Planner `s recommendation they should
recommend something constructive. for this property. He added
that he wou]d like the H-Control to approve any buildings for
this property.
Comm. Traeumer asked if there was any pllm.bi,ng :in the garage .
® Mr . Cappel said there Gfas . This would complicate the moving
of the garage . Mr. Cappel said Mr. Chow has investigated the
possibility of moving the garage and found it was not financially
feasible . The garage , which contains a bath, is worth from
$8000 to $9000.
Chairman Thomson asked for comments from the audience'.
Mr . Robert Shawn, 20678 Shelley Drive , asked what easements
were involved. The City Planner said there will have to be
some provision on Lot D to get the power supply extended to
Lot C .
It was moved by Comm. Hirshon and seconded by Comm. Traeumer
to close the Second Hearing .
Motion carried, 6-0
It was moved by Comm. Gates and seconded by Comm. Small to:
approve the Record of Survey and application 13-V--64, subject
to the 12 standard conditions that apply and :
13 . That the proposed development go through H-Control.
14 . Fireproofing of the garage now near the .proPerty line of
Parcel D on the Record of Survey.
AYES : Comm. Frolich; Gates,• Hirshon, Small; Thomson
NOES : Comm. Traeumer
ABSENT : Comm. Johnson . .
,• Motion carried, 5-1
C . -14-V-64 ALPHA- LAND CO. : Application for a Variance ; 48 sq.
ft. flat type sign for apartment .. Second hearing.
Mr. H. Perry, of Alpha Land Co. , recapped the proceedings of
_ the First Hearing. He said they would like. to put up one
48 sq. ft . sign, facing 'Saratoga--Sunnyvale Road.,-:and remove
the two 24' sq . ft . existing signs .
Chairman Thomson asked for comments from the audience . There
were none.
Chairman Thomson asked : "How do we keep the City from becoming
dominated by signs when we grant a variance here? "
Comm. Hirshon said he would rather see one sign here than a
series of signs .
Chairman Thomson wondered-if this 'is the way apartments should
be advertised..
•
•
411
Mr . Perry said they have 17 or 18 apartments on leases and all
the rest are on a month-to-month basis .
• .
Comm. Traeumer agreed with the ,Chairman about the "spirit " of the
sign ordinance . ' -
•
Mr . Perry said the Chief Building Inspector was not averse to
this proposal .
•
It was moved by Comm. Traeumer and' seConded by Commo Gates to
. • close the Second Hearing d
Motion carried, 6-0 •
Comm. Gates asked the City Attorney' if it was true that the
applicant could actually put up six 24, sq. ft : signs and still
be within the sign ordinance . _ , The City Attorney said he would
have to check this out . The. Chief Building Inspector is the
• "expert " on the sign. ordinance'.
It was moved by Comm. Gates and seconded by Comm, Traeumer to
defer .the vote on application l4-V-64 until • the next regular
meeting, at which time the City Attorney can give an interpre-
tation of the Sign Ordinance as it applies in this case .
Chairman Thomson amended this motion to also add that the City
Attorney report on the limitations on various sizes of buildings
. . and what the maximum size of signs is in the City of Cupertino.
AYES : Comm. Frolich, Gates , Small, Traeumer, Thomson
NOES : Comm. Hirshon
. ABSENT : Comm. Johnson
111
'Motion carried, 5-1 •
D. 19-Z-64, DON EXCELL: Application for rezoning from R-2-H to
R-3-H; 0.8 acres east of Foothill Blvd. at Walnut 'Circle .
Second Hearing.
Mr . Gene Masten, Civil Engineer, chose to answer those arguments
., brought forth at the First .Hearing.
•
1. Spot zoning. He displayed a large map showing all along
Foothill Blvd, where there is 'a variety of commercial zoning;
a warehousing operation at the rear, and a convalescent hospital
is' going in close, by. He felt this would be compatible zoning.
2 . It would be dumping a lot of traffic directly onto Foothill
Blvd.. He said Foothill Blvd .. is a 901 street ' and is de-
signed to take the traffic .
3 . Height of the buildings; no. control over. the height under R-3 .
Mr. Masten said there is no. economical. reason to go more
than two stories , 410
4. Some existing residences in the area are . sing:le. ..story.'
Mr. Masten said Mr. Excell was asked by the Planning Com-
mission to vary the buildings in the neighboring property so
he put in some single ator'y, based on that. .recommendation,
�6-
P
• I
5 . Number of children in apartments .
Mr . Masten said be had no st-atistics as to the number of
children living in apartments versus the number living in
R-2 or R-3 type housing. However, no miter what type of
c+' i g they e -rl 7 istill Foot-
hill r;,.��.y l_�ve;... in, cl.�.=�y wc•�.z:Ld. have to cross roo.,®
hilt_ Blvd. to tee:L to the pa.rkc:.
Mr. Masten then reviewed the proposal of four buildings with
four living units in. each. Parking is to the rear , off side
streets . There are no entrances from Foothill Blvd. Sidewalks
and street improvements would all be rn ?n and there would be
a pool. There willonecovered andoneopen car space for
be b..:.�(_t G"'C:'.i. c
each unit. There is a distance of 40 @ from the rear of the
building to the rear of the property line ,
Comm. Traeumer asked the City Planner if this wasn 't rather
narrow. The City Planner said that it was..
Comm. Hirshon asked if there were any reasons other than
economical for this proposal. Mr. Masten said the applicant
is concerned about, sales for the property directly on Foothill
Blvd. Mr. Excell feels apartments . would do better here . The
duplexes are usually owner-occupied in the one unit . Mr. Excell
sells the duplexes .
The City Planner defined spot zoning. He said one case is where
the developer asks for less density; develops; and then comes
back in for high density for unsold lots . He said. these lots are
too small to meet the requirements for R-3, unless they are
merged :into one lot , in which case they can accommodate twenty
unite L„aximum.
The City Planner said the parking situation "must also be taken
into consideration. The ordinance requires two garage and park-
ingspacesper dwelling unit . Actually, areabout 2-1/2
there
cars per dwelling unit in Santa Clara County today, and the
number of cars is increasing. If twsrd y "units are put on this
property the adjoining streets would be crowded with curb
parking.
In regard to the number of children living in R-3 versus R-2,
the City Planner agreed that apartments had fewer children
per unit , but there would be more children per acre . He said
an increase in density here is undesirable .
The City and Traffic Planner said it is very dangerous to come
directly out to the Blvd . from this development; however, the
displayed plan shows them going out through the side streets ,
which is acceptable.
Chairman Thomson asked for comments from the audience; There.
were none .
• It was moved by Comm. Gates , seconded by Comm. Hirshon, to.
close the Second Hearing.
r 1- O_.n. Cc..rr- ".e ds p
J v
410 ,1 •
Chairman Thomson said that all:Theugh this section Includes the
hills , there is a]reaJy quite .1 number of multiples He said
there is a total of L80 acresUzoned R-3, of whch only 50 are
developed so fay . He had hopes tha':; bhe new set of ordinances
would imnrove on the R-3 . At Ipresent , it allows too high density.
Chairman Thomson noted there js a school across the street from
this property, which provides cv2n space and makes this a more
valuable piece of property. H 1 III
It was moved by Comm. Traoumely, seconded by Com. Frolich, that
application 19-Z-64 be denied.
1 ,
AYES : Comm. Frolich, Gates , ,..)mall, Traeumer, Thomson.
NOES : Comm. Hirshon
ABSENT: Comm. Johnson
I
Moti ,n carried, 5-1
1
1)
% Chairman Thomson advised the applicant of his right of appeal,
..1
.:,.> E. 12-U-64; CUPERTINO CHURCHHOF THE NAZARENE : Application for
a Use Permit for a church site at the SW corner of Wolfe
Road and Richwood Drive . 'First HearAng
Mr. George Oaks , one of the owners of the property, made the
presentation including elevations , etc . , of the proposed buildings .
He said it is his policy to locate churches and, so far, he has
located eleven of them I.
Mr . Oaks said this property is directly across the street from mar
commercial, and is near multlif v ami3 and single- family dwellings ,
III -''
He feels this would constitute a good buffer between residential
",
and commercial. He said there vv'ould b 70 from the end of the
sanctuary to the property lini . In regard to the parking,
Mr . Oaks said the shopping center peopie across the way have
agreed to take care of the ovdrflow of parking. An affidavit to 1.
this effect was given to the City Planner .
il
Mr . Oaks said all eleven of the churches he has located have been
across the street from shoppingicenters . This allows extra
parking and lighting. Church meetings usually do nob coincide
with peak shopping periods .
Details about the churcIA were Ipresented• by Rz., Irwin Hawes, a
representative of the architect . The quarter-million-dollar ,
investment will include a sanCtuary with a seating capacity of
300 and on-site parking space S for 41 cars , These plans are to
be incorporated into the Minu'des of this meeting,.
e ' .
Mr . Hawes said the edifice would have a stone veneer and stained
glass trim. The building will be stucco with heavy wood fascia
410 and asbestos shingle roof.
The City Planner said this was a good location for a church. He
commented that it was a good idea to have the parking spaces on the
area adjoining the residential lots ; nerales this should be a
condition in the motion,
--
---
1 -
1
:.
i...._
. -
• •
•
The Chairman asked the City Attorney if it would be valid to have
a comment from the shopping center management . • The City Attorney
said they should have an easement running from the church to the
shopping center. :F.t may be all right with the present tenants of
the business establishments , but may not necessarily be with any
succeeding tEnants. It was ee.-;tabl'i.shed the applicant would need
a non-exc lus ve easement to park 35 cars at the shopping center.
• Mr . Robert Harrington, Manager of the Mayfair Market, said this
was a verbal agreement between. him and his District Manager.
He had no written consent from him.
•
The City Attorney cautioned that oral permissiOn could be revoked
at any time . .
Chairman Thomson asked for comments from the audience .
Mr. John a-mims, 10165 Vicksburg Drive , said hid property adjoins •
the parking lot at the one ends; He said he is not against
churches , but When he bought his home he was told (erroneously)
that the adjoining property was zoned R-1 but now he finds he is
about to be surrounded by anything but R-1,
•
Mr . Charles Carrier, East Estates Drive, asked -about the distance
from the. Church to the property line . Ha Was told it was aboUt
401 . He then asked about, the required parki.ng ratio. The City
Attorney explained that this does not necessarily have to be
on-site parking.
Mr, Zemms .asked if .ET-Control comes next . He said that on the
east 'side of his house are duplexes . They did not put up :a
fence, making his fence vulnerable to those tenants 'backing up,
etc , Mr. Hawes indicated that the church plans -to utilize wheel
bump&cs for diagonal stalls, which should eliminate this problem..
Mr . Oaks said he would be willing to go along with buffering by
means of plantings• large enough to be effective and will bring
in a landscape architect to work this out,
Comm. Frolich asked when. they planned •to build 1`•qr. 7--3ob Anderson,
representative from the church, said :they plan to build the
sanctuary first and perhaps the front portion of the rest .
Portions will be two-story,
Comm. Small asked if surfacing of the parking lot will be in the
first stage of development . He was told that it would .
Comm. Frolich questioned whether the applicant had considered the
property directly behind the Mobil%Station for parking area .
Mr . Oaks said he- would check this. out before the Second Hearing.
It was moved by Comma Traeumer, seconded .by Comm. Frolich to
• • -
close the First Rearing.
• . Motion carried, 6-0
• • ' - '• .
. •
Chairman Thomson instructed the a.pplfLcant to ihve.stiga be the• park-
ing easement on. the Mayfair Market proPerty and the property to •
the rear of the Mobil Station before the Second Hearing.4 . .
Chairman called fur a 5- LIIirsete '
9...
•
® 411
F. 15-V--64; E. & R. MOYERS : Application for a Variance to
extend a building to withih six feet of the property line
at 22480 Starling Court , First Hearing.
Dr. Moyers explained that he is outgrowing his home so he wants
to enlarge it by 14+ ' to 15 ' He is on the corner of a cul de sac .
There are duplexes adjoining his property to the rear. He plans
to put no windows along the rear wall. ,
IID
Chairman Thomson said that , for reasons of space and light, he
would be against a two-story blgilding here . He felt this should
be in the conditions if this variance is granted
The Chairman asked for comments from the audience.
Mrs . Gilbert, 10562 Foothill Blvd . , said she owns the duplex
directly to the rear of the Moyer property and has a 12 ' rear
yard: In addition, an eesemenit goes through her yard so if
there is any problem with the plumbing her yard would have to
be torn up.
The City Attorney pointed out that the reason for a variance here
must be hardship. Dr. Moyers; said he is going to out-grow his
house and must either add on t,o it or sell and buy a larger home .
It was moved by Comm. Gates , seconded by Comm. Hirshon, to close
The Public Hearings . When it became apparent that a roll call
vote was necessary here the motion was withdrawn.
It was moved by Comm. Traeumer, seconded by Comm. Small to close ;'•
the First Hearing. ►�
AYES : Comm. Frolich, Gates, Hirshon, Small, Traeumer, Thomson
NOES : None
ABSENT : Comm. Johnson
Motion carried, 6-0
The City Planner said it was desirable if the Commissioners could
go out and look at this property before the Second Hearing.
Chairman Thomson said this was his intention.
i G. 16-V-64; SALVATORE A. MARCHESE: Application for a Variance
to allow 58 ' lot width instead of 70 ' on a portion of lot #35
on the east side of Blaney! Ave. , between Pear Tree T�ne and
Merrit Drive . First Hearing .
Mr. Don Ryan, representing Mr. Marchese , submitted a plot plan.
He explained this property was split in 1958, and this is the
only remaining land. Its net depth is 195 ' . There is a house
to the south on the same size lot,. The house to the north is set
back about 80 ' . II
The City Planner explained that this lot was shaped when we had
the County Ordinance so he feels this is a hardship case . He had
no objections to this variance .
Comm. .Frolich commented that tlZis looks like one that should be
granted and referred to the H-Control
-1.0--
i
0 i
Mr . Marchese said this lot was cut up 6--7 years ago and does not
know what else could be done with it .
It was • moved by Comm. Gates , second d 'icy Comm. Traeumer, to close
the . Public Hearings .
Motion carried, hr0 - •
IIP It was moved by Comm. Frolich and seconded by Comm, Traeumer that
application 16-V-64 be granted, , ub.je_:L to approval of..the, build-
ing and site by H-•Control before the building permit is issued
AYES : Comm. Frolich, Gates , Hirehon , Small, Traeumer, Thomson.
NOES : None
ABSENT : Comm. Johnson
•
Motion carried, 6-0
The applicant was. informed that his . application would next be
reviewed by the City Council.
> H. 2O-Z--64; P. & R o . CAMARDA: • Application for rezoning from
. • R--1 :B.-2 to R•-2-H of 2 acres at Vista Drive between—Forest
Avenue and Appletree Drive . First Hearing.
Mr. Camarda was represented by Mr. Don Bandley, 21490 Columbus
Avenue . He said this property is across from the school site
and has been exposed to the ' market but just does not have any
appeal because of the location. Another factor is that the
• economics of farming two acres of cherries is not feasible. He
® also stated that Mr. Camarda never did own any of the adjoining
property.
Mr. Bandley.. explained that Mr .. Camarda does not want to have to
go to cheaper housing because of the cost of the street improve-
ments , etc .
•
Comm. Traeumer asked the appl LC( nt if he had any objections to
single-story rather than two-story . Mr. Bandley said that would
be all right ,
The City Planner pointed out that the present zoning ordinance •
says R-2-H requires 1-story buildings . He also stated that this
is identical with. the application before the City a few months ago
when he was new here . At that time he felt that duplexes would
be compatible with the surroundings . He felt that they would
look very similar to adjacent homes . He is of the same opinion now,
Mr. Bandley felt the curbs and sidewalks would be an asset to the
area .. He said that if there was more •depth to the property it
would be easy to put a nice, large home here . People who usually
reside in duplexes don 't require large yards ., .
t
III
Chairman Thomson asked for comments from the .audience
Mr. Joe Dumont, 7669 Rainbow, said from a roa.l estate man 's view-
point, an R--2 would be better that R-1 directly across the street
from a school ,. There is more difficulty in marketing an R-1 than
R-2 in a location s i;.ch as this
Lane ' as ed much ,�
� ' much back yard
Mr . John Brooker, 10?35 Pear Tr°ee � �-�k how
would be left Mr. Bandley said. they haven 't reached the stage
where site and elevations are drawn up, There could be 8-9 lots
here . Mr . Brooker then asked what the controls were governing
duplexes . The City P i_ann.er said the total of both, side yard set-
backs are not to be less than 20% of the lot width. Rear yard
setback to be 20 ' or 20% of lot depth Mr . Brooker then asked
how large a lot depth is contemplated here , Mr. Bandley said it
would be 844 ' to 86 ' . •
• Comm, Frolich asked what it would be after street dedications ,
Chairman Thomson. said lot width would be close to 100 '
Comm. Frolich said that this prOperty lies across the street from
an office building (school administration office ) and parking lot
Comm. Traeumer noted they would almost have two 100 ' wide lots --
spacious looking frontage . .
Mr , Bandley said the duplexes would be build according to re-
quirements of the individual customer. Comm- Hirshon asked what
type of construction was contemplated. Mr. Bandley said it would
probably be ranch type . 1
Mr. Camarda said he checked with 9 property owners abutting his
property and actually talked with 6 of them. They naturally
preferred that it remain undeveloped; however , they all preferred
duplexes over split=level, Mr . Camarda said it would not be
economically feasible to build alnything inferior here because he
lives close by and still owns property up the street ,
Mr. Robert McE_lliott , Vista Dr.1ve, said he had no objections to •
.this plan. He said he objected 'lthe previous application because
he objected to the builder involved in- the deal.
It was moved by Comm. Hirshon, seconded by Comm. Traeumer to
close the First Hearing,
Motion carried, 6-0
•
V UNFINISHED BUSINESS ---- None I
VI NEW BUSINESS •
A. Miscellaneous
•
1, . 51,087; MAC KAY & SUMPS : Application for extension of time for
• filing a final map for "Lands of .Bogdanich" at Linda Vista Dr .
. The City Planner explained this vas for prolongation of time
before the tentative map must be filed„
MINUTE ORDER : Moved by Comm. Traeumer. , seconded by Comm. Gates
to extend by one year the tir:ie fo the .filing of a final map for
"Lands of Bogdanich " at Linda Vista Drive
AYES : Comm, Frolich, Gates , Hirshon, Small, Traeumer , Thomson
NOES : None •
ABSENT : Comm. Johnson
Motion carried, 6-:0
•
-l2!-
411
2 . 51,151; P. CAMARDA: Record of Survey; 4 parcels of lot #34, SW
corner of Blaney Ave . and Forest Ave .
The City Planner said he and the Assistant City Engineer have
discussed this and feel this should be a Tentative Map rather
than a Record of Survey. The City Planner added that we do need
the street improvements here , which most easily are made re-
quirements of a Tentative map,
• Comm. Frolich asked if the Commission would then have to delay
this until letters are sent to the various agencies . The City
Planner saw no need for this delay because there is no problem.
The City Attorney felt this could be treated as a Tentative Map
and require they put in the street improvements ..
Mr. Camarda said the City Engineer said 150 ' of street improve-
ments would be required here .
Mr . Don MacKay, Engineer, said they would like to have this
treated as a Record of Survey with the condition of the street
improvements .
Mr. Camarda said he just wants to improve the street in front of
his property,not that in front of his father 's property.
It was moved by Comm. Frolich, seconded by Comm. Gates to table
File 51,151.
AYES : Comm. Frolich, Gates, Hirshon, Small, Traeumer, Thomson
• NOES : None
ABSENT: Comm. Johnson
Motion carried, 6-0
411
_ ( 3 —
111
VI NEW BUSINESS
A. Miscellaneous
9-TM-64 3 . """ N Tentative Map for 5 acres / between
Mary Avenue and Stevens Freeway.
Comm. Traeumer abstained from this Hearing.
Mr. Lou Tersini and Mr. Herman Ruth, Planning Consultant ,
made the presentation. Mr . Ruth explained that Cupertino
Greens will be on the property formerly known as the Saich
property. It fronts on Mary Avenue and is separated from
the remainder of the R-24-H Zone by the freeway. It will
contain 20 single-family units and 17 courtyard units.
The residential portion of the initial 5-acre parcel totals
2.4 acres ; 1.2 acres will be taken up by streets ; and
parking in bays will occupy 0.2 acres ; and 1.2 acres will be
for
open spaces .
p
Mr . Ruth pointed out that, with R-24-H Zoning, they could
legally go to over 600 units in their total area, on both
sides of the freeway, but they are planning for only 283
units .
Of the original 48 acres , over 10 acres went to the freeway,
leaving 17 acres in residences , 7.5 acres in streets , 3 .7
acres in parking bays and 10.3 acres of open space . Of the
total area, 26.7% is devoted to open space .
It was brought out that , at the time of the rezoning Hearings ,
ingress and egress was the big problem. Considerable study
has gone into this and it was decided that Peninsula Avenue
' would be the main access street . University Avenue will be
widened and the State will widen Lowe Avenue . The
interchange at Stevens Creek Road will be relocated . All
exits must be to the south.
Southern Pacific Railroad has indicated they will release
5 ' (or 10 ' , reluctantly) . They would require condemnation,
for tax reasons .
The living units will be 1078 to 1868 sq . ft . Each unit
will have two parking spaces in a garage and a parking apron.
There will be a north-south pedestrian walkway, a pool, a
club house , and tennis courts . The way the units are
oriented, it makes it impossible to look into the neighbor-
ing yards and maximum privacy is insured.
Comm. Small asked about the ingress and egress for the 5-acre
portion. He was told it had access to Mary Avenue . Comm.
Small then asked what provision has been made for the upkeep
of the private streets . Mr. Tersini said a Homeowners
Association membership would be mandatory and funds for
maintenance of the common areas and streets will come from
the dues or maintenance charges .
Comm. Small asked if there would be overhead or underground
utilities . Mr . Tersini said a modified underground utility
situation is being contemplated .
The City Planner said he has reviewed these plans and would
like to see this kind of development in Cupertino . He said
this actually is a R--1-C with density increased under a
special clause , which would allow higher density than R-1
where the existing zone is R-2, R-24-H, or R-3-H. The R-1-C
zone exists of course only as a draft at this time . The City
Planner questioned whether this development would be legal
under the present R-2L-H Ordinance because these are single-
family lots proposed. Mr . Ruth felt that it would be legal
and quoted Section 2.5 of Ordinance 002 (k) .
Comm. Frolich asked if this is a Tentative Map approval Hearing.
Mr . Tersini said the Tentative Map, actually presented, is
obsolete because there was an agreement with the City Planner
to reduce the three entrances shown to two.
Definitions were then discussed. Common walls usually refer
to apartment house situations . Double walls occur in town
houses on individual lots .
After due consideration, the City Attorney felt it would be
wise to recommend to the City Council that they amend the
present Emergency R-24 Ordinance to include covering all
types of residential dwellings .
MINUTE ORDER: It was moved by Comm. Small and seconded by
411 Comm. Hirshon to respectfully request the City Council to
look into the possibility of an amendment to the R-24 Ordinance
to include single family and condominium units .
AYES : Comm. Frolich, Hirshon, Small, Thomson
NOES : None
ABSENT : Comm. Johnson
ABSTAINED : Comm. Gates , Traeumer
Motion carried, 4-0
VIII ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 11 :55 P.M.
APPROVED :
/s/ Scott Thomson
Chairman
ATTEST :
City and Traffic Planner
/S—