Reso 1854 12-TM-78
RESOLUTION NO. 1854
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
110 RECOMMENDING THE DENIAL OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TO
DIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 9.3 ACRES INTO A 29 LOT SUBDIVISION
AND 6.1 ACRES INTO TWO PARCELS TO BE USED FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION.
APPLICANT: B.A.S. Homes, Inc.
ADDRESS : 20823 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Suite C-2, Cupertino, California 95014
SUBMITTED: April 12, 1978
LOCATION: Westerly side of Foothill Boulevard approximately 150 ft. southerly
of Poppy Drive immediately opposite of the intersection of
Salem Drive
FURTHER FINDINGS :
The recommended denial of the Planned. Development zoning request results in
an automatic recommendation for denial of the tentative map request.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 1978, at a regular meeting of the
® Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the
following roll call vote:
AYES : Commissioners Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Chairperson Blaine
NAYS : None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Adams
APPROVED:
/s/ Sharon Blaine
Sharon Blaine, Chairperson
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
QAA4-4W11)14
Robert Cowan
Assistant Planning Director
110
-2-
CITY OF CUP ERT INO
City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue - i
Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: (408) 252-4505
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING
THE DENIAL OF A TENTATIVE MAP
WHEREAS, the attached application has been submitted to the City of Cupertino
requesting approval of a tentative map; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has Held at least one public hearing in
regard to the application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered and heard all evidence
submitted in regard to said application; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the
subdivision and procedural ordinances of the City of Cupertino.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Planning Commission makes the following findings:
a) That the proposed map is inconsistent with the general and specific
plans.
b) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
inconsistent with the general and specific plans.
c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.
d). That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of
development.
e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are
likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially
and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are
likely to cause serious public health problems.
g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large; for
access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.