PC 06-12-78
·
CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFOfu>¡IA
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
Telephone: 252-4505
pc- 23 3
PaQI2 1
MINUTES OF TRE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING Cm!MISSION
HELD ON JUNEI2, 1978 IN TRE COUNCIL CHAMBER
CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
SALUTE TO TRE FLAG
Ch. Blaine called the meeting to order at 7:36 PM with the Salute
to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
Comm. present: Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
Comm. absent: None
Staff present: Assistant Planning Director Cowan
Assistant City Attorney Kilian
Associate Planner Piasecki
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of April 24, 1978:
Page 3, paragraph 4, line I: delete "it is" and replace with "his".
Page 4, put paragraph 4 directly under first paragraph and combine
paragraphs 2 and 3.
Page 5. paragraph 2, line 1, aÎter ''Toby Kramer" add "discussing a
below market housing price,". In the next to the last paragraph,
line 2, add "limited" after "get", and delete "on it" and replace
with "and".
Page 6, paragraph 1, lines 2 and 3 should read: "...jogging
and place individual units' fences back to the property line
consider single story units.
I
I
path ¡
and J
"have',.
I
I
¡
I
i
I
Minutes of May 8, 1978:
Page 9, last paragraph, line 4, add "never" between "and" and
PC-283
Page 2
BAS HOMES appli.
continued to
July 10, 1978
MINUTES OF JUNE U, 19ï5, PLA'r-IING COHNISSION :fEETI:¡C
i
i Page 10, paragraph 7, last sentence should read: "This structure.......
: 2 stories in height. It
! Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to approve the
I Hinutes of May 8, 1978, as corrected.
I Motion carried, 5-0
POSTPONEMENTS
Per the staff request" it was moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by
Comm. Adams to postpone agenda item 3 (B.A.S. Homes, Inc.) to
July 10, 1978.
Motion carried, 5-0
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Letters from Mr. Jim Crockett, Mr. John B. Banks and Mr. Terry Wagner
in regard to agenda item 5 (9-U-78 - Dr. Joe Brown).
ORAL CO~~ICATIONS
None..
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CITY OF CUPERTINO: Public Hearing to consider a comprehensive
amendment to the General Plan and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No
action required. The environmental assessment will be completed
after the Planning Commission defines the project via the
approval of a consenSuS plan amendment. First Hearing contirruêJ.
Ch. Blaine explained the new procedure that will be used as far as
environmental review is concerned. The Planning Commission will be
having a more active role in this regard. The ERC will now be making
recommendation to the Planning Commission on some issues and to the
City Council on others.
The Assistant Planning Director recapped the five previous public
hearings on this General Plan Amendment issue.
MINUTES OF JUNE 12, 1978, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Carom. Koeni~zer wanted to make the following comments:
1) He generally is opposed to the mix of uses. We have
unsuccessfully tried this in the past. The idea is good
results have been less than satisfactory.
2) The proposed maximum density of 35 units per acre without
some very strong, special circumstances is not within the
character of our City.
3) He does support 16 units per acre.
The Commission then decided to review the individual areas:
Area A
Town Center (50 acres) - No objections to staff memo.
Area B 3 parcels totalling 5.2 acres, bounded
Blaney Avenue and by Wilson School on the east.
5-10 units per acre recommended.
on West by
Residential,
Area C - NW quadrant of Blaney and Price Avenues. Recommended
for Residential, 0-5 units per acre.
Area D - 2.52 acres at SE quadrant of Stelling and Stevens
Creek Blvd. Staff recommends Residential, 10-20 units per acre
Comm. Koenitzer supported the 10-20 units per acre with access
to Stevens Creek Blvd. from residential area as a requirement
and the possibility of adding the Stevens Creek Blvd. area (rea
estate offices) to the residential area should be retained.
Area E - 5.0 acres fronting on Portal Avenue and Stevens Creek
Blvd. Presently zoned General Commercial, Residential 4.4-12
units per acre. Comm. Koenitzer does not think this mixed use
is a very useful designation. Comm. Claudy explained his idea
of a mixed use is different types of uses that blend together
in a unified plan. Comm. Koenitzer questioned whether 5 acres
is a large enough parcel to accomplish this. He would like to
see this property either commercial or residential. Ch. Blaine
stilI believes this is a good site for Residential. Comm.
Adams, Claudy and Gatt~ were in favor of a mix here. The
entire Commission felt 10-20 would be a good density if it goes
residentiaL
Area F - OK. Comm. Adams, Claudy and Gatto favored mix of
uses; Comm. Koenitzer and Ch. Blaine favored residential. All
agreed on 10-20 units per acre.
Area G - 3.8 acres bordered by Lazaneo Drive, Bandley Drive and
DeAnza Blvd. Comm. Adams would like this to be a commercial
and light industrial mix. He would not like to see residential
here. Camm. KoeDitzer agreed, as did Comm. Claudy. Camm.
Gatto said his original intent was to allow commercial and ligh
industrial; he would be willing at this time to allow commercia ,
industrial or residential here. Ch. Blaine and Comm. Gatto wer
in favor of allowing residential; Comm. Adams, Claudy and
Koenitzer were not.
PC-283
Page 3
bu
PC-283
Page 4
: MINUTES OF JU:\E 12, 1978 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETI:il~
I
I Area H - 3.parcels (7.1 acres) at ~uture extension of RandIey Drive.
I Comm. Koen~tzer feels the only feas~ble place on Bandley Drive for
I residential is on the west side. Comm. Adams suggested a mix of
I residential and industrial. Comm. Claudy feels this is a prime site
! for transition to residential. However, he cautioned that changing
! uses at back fences creates problems. Comma Koenitzer is against
I mixed uses. He will support residential here. Comm. Adams commented
! on that fact that this property near #280 and De Anza Blvd. lends
I itself very well to light industrial. Comm. Gatto said that to
I preclude this as industrial site would be foolish. Comm. Koenitzer
; does not believe we need to add to the industrial sites. He sees the people
I' who now live in Morgan Rill, etc., already having to drive some 30 miles
I to work, and another few miles won't make that much difference.
I
I
!
Residential:
Mix:
Density:
Comm. Claudy, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
Comm. Adams, Gatto
low end of 10-20 Comm. Adams, Claudy,
Comm. Gatto was in favor of 5-10.
Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
Area I - Bounded by De Anza Blvd, Mariani Avenue and Bandley Drive,
within the Conceptual Plan. (6 acres). Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto
and Koenitzer felt tnis should be commercial/industrial. Ch. Blaine
felt this could go residential.
Area J - 18.5 acreS - the fruitpacking plant between Homestead Road
and #280. Comm. Koenitzer felt this site could support high density;
20-30 units per acre. Comm. Adams felt this was a perfect site for
light industrial. Comm. Gatto thought it should be 10-20 units per
acre; whereas Comm. Claudy and Ch. Blaine felt it should be high density.
Consensus: Residential. Comm. Adams dissented.
Area K - 7.4 acres along #280, behind the lumber yard. Comm. Koenitzer
felt general commercial or light industrial would fit in here. All
agreed the density should be 10-20.
Area L - 9.3 acres presently used as a flower nursery on Romestead Road.
All agreed this should be multi-family residential, or single-family
! townhouses at 12 units per acre.
Area M - Deleted.
Area N Stevens Creek Blvd. between Blaney and Randy Avenues - 4 acres.
Comm. Koenitzer said he can see a mixed use here, and residential
density at the lower end. Comm. Gatto would like 5-10 and Ch. Blaine
would like 10-20 units per acre here. Consensus: Mixed residential/
commercial with residential 10-20 units per acre.
Mr. Morton Ryan, professional property manager, said he was representing
Area G. This has always been a commercial site. Since January, when
they went into escrow, they were told by the staff their basic recom-
mendation was commercial with the possibility of residential mix.
HINUTES OF JU;;E
1"
.-,
1978 PLJU~NING COMMISSION fŒETING
Mr. Ed Storm stated he does not feel eliminating residential
helps the City. He asked the City to allow the flexibility for
a unique design. He did not identify which property he was
talking about. He said the original pIan was for 12,000 sq. ft.
buffer-front and about 44 townhouse units at the rear -- IS
units per acre Site G.
Mr. Dirk Reed, 45 Broadway, Los Gatos, said the Hathaway
Construction Company has been working on this site since
January. Highest and best use of this property, they felt,
would be commercial along the front and residential to the
rear. If they have to'put in all commercial they run into
problems with the trip ends.
Mr. Marty HaIl, 10937 Par III Drive, Cupertino, wanted to discuss
Area E. His pIan is for 100 units -- 16 patio homes and 84
condominium units. They feel the main entrance should come
from Portal rather than from Stevens Creek Blvd. The condos
would be two 3-1/2 story buildings with underground parking. He
said his development will be superior to the Old Mill development.
He asked what the status is of the parcel that is completely
surrounded by his property. The Assistant Planning Director said
this is not a legal lot.
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the
Public Hearing. Hotion and second were withdrawn.
It waS decided Areas E and G were to be reconsidered.
Site G - Residential/ccrmmercial/industrial mix...al1 in favor.
Density - 10-20.
Moved by Comm. Koenitzer to continue this public hearing tG
June 26th. Motion died for lack of a second.
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Claudy to recommend
to the City Council a comprehensive amendment to the General Pla
as delineated in these Minutes.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
None
Motion carried, 5-0
! PC-283
Page 5
Compo Amend. to
General Plan
rec ommend ed
PC-283
Page 6
GP Amendment
continued to
last meeting
in July.
MINUTES OF JUNE 12, 1978 PLANNING COMMISSION ~ETINC
Comm. Adams requested the Council Members look at the individual
votes during their deliberations. It is his strong belief that
there are areas where light industrial is appropriate.
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Claudy to continue agenda
item 1 to the last meeting in July.
Motion carried, 5-0
i Recess Was called at 9:30 PM. The meeting reconvened at 9:45 PM.
i
I
12. Applications 30-Z-77 and 32-TM-77 of JERRY MERKELO & WILLIAM MCGUIRE:
I REZONING approximately 13.1 acres from Al-43 (Agricultural-Resi-
dential, single-family, I-acre lot minimum) to Rl-100 (Residential,
single-family 100,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) or whatever zone
may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission; TENTATIVE MAP
to resubdivide three lots comprising approximately 13.1 acres into
four lots; and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No action required. The
project was granted a Negative Declaration on December 20, 1977.
Said property is located at southerly terminus of Regnart Road.
First Hearing continued.
The Assistant Planning Director reviewed the composite map describing
real and proposed uses of the properties in the area. He said this
proposal is consistent with the General Plan. He reviewed details
contained in the June 9, 1978 staff report on this matter.
The Assistant Planning Director said another issue here is the road
alignment of Regnart Road. This road needs realignment to eliminate
the two switchbacks. At one point, this may require loss of some
trees unless there is further realignment. The proposal tonight is
to divide the property into four lots.
Comm. Gatto asked what the status is of the LID for Regnart Road.
The Assistant Planning Director said the Director of Public Works
would have to describe this. He was in the Council meeting at this
time, but would come in later to explain.
The Assistant Planning Director briefly described on the geologist's
map where the slide areas were.
Ch. Blaine asked for comments from the audience.
I
I
Mr. Jerry Merkelo, ll119 Sutherland, offered to answer any I
questions, and also wanted to make some comments. He said these
lot lines have been worked out in such a way that it is more
financially feasible. He called attention to Condition 17,
paragraph 1. Re said this should not be tied to the proposal.
HINUTES OF JUNE 12, 1978 PLANNING COMMISSIOò: ::EETl::C
PC-283
Page 7
There was some discussion of the slide area. On Parcel B there
is an active stream,
The Director of Public Works arrived at this meeting at 10 :40 PH
He described the status of the Regnart Road LID.
In Condit ion 17, paragraph 3, last line, the words "and acqU:LS:L-
tion of right-of-way" were added just prior to "on a pro-rate".
There was some discussion in regard to Lot 3.
Mr. Bill McGuire, 1042l Phar Lap Drive, said the selection of
the building sites was based on stability of the land.
In regard to Condition 17, he said he does not want to be stuck
with paying for MPRPD, He believes the roadway is everybody's
problem, not just the developer's. Mr. Merkelo's building site
is more stable than the others. Mr. McGuire said he would not
like to be treated differently from the Reglan Water System
users, the same as the people in the Candy Rock area.
Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Gatto to close the
Public Hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
Comm. Gatto believes Condition 17 is pretty
small development. It should be changed to
ment that if the assessment district is not
years .. .. .. .. ..
I
stiff for such a I
reflect the require-!
filed within 5 '
Comm. Claudy suggested the right-of-way be dedicated at this
time.
Comm. Koenitzer said it does not Seem unreasonable to ask the
property owners farther along, up the road to participate in
the development of that road. Comm. Gatto said there is a
time frame problem with that.
Comm. Adams suggested the staff TP-word Condition 17.
PC-283
Page 8
30-2-77
approved
32-TM-77
approved with
amendment
:n"UTES OF JUCŒ 12, 1978 PL&>¡NING COMHISSION MEETING
!Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to recommend to the
City Council 30-Z-77 with the minor modifications to Exhibit A and
piece
i the parcel shall be modified so that th~ smaller triangular
¡ should be moved across the road and joined with #2.
,
¡AYES:
NOES:
I
I
I
Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
None
Motion carried, 5-0
¡ Moved by Comm. Gatto,' seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to recommend to
I' the City Council approval of application 32-TM-77, subj ect to all
conditions as list~ in the staff repor~ of June 9, 1978.
I Comm. Gatto amended this to delete paragraphs 2 and 4 of Condition 17.
i This amendment died for lack of a Second.
I Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Gatto to amend this
¡motion by deleting paragraph 4 of Condition 17. (The Director of
I Public Works saw no problem with this amendment.)
Amendment carri~d, 5-0
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
None
Motion carried, 5-0
This was scheduled for July 3rd City Council meeting.
3. Applications 9-Z-78, l2-TM-78 and 6-U-78 (BAS ROMES)
CONTINUED TO JULY la, 1978.
Comm. Koenitzer called attention to the commitment for extension of
Salem to extension of Cathedral Oaks.
4. Application 8-U-78 of OXBOW LAND & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY:
USE PERMIT to construct a duplex on a 0.2 acre parc~l and
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No action required. The project
was previously assessed in conjunction with a Planned
Development zoning action. Said property is locat~d on the
southwest side of Santa Clara Avenue approximately 125 feet
westerly of Alhambra Avenue in a P (Planned Development with
residential duplex intent) zone. First Hearing.
MINUTES OF JUNE 12, 1978 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
There were no comments from the staff, other than referral to
the June 8, 1978 staff report. The applicant was in the audienc
and offered to answer questions. He said the existing garage
wil1 be removed.
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the
Public Hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to recommend to
the City Council approval of application 8-U-78 subject to the
15 conditions and findings in the June 8, 1978 staff report.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. AdRmS, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
None
Motion carried, 5-0
Thiswill go to the City Council June 19, 1978.
5. Application 9-U-78 of DR. JOSEPH F. BROWN: USE PERMIT
to allow construction of an industrial building containing
approximately 36,500 sq. ft. and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No actio
required. The project was assessed previously in conjunction
with an earlier application submittal. Said property is located
at the northerly terminus of Bandley Drive. First Rearing.
The Assistant Planning Director reviewed the June 9, 1978, staff
memo on this matter. He answered Comm. Koenitzer that this
application is identical to the previous one.
Dr. ~oe Brown, 20985 Pepper Tree Lane, Cupertino, said he
originally pu.~hased chis property so it would not be used as
residential, because this would not be a compatible use with
his present business. In addition, for 20+years the adjacent
property owner has had a nursery on De Anza Blvd. They do not
want residential. He then reviewed their plans for the subject
property. They cannot put in commercial. He said owners of
the property to the north, east and south of him are all against
residential. He asked for a vote at this meeting on his pro-
posal for light industrial.
Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was
moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Claudy to close the
public hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
PC-283
Page 9
8-U-78
approved
1
PC-283
Page 10
MINUTES OF JUNE 12, 1978 PLAt'lNING COI1"ISSro, ~,rEETT';G
9-U-78
denied
Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Cornm. Claudy to recommend denial
of application 9-U-78.
Comm. Gatto agreed with the applicant that this should be used for
industrial. Exclusively residential is a mistake. Comm. Adams agreed.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Claudy, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
Comm. Adams, Gatto
Motion carried, 3-2
This goes to the City Council June 19, 1978.
6. Application l-V-78 of BARRE BARNES: VARI&~CE from Section 66.1 of
Ordinance 220(g) (Height Ordinance) and Sections 7.1 and 9.2 of
Ordinance No. 780 (Ordinance regulating single-family zones) to
permit a home to be constructed at a height of approximately 35 ft.
in lieu of a maximum permissible height of 30 ft. and a front
setback of 7 ft. in lieu of 20 ft. as required under the above-
referenced ordinances; and ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No action
required. The project was granted a Negative Declaration on
March 22, 1977. Said property consists of approximately 0.30
acres located on the north side of the privately owned portion of
San Juan Road approximately 500 ft. westerly of Cordova Road in
an Rl-10 (Single-family Residential, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot
size) zoning district. First Hearinp,.
Assistant Planner Piasecki reviewed the nature of the request, as
recorded in the June 8, 1978, staff report. He showed on the neighborhood
map the proposal in relation to the existing development. The staff
feels the variance is justified in light of the steep slope.
Condition 16 shall include as follows: That the applicant shall enter
into the appropriate legal agreements with the property owner to the
south to insure that uninhibited rights of ingress/egress are available
to the subject property. At such time as the road needs to be
maintained, the property owner signing the agreement shall pay the
prorated amount.
Mr. Barre Barnes, 22660 San Jose Road, said the existing asphalt does
not lie in the right-of-way. He said his engineer has said the road
could be relocated.
Civil Engineer Harry Lawler, 919 The Alameda, said he was representing
the Marionists of the Pacific and property owners Paviso, Wiley, Nunez,
Hertert, MacKay and Wong. They oppose this variance because it would
impair the use of the road by existing residences. There is the potential
for 14 residences on San Juan Road. There has been no direction about the
turn around, since this is the end of the road.
~IE;un:s OF JU:Π12, 1978 PLANNING CmnlISSION '1EETH1G
He said that without the prorata share of improvements of the
road, they asked for denial of this request,
Mr. Paul Fontaine, Civil and Structural Engineer, said he has
made a topographical survey of this property. They cannot
widen the road at one point without a large retaining wall.
Mr. Paviso wants to build two homes on his lots without providing
access to this applicant's property.
Mrs. Nancy Hertert, San Juan Road, said she lives above this·
property. The property owners who live directly below this
were also at this meeting. They are all concerned about con-
struction on such a steep slope. She regrets that in March 1977
there was a negative declaration on this property. In the
future, it would be a good idea to notify adjacent property
owners of any action being taken on a property. This plan does
not fit into the Inspiration Heights study that is taking place
noW. She recommended a condition whereby there would be no
parking on the road as it approaches this property because there
is only 14 ft. width at its narrowest point. Also, there is
no place to stack the. building materials. There is a considerab
washout on properties below and above this property. They would
like to see no new homes built until San Juan Road is made to
City specifications. She would also like a condition of no
grading allowed until the new grading ordinance is in effect.
She is in favor of sharing the maintenance of the road. They
would like to See the natural grade average for the height.
She said the geology report addresses only the safety of the
subject property and nothing about the safety of those living
below nor above the property.
Comm. Gatto was reassured that this is a legal lot of record.
Mr. Edward A. MacKay, 22273 San Juan Road, does not think
anything should be developed unless there is a comprehensive
study of the property. His house slipped just receui.ly; auù
this has been repaired. No large trucks should be allowed on
this road.
Mr. Louis Paviso, 22820 San Juan
Commis.sioners. He said cars and
that patm,ay has become a road.
agreement required by the City.
wider but it is expensive.
Road, presented a map to the
horses went up there and now
He said he won't sign the
He said the road can be made
In regard to
construction
fallen down.
can It others.
slides, etc., Mr. Barnes said he has been
business since 1963 and none of the homes
He said those people have homes up there
in the
have
-- why
PC - 2 8 3
Page 11
PC-283
Page 12
MINUTES OF JUNE 12, 1978 PLANNING COMMISSIOK MEETING
Mr. Edward MacKay said the big thing here is the qu~stion of the
roadway leading to the home and the EIR. It should be well
engineered. The people up ther~ are not trying to exclude anyone
but rather to protect them.
Mr. Robert Wolfe, 22780 Mercedes Road, said he lives at the bottom
of the hill. He said his home was engine~red and built by some
"sharpie". He had a mud slid~ in his back yard. He had an ~ngineer
out. In his opinion, that entire hillside is a slide area because
there is drainage coming down that hill. Any concrete work will dam
up the water. He presented photographs of the damage to his property.
Mr. Leonard Tarantola,
do the best they can.
shoveled a lot of mud.
22776 Mercedes Road, said
It is not a pure science.
civil engineers
He, too, has
Mrs. Agnes Nunez, 22767 San Juan Road, said she lives on the private
road off San Juan Road. Their whole area is a slide ar~a. It cost
$8000 to put their 3-car garage back in place recently.
Moved by Comm. Gatto, second~d by Comm. Adams to close the public
hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
Ch. Blaine waS concerned why this lot, with 50% slope, was not studied.
The Assistant Planning Director said the real problem here is the
access up San Juan Road. The applicant can change his plans and
eliminate the need for a variance and go before H-Control.
Comm. Koenitzer said Mrs. Hertert brought up a good point about
where to stor~ the building materials.
Comm. Ad4WQ Q4iù Lì~t if this site was buildable it would not be
before this Body. "
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to deny application
l-V-78, based on findings that there are no unusual or outstanding
categories on which to base an approval.
AYES; Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
NOES: None
Motion carried, 5-0
Ml~!l1TES OF JUNE 12, 1978 PLANNING COHHISSI"N ~IEETI:';C
MINUTE ORDER; By Comm. Gatto, seconded by Corom. Koenitzer,
to the staff to initiate proceedings to bring this property and
all of Inspiration Heights back into the study area.
Motion carried, 5-0
7. Application 15-U-77 (Revised) of SOBRATO-BERG PRC1PERTIES:
USE PERMIT revision of a previously approved use permit to
increase the floor area of the existing Peppermill Restauran
by approximately 800 sq. ft. and seating capacity by approx-
imately 40 seats, and reduce the building site of an approve
future bank facility by approximately 1,200 sq. ft.; and
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No action required. This project is
categorically exempt. Said property is located on the
northeast corner of North De Anza Blvd. and Mariani Avenue
in a P (Planned Development with commercial, industrial/
office use intent) zone. First Hearing.
The Assistant Planner reviewed the June 8, 1978, staff report.
This enlargement wil1 offset the balance of the architecture.
H-Control can look at this and some minor changes , to the exterio
can correct this. The staff recommended addition of a driveway
to existip~ ¿~ive to the north.
Comm. Claudy commented that we are giving away landscaping for
more square footage.
Mr. John Sobrato said they propose to cut back the existing
sidewalk 2' to get more planting in. Once again, Mr. Sobrato
explained the reasons why 4 Phase does not want this driveway
cut in. They want to retain the integrity of their site. In
addition, it is safer for the cars to go out on Mariani Avenue
to the stop light. Re felt the solution was to devote that
awkward area of parking to employee parking.
Comm. Claudy was afraid we might be creating another problem
like Ski Any Mountain because they are so successful.
Mr. Sobrato said right now they need the parking so he is willin
to pave the bank site for the time being.
Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the
public hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
PC-283
Page 13
Insp. Hts back
into Study Area
.
pc- 283
Page 14
MINUTES OF JUNE 12, 1978 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Comm. Gatto was in favor of striking condition 18 and at the end of
that aisle, stripe 2 spaces and the end for turn-around.
Comm. Claudy wanted to encourage employees to park there.
New condition 18 (per Carom. Gatto): One or more spaces, as necessary,
will be restriped for turn-around movement at cul-de-sac at north
end to allow cars going in there to turn around.
15-U-77
approved
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to approve application
15-U-77 (revised) per the 14 standard conditions and conditions 15
through 17 in the staff report and new condition 18.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
~one
Motion carried, 5-0
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS
Extension of Tentative Map - application 8-TM-76 - NOORUDIN BILLAWALA:
ENVIRONlIENTAL REVIEW: No action required. The project is ministerial.
The Assistant City Attorney said technically speaking, this has run out
but practically speaking, it is OK to extend it at this time.
8-TM-76
extended
So moved by Camm. Koenitzer, seconded by Carom. Gatto.
AYES:
NOES:
Carom. Adams, Claudy, Gatto, Koenitzer, Ch. Blaine
None
Motion carried, 5-0
REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION: Not all trash enclosures are being used.
REPORT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR: The "tire shop" is going to be scheduled for review.
ADJOUR..~ENT
Ch. Blaine adjourned this meeting at 1:IO AM.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
~c/ 3L~
-Cha rwoman