Loading...
PC 03-13-78 . i ~ - CITY OF CL'P~~~ I::v, ST9TE OF CALI50R~Ir FC-276 ~ 10300 Torr~ Avenue, Cupertiuo, Ca 95014 ~°a~e 1 Telephone: 2;2-4505 I MINUTES OF THE F.EGULaR ?fEETING OF TY.E FLANNING COt,i^+ISSION HELD ON MARCH 13 , 1978 , IN THE COUNCIL CHA*t3ER, CiTY 'HP1LL CUPERTZPIO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Chairman Koenitzer called the meeting to order at 7:32 PM with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Comm. present: Adams, Blaine, Gatto, Chaix~an Koenitzer Comm• absent: Markkula Staff present: Assistant Planning Director Cowan Assistant City Attorney Kilian Assistant City Engineer [dhitten Associate Planner Piasecki APPROVAI. OF P1I:IUTES Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 13, 1978. Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Blaine, to approve the Minutes of February 13, 1978, as submitted. Motion carried, 4-0 POSTPONEP~UTS Upon request of the applicant, it aas moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded 5-T*!-78 by Coimn. Blaine, to continue application S-TM-78 to April 10, 1978. cont'd *totion carried, 4-0 WRITTEN COTL"fUNICATIONS Letter from 23rs. U_ Tedesco in regard to ag.enda item 2. I i i PC-276 ~MINUTES OF PfARCh 13, 1978 PLe1NNING C0.'~4~SISSION DiEET~IN~ - Page 2 The staff received a request this date from developers uf the Alnha Beta complex at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd. for an interpretation of the Ordinance in rega:d to the sale of food items from a walk-up window. The Assistant Planning Director wanted to discuss this matter with the Planning Co~ission at the end of this meeting. ORAL CO*iM[JNICATIONS: None, PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Application 2-Z-78 of J. WESLEY 6 SIDNEY A.PIERSON: PBEZONING approximately 0.68 acre from Santa Clara County RHS (Hesidential, Hillside Variable Slope District) to City of Cupertino ?t1-30 (Resi- dential, single-family, 30,000 sq, ft. per dwelling unit) or cohatever zone may be de~med appropriate by the Planning Co~ission. Said property is located adjacent to and southerly of El Cerrito Road approximately 400 feet southerly of the intersection of San Juan P.oad and E1 Cerrito Road. First Hearing. The Assistant Planning Director reviewed the March 10, 1978 staff report ~ regarding this proposal for development of a lot in Inspiration Heights, From an engineering standpoint; this lot is buildable with access to aligi-iment of E1 Cerrito Aoad and it is serviceable by esnergency vehiclas and public utilities. Sew~r facilities and water lines will be extended from San Juan Road. An aerial photograph was displayed, indicating there is a building pad that was created on this lot several years ago. The Assistant Planning Director stated this property is one of the legal lots to be recognized in Inspiration Heights. ~ . In answer to Comm. Adam~' question, the Assistant Planning Director stated that if gravity flow s~wers won't work here, it would be the option of the property owner to att~pt to gain easement rights to San Juan Road or the_use of an injection pump. The Associate Planner noted the previous owners of this property have done some grad~ing to broaden the pad from what is shown on the aerial photograph. Comm. Blaine asYed what standard conditions would be imposed here, since no special conditions are recommended by [he staff. The Assistant Planning Director said there is no vehicle at the present time for regulating zoning in this case. The Director of Public Works has control of the grading, etc., however. ~1INUTES OF MARCH 13, 1978 PLANNING COL~L^1ISSION MEETIDIG I~~PC-276 Page 3 Mr. .7. W. Pierson stated he was the owner of this property. It was his understanding that this was a buildable lot. He offered to answer any questions, The Assistant City Engineer stated it is the responsibility of the property owner to gain access to San Juan Road. Mr. Pierson was advised to work out these details of concern with the staff. Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Co~. Adams, seconded by Comm. Gatto to close the Public~~• Hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 :Soved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Gatto to approve applica- tion 2-Z-78. AYES: Co~n_ Adams,Blaine, Gatto, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Markkula Motion carried, 4-0 - The applicant was advised this would be before the City Council on April 3, 1978. 2. Application 4-Z-78 and 4-TM-78 of CRAIG A. fi NANCY BINNEWEG CLARK: PREZONING two existing lots consisting of 0.48 acre from Santa Clara County R1-8 (Residential, single-family, 8~000 sq, ft, per dwelling unit) to City of Cupertino R1-7.5 (Residential, single-family, 7,500 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Coffinission; TENTATIVE MAP to adjust lot lines between the two ~ parcels such that the two lots will equal 8,400 sq. ft. and 12,470 sq. ft. ~a'_d prorcrty is located on the north side of _ McClellan Road approximately 200 feet westerly of the inter- section of Orange Avenue. First Hearing. The Associate Planner locate~i the property on the map. He said the only issue raised by the staff was in regard to the location of the driveway. The City is interested in preservation of the large pepper tree. Comm. Gatto stated the pepper tree is in the I public right b f-way.~ The Associate Planner clarified the point that under the present R1 Ordinance, it will not be possible to use these lots for other than a single family residence. The applicant has been made aware _ of this fact. I PC-276 ~ MIiltiLiS OF :-I~AicCF. i3, 1978 PLANNISG COPL"IIS~I.S `+~ET~.G Page 4 ~ i Mrs. Nancy Ciar~, 22401 Santa Paula, Cupertino, sazd th~v plan to build just 2 single fa~ily homes on this property, c~sis.ent ~ith the zoning. . She said [hep live on a flag lot now and the acoposaT fct a jog in tie driv=way would be interesting and would add to the xiginornood. She said th~ man in the house ne~ct door has offaed to sell th~ some land for the driveway, but the price was prohi'aitiva. Chairman E:oenitzer suggested putting the dr;vaay oa the east side and then we 3on't have to worry about dodging tne tree. The Associate Planner added there could be a flaring out of the c~iveLay. Chairman Roeni[zer's concern is for the a~o~t of paving arwnd the neppertree. If the driveway were placed on t~ east si~, this vould not oe a caorry. Co~. Hlaine suggested a monolithic sidevalt as an a2[er~ytive. The Assistant City Engineer answered Coum_ Ea^n tba: tln potential £or that sidewalk bein~ completed within 5 or 6 years is negiigible. Comm. Gatto said it might be well to go viLb jast cab ad gutter here. The Associate Planner agreed that the sidevallcvoult ha~ to go very close to that tree. ~ . kfter~further discussion, the Planning Covmi_~~ on decidei the dr3vewav - ~ shnul~ be.put on tne east side of the lot. TSe applJ.cas agreed to ~ t'Bis -arrangesnent, and the change was made oa Li~e Tc3iatire Yap. i ~ Mr. Forsyth, 10893 McClellan Road said he voald like to see every effort i made to get this property developed, as ii is a ju~ pilr now and is an attractive nuisance for neighborhood chilar~_ I Since there were no further co~ents from t~e ~di~ce, =t vas mwed by I Comm. Blaine, seconded by Co~. Adams to close Lhe ~abliz Aearing. ~ I Motion carried, 4-11 4-Z-78 Moved by Comm_ Gatto, seconded by Co~n. Blaine, to r=_co~enti to the City approved Council approval of application 4-Z-78, AYES: Comm. Adams, Blaine, Gatta, C.~'airm~ KoQitzer ^]OES : None ABSENT: Co~. Markkula Motion carried, b-0 i ; MIVUTES OF "U,RCH 13, 197fl, PLANNING CO`L*SISSION .*1,EPI~i; IPC-27n ~ age 5 Moved by Comm_ Blaine,.seconded by Coa¢n. Gatto, to recomr.ier.d to th 4-TM-78 City Council approval of application 4-TT:-78 with the 14 standard approved conditions and condition 15, with approval based on amended exhib~ with driveway to the rear lot placed on the east side of the pro- perty. Condition 16 in staff report is deleted. Findings: a) That the proposed map is consistent with the general and specific plans. b) That the design or improve~ent of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the general and specific plans. - c) That the site is physically suitable for the type of develop- ment. d) That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 3) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvemen[ are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or su - stantially and avoidably in~ure fisti oi wildlife or their habitat. ~ f) That the design of the subdivision or the tyoe of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements wi11 not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. AYES: Co~. Adams, Blaine, Gatto, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None ABSENT: Co~. Maricicula Motion carried, 4-0 It was announced this would go to the City Council April 3rd. 3. Application S-Z-78 of MITCHELL RADOVICH: PREZONING 0.21 acre from Santa Clara County R3-2.4 (Residential, multiple, 2,400 s. . ft. per dwelling unit) to City of Cupertino R1-7.5 (Residentia single-family, 7,500 sq. ft. pez dwelling unit) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Said property is located on the southerly side of Olive 9venue approximately 100 feet easterly of Orange Avenue. First Hearing _ i ~ I PC-276 MINUTES OF THE MARCH 13, 1978, PLANNI".dG COMMISSION MEETI?iG Yage 6 The Assistant Planning Director reviewed details of the March 10, 1978 staff report. He identified the property on the transparency, noting this application is consistent with the General Plan and the development pattern in the area. The General Plan calls for residential 4.4-12 dwelling units per acre. Construction of this house would translate to 4.6 dwelling units per acre. The Assistant Planning Director stated [he development pattern in this area is quite mixed. There are dupleaces on the adjoining property to the east. There is an existing easement through this property to several existing properties to the rear. The property owner, Mr. Mitchell Radovich, said he has owned this for about 5 years. He is anacious to build on this property because the way it is now, people are dumping trash on it and there have been problems with juveniles on the property, Since there were no further comments from the audience, i[ was moved by Coc¢m. Gatto, seconded by Coam. Adams, to close the Public Hearing. . Motion carried, 4-0 5-Z-78 Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Adams, to recommend to the approved . City Council approval of application 5-Z-78. AYES: Covan. Adams, Blaine, Gatto, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None ABSENT: Co~. Markkula Motion carried, 4-0 4. Application 1-TM-78 of TERRANOMICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: TENTATIVE MAP to subdivide a recently developed 9.9 acre cc~ :ercial center into thr~~ pa.cal~ coasisting of 0.7, 0.1 and 9.1 acres. Said property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection ~ of Portal Avenue and Stevens Creek Blvd. First Hearing. The Associate Planner reviewed details of the 2larch 10, 1978 staff report on this it~, The only concern at this time is that each si[e must be served by separate sanitary sewer lines with adequate provision for proper maintenance of lines crossing over one prouerty to serve another, It caill be necessary to require recordation of reciprocal ingress/egress easements and maintenance easements for circulacion areas and for all on-site utility lines. 1 MI:V[iTES OF THE '~'iARCA i3, 1978 PLAidNING COMNfISSION MEETING PC-276 Page 7 Chairman Koenitzer asked for clarification of the 2 letters from the Sanitary District in regard to this property. The Associate Planner said there was a misunderstanding in the first letter, and the second letter clarifies the clearing up of this misunderstand- ing. Mr. Mel Peterson, representing the applicant, said they are in agreement with the staff on all points and the conditio.ns are accepcable to them. Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Co~. Blaine to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Moved by Comm. Adams, seconded by Comm. Blaine, to recommend to 1-TM-78 the City Council approval of application 1-TM-78 with Conditions approved ~ 1 through 17 as enumerated in the March 10, 1978 staff report and the following findings: a) That the proposed sap is consistent with the general and - specific plans. b) That the design ot improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the general and specific plans. c) That the site is physically suitable for the type of develop- ment. d) That the sita is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. e) That the design of the subdivision or the pzoposed improvement are not likely to cause substan[ial environmental damag~ :.r substantially S avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. f) Tha[ the dasign of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. AYES: Co~. Adams, Blaine, Gatto, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Markkula Motion carried, 4-0 ~ This goes to the City Council *larch 20, 1978. I ~ i PC-276 MINUTES OF TNE ^14RCH 13, 1978 PLANNING COi°A!ZSSiON Page 8 5. Application 3-TM-78 of PHYLLIS CHESTNUTT: TENTATIVF M_4P to divide approximately 0.50 acre into two lots, consisting of 8,000 sa. f*_. and 11,140 sq. ft. Said property is located or. the west side of Tula Lane at the intersection with Sola Street. First Hearing. The Assistant °lanning Director referred to details in the *larch 10, 1978 staff report, noting the original tentative map presented to the Planning Commission in 1974 and subsequent tentative map was approved by the City Council over the denial of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission has always been concerned about development of property in this area in terms of character and density or intensity of development as well as the need for a master street systan for Tula Lane. The City Council feels Tula Lane would serve as the major ingress to this property and it would not be necessary for the City to master plan a street system for the area. Cou~. Blaine asked how these people are supposed to get in and out of there there are presently two lanes of Tula Lane letting traffic out onto McClellan. The Assistant City Engineer said you can get two cars through there, There are presently about 14 homes back there. This proposal is for two more houses, which will not make a significant difference. The Assistant Planning Director added that the City always has the power of Eminent Domain if safety becomes an issue. The Assistant City EnRineer said there is no oublic access back there now. There is only private access, agreed upon by the residents in the area. The applicant, Mrs. Phyllis Chestnutt, said the rest of the property has been developed with access to Sola Street. It would not make any difference if Tula Lane were closed off. The property is zoned for 7500 sq, ft, lots and her lots have 8,000 and 11,000 sq. ft. Chairman Koenitzer asked for co~nents from the audience. There were none. Comm. Gatto's concern was in the event Tula Lane should become a private road or should become barricaded, there could be a problem if a fire should occur back there. The Assistant Planning Director said [he Fire Department has very good maps and access will be maintained. Co~n. Blaine said that if there is going to be a new name for that portion of the street to the north it should be done before tha people move into the area, Since there were no further comments, it was moved by Co~. Adams, seconded by Comm, Gatto to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 MIWTES OF THE MARCH 13, 19i8 PLANNING COP4IISSION MEEfNG PC-276 ' Page 9 Co~. Gatto said he did not see why this person should be penalized just because the development pattern did not materialize the way the Planning Commission had hoped it would. The remainder of the Co~ission agreed. Moved by Co~. Gatto, seconded by Cov~. Blaine to recommend to the 3-TM-78 City Council approval of application 3-TM-78 with the 14 standard apnroved conditions and conditions 15 and 16 in the staff report, along wit the following findings: a) That the proposed map is consistent with the general and specific plans. b) That the d.esign or improvement of the proposed subdivision is ~ consisten[ with the general and specific plans. ( c) That th~ site is physically suitable for the type of developme~t. d) That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvement~ are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or i substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their ~ ~ habitat. ~ ( f) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements; are not likely to cause serious public health problems. g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements; will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at ~ large, for access through or use of, property within the f . propased subdivision, ; AYES: Co~. Adams, Blaine, Gatto, Chairman Koenitzer i NOES: None ~ A3SENT: Comm. Markkula i Motion carried, 4-0 I MINUTE ORDER TO CITY COUNCIL: Moved by Co~. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine, that perhaps a review of the public portion of that street being renamed should be considered, particularly to aid emergency vehicles. Motion carried, 3-1 Chairman Koenitzer dissented Goes to City Council March 20th. ; ; PC-276 i MINUTES OF 'THE MARCH i3, 1978, PLANNING COMMISSION MEEPING Page 10 f ~ i ~ 6. Application S-TM-78, COAST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION ~ CONTIWED FOR ONE MONTH. ~ UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None. ( NEW BUSINESS 1 7. Request for extension of Tentative Map - Apnlication 24-TM-76 - E. Alvarez & Son Construction. Letter of February 15, 1978, £rom Mr. E. Alvarez indicates a ! disabling injury to himself which put him 6 months behind in his work. The Assistant Planning Director distributed copies of the approved map, for 6 lots on McClellan Road. The staff reco~ends 1 year extension. ~ 24-TM-76 I Moved by Co~. Adams, seconded by Comm. Blaine, to approve the extension extended i for one year for application 24-TM-76. one year ' Motion carried, 4-0 't M ~ 8. Request for interpretation of the Ordinance in regard to sale of . food items from a walk-up window; northwest corner of Stevens ' Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd. Comm. Gatto abstained from this discussion. The Associate Planner said the staff noticed the window on the building ~ plans, and a review of the CG Ordinance was somewhat ambiguous on this point. The staff is acvare of public concern about walk-up and fast ~ food situation. A use permit is required. Further considaration is ~ that there are very limited situations within l:G zones in thc C~t~ of Cupertino where this ~aould apply. He quoted sections of the Ordinance. Comm. Blaine said the proposal is for donuts and coffee now What happens if they want to expand to sandwiches. She asked if this use ~ would make any difference in the parking. The Associate Planner said it would not. If they enlarge this use thay would have to come back ~ in for a use permit, f Co~. Adams asked the staff how many patio-type outdoor eating~~azeas there ` are in the City of Cupertino. There are quiTe a few. IInless they have ~ been abused, he had no objection to them or to this use. I f i MINUTES OF THE AL4RCH 13, 1978, PLAIdNIhG COMMISSZON P~ETi2:G °C-276 ?age 11 The plans were placed on the bulletin board so the Go:nmissioners could get a better handle on the potentiai problem, Co~. Blaine`s concern is that perhaps this would be setting a precedent. The Associate Planner said there are not that many CG zones left in the City. He said the key here is "substantial part of the business". Co~. Adams compared this to a coffee and pastry vending machine, which we find in most light industrial businesses. The Associate Planner answered Comm_ Blaine that they would have to come back in to request permission to enlarge the window. The Assistant City Attorney said the best approach to this problem is to consider it's effect on traffic, air quality, etc., rather than to try to interpret what the Ordinance is saying. Consensus: No major problem here. Chairman Koenitzer said we will have to start thinking about what to do if it does become a problem. We should 1et H-Control know this is being contemplated. REPORT OF PLANNING COrPfISSION: None. REPORT OF PLANPIIHG DIRECTOR The Assistant Planning Director announced the March 27th meeting . will be a long one with reports on the jobs/housing issue, housing programs, PPC Trails task force support, discussion of the Board of Supervisors decision regarding 20-acre County lot sizes in relation to traffic and four Ordinances: Hillside, Hillside Subdivision, Grading & Condominium Conversion. Mrs. Lucien Hertert recommended a little excursion up San Juan ~ Road to the intersection of E1 Cerrito prior to the next meeting. ~ There is a one acre lot anne~ced some time ago and which received a building permit. They have bulldo2ed the road in this slide area. ~ Comm. Adams was concerned about the extensive grading above Voss Avenue. The Assistant City Engineer said the drainage is better in that area now than it was before it Was graded. It was always ' very marshy, ~ i - i I~ - I