PC 04-11-77
CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: 252-4505
PC-251
Page 1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON APRIL 11, 1977 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER
CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
Chairman Adams called the meeting to order at 7:32 PM with the
Salute to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
Comm. present: Blaine, Gatto,'Koenitzer (7:35), Markkula,
Chairman Adams
Comm. absent: None
Staff present: Assistant Planning Director Cowan
Assistant City Attorney Kilian
Assistant City Engineer Whitten
Assistant Planner Piasecki
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 28,1977, Minutes not presented to the Planning Commission
at this time.
March 14, 1977 Minutes:
Page 6, paragraph 3, delete second line and replace with: "lanes
of traffic directly from the steps by the retaining wall. Mr. Ward
indicated there is a sidewalk next to the retaining wall on that
side of the drive.
Page 6, paragraph 6, add "e" to the end of "rational" on line 1.
Page 11, paragraph 4, last line: delete "allow" and replace with
l1provide" .
Page 12, paragraph 10~ delete: "noting we have enough tile roofs
in Cupertino for the time being"
Page 14, 4th paragraph from the bottom, line 2, delete "alternate
Exhibit 2" and replace with"7 of the 9 alternates".
PC- 251
Pag 2
INUTES OF APRIL 11,1977, PLANNING CO~1ISSION MEETING
POSTPONEMENTS: None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
The Assistant Planning Director said Mr. H. Grench, of Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District, has requested permission to place an
item under New Business on this agenda. Chairman Adams agreed to this.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
II.
:
Application 5-Z-77 of BARRIE LEE BARNES: PREZONING APPROXIMATELY
0.24 acres from Santa Clara County R-HS (Residential, Hillside
slope-density) to City of 'Cupertino Rl-IO (Residential, single-
family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) or whatever zone may be
deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Said property is
located southwesterly of and adjacent to San Juan Road approximately
5QO feet westerly of the intersection of San Juan Road and Stevens
Canyon Road. First Hearing.
The Assistant Planning Director located the property in question on the
topo map. He noted the undeveloped portion of Inspiration Heights lies
within the southwest portion of this property. It is the staff's opinion
that this is a legally buildable lot.
Comm. Markkula asked if there are any contingencies involved here, such
as how the building at the rear will have access. Mr. Barry Barnes,
10477 Merriman Road, said the structure to the rear has an easement for
access. He said the map on the bulletin board was somewhat in error.
It was established that this is a pre-existing legal lot.
El Cerito is a "paper" street and is 18% grade in some portions.
Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by
Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Gatto to close the public hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
5-Z-77
approved
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer, to recommend to the
City Council approval of application 5-Z-77.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Rlaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-251
Pag e 3
2. Application 8-Z-77 and 3-TM-77 of HIRAM A. SIBLEY: REZONING
approximately 0.45 acre from Rl-10 (Residential, sing1e-
family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) and Rl-10ag (Resi-
dential, single-family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) to
Rl-7.5 (Residential, single-family 7,500 sq. ft. per dwelling
unit) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the
Planning Commission; TENTATIVE MAP to divide 0.45 acre into
two parcels. Said property is located adjacent to and
easterly of Stelling Road approximately 600 feet northerly of
the intersection of McClellan Road and Stelling Road - 10370
Stelling Road.
The Assistant Planning Director said this was reviewed by the City
Council about 3 years ago and was approved by that body, although
the Planning Commission recommended denial. There are four lots
fronting on Stelling Road with the potential of flag lots. The
proposed flag is 18 feet, whereas the City requires 20 feet.
Chairman Adams agreed with the Assistant Planning Director that
the Planning Commission should investigate whether or not it
might be wise to consider the flag on the opposite side of the
lot than is proposed by the applicant.
Comm. Gatto felt that was not the question, but rather the
Planning Commission should decide whether or not the proposal is
right for this property.
Comm. Blaine would like the staff to look at this entire quadrant
and make recommendations.
Comm. Gatto observed that during previous hearings on this area,
it was the decision of the people living in that area to keep
the Tu1a Lane area as rural as possible.
Comm. Blaine was concerned about the City considering these
properties on an individual basis rather than as a whole.
Mr. Hiram Sibley, 6729 Dartmoor Way, San Jose, said he wants to
build his home on this property. Most of these lots along
Stelling have their homes virtually in the center of their lots
so there is no way for them to create 2 lots out of one. The lots
are large enough so that it will not be necessary to back the car
out of the driveway onto Stelling Road.
Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was
moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine to close the
public hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
·
PC-251
Page 4
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Comm. Koenitzer said he was concerned that allowing this proposal would
set a precedent for flag lots in this area. Comm. Blaine agreed.
Comm. Gatto said the message promoted all through the previous hearings
on this area was that this is an enclave in an area near the center
of the City of Cupertino. Many people living in that area believe
this is a unique area with a character that should be preserved.
8-Z-77
denied
oved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Gatto to recommend application
8-Z-77 be denied by the City Council.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
his matter will go to the City Council on May 2, 1977.
3-TM-77
denied
Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to deny application
3-TM-77 .
AYES:
NOES:
Cnmm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
It was determined that the above~entioned lot split would result
in lots less than 10,000 sq. ft., in size.
3. Application l..cDPR3-77 of JACK PAlJLSON: CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT
PLAN R3 for approximately 0.3 acre to allow ~onstruction of a
4-plex in an R3 zoning district. Said property is located
adjacent to and easterly of Alpine Drive approximately 300 feet
northerly of the intersection of Salem Avenue and Alpine Drive.
First Hearing.
It was noted this is one of the few remaining lots in this area with
multiple zoning. The proposal has been reviewed by the staff and
is ~onsidered to be harmonious with structures in the area. There
are no windows facing single-family homes. H-Control will go through
their review of this proposal. There is the possibility of 3
bedroom windows that look across this property and into the
adjacent structure. The staff feels that with minor changes, this
propòsal will be acceptable as far as solving the privacy problem.
Comm. Koenitzer suggested a higher fence could help solve some of
the problems here.
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLA~NING COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Jack P. Paulson, 1689 English Lane, San Jose, said he and his
wife plan to live here and want their neighbors to be happy.
Mr. Bill Stager, 10317 Vista Knoll, said he lives in a residence
on the lot behind here. He complimented Mr. Paulson on his effort
to put up something here that is compatible with the neighborhood.
He was in favor of the fence being raised somewhat.
Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to close the
public hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Gatto to recommend
to the City Council approval of application I-GDPRJ-77, with the
14 standard conditions and conditions 15, 16 and 17 per the
staff report of April 7, 1977~
AYES:
NOES:
Comm., Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
4. Application 7-Z-77 of HOWARD RUTH, JR.: REZONING approximatel
0.23 acre from P (Planned Development with multi-family use
intent) to Rl-7.5 (Residential, single-family, 7,500 sq. ft.
per dwelling unit) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate
by the Planning Commission. Said property is located at the
southeast corner of Pacifica Drive and Whitney Way. First
Hearing.
The Assistant Planning Director stated this application was to
rezone this property to be consistent with the neighborhood.
Mr. Howard Ruth, Jr., 2205 India Court, Los Altos, said this
application is a requirement to conform with the General Plan as
adopted.
Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was
moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Markkula to close the
public hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine to recommend ap-
proval of 7-Z-77 as recommended by the staff.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
PC-251
Page 5
l-CDPRJ-77
approved
7-Z-77
approved
PC-251
Page 6
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
5. Application 7-U-77 of WILLIAM S. AND SHARON A. IRETON: Use Permit
to allow use of building in a general commercial zone as a health
spa. Said property is located adjacent to and northerly of
Stevens Creek Blvd., approximately 450 feet westerly of the inter-
section of Stevens Creek Blvd., and Vista Drive - 20311 Stevens
Creek Blvd. First Hearing.
The Assistant Planner stated this applicant is asking for permission
to have a health spa in an existing building where there previously
was a karate school. The business will utilize 1800 sq. ft., will
operate 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday and from 10:00 AM
to 2:00 PM on Saturday.
Comm. Gatto asked why there is a need for a use permit for this type
use. The Assistant Planner said the CG Ordinance requires this.
Comm. Gatto asked if the underground utilities requirement should be
the responsibility of the owner of this building. The Assistant
Planner agreed.
Mrs. Sharon Ireton, 4955 Rue Bordeaux, said this is going to be a
good salon and she is hoping this use permit will be approved.
Since there were no further comments from the audience, 'it was moved
by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Gatto to approve application
7-U-77 with the 14 standard conditions and condition 15 in the staff
memo of April 4, 1977.
Findings: The Planning Commission finds that the use is in conformance
with the general plan and is not detrimental to existing uses or to
uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed uSe is
to be located; that the property involved is adquate in size and shape
to accommodate the proposed use; that the proposed use will not
generate a level of traffic over and beyond that of the capacity of
the existing street system; and that the proposed use is otherwise
not detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals and general welfare
of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed
use nor injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-Z51
Page 7
6. Application 4-TM-77 of CLAYTON T. WOODS: TENTATIVE MAP to
subdivide approximately 1.1 acres into five lots. Said
property is located at the southwest corner of Foothill Blvd.
and Alcalde Road. First Rearing.
The Assistant Planner reviewed the previous action on this propert
This proposal conforms with the approved building plan with the
exception of the following minor modifications: 1) The building
on Lot 5 is approximately 5 feet closer to the front property
line than the original submittal. 2) The lot line between Lots 2
and 3 angles off into a triangular-shaped addition to the common
area. 3) The tentative map reflects a private yard area between
Unit 1 and the detached garage as opposed to common space as was
originally shown on the development plan.
Comm. Koenitzer was concerned with the moving of Unit 5 because
of the amount of landscaping that will be severely cut back.
Mr. Clayton Woods, 430, Stanford Avenue, Palo Alto, said that in
regard to Lot 5, there will be turf with irrigation in the front
by the circular driveway. He said he, too, wants to preserve as
much of the green area as possible. He answered Comm. Markkula
that the reason for the minor modification was for window placemen
These are merely refinements of the plans.
Since there were no further comments by the audience, it was moved
by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine, to close the public
hearings.
Motion carried, 5-0
Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Gatto to recommend to
the City Council approval of application 4-TM-77 with the 14 stand
ard conditions and conditions 15 through 17 as listed in the
April 7, 1977, staff report.
The Planning Commission finds that: 1) The proposed map is con-
sistent with the general and specific plans. 2) That the design
or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
general and specific plans. 3) That the site is physically
suitable for the type of development. 4) The site is physically
suitable for the proposed density. 5) The design of the subdivi-
sion or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substan-
tial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6) The design of the sub-
division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems. 7) 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 proposed subdivision.
AYES: Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
NOES: None
Motion carried, 5-0
PC-251
Page 8
INurES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
7. Application I-V-77of E. ALVAREZ AND SON CONSTRUCTION: VARIANCE
request from Section 10.3 of Ordinance 220(n) to allow reduction
of required side yard setback on the street side of a corner lot
from twelve feet to eight feet. Said property is located at
20820 McClellan Road. First Hearing.
The Assistant Planner said tentative map approval was received last
December for 5 units with 10,000 sq. ft. lots with the condition that
the existing structures located on Parcel 1 be removed or relocated
prior to recordation of the final map. The applicant now is of the
opinion that by relocating the detached garage and removing a portion
of the existing single-family structure that the existing unit can
be modified to closely conform with the required Rl setbacks. However,
the applicant would like permission to allow a portion of the existing
structure to protrude Some 4 feet into the side yard setback. The
staff feels that in this ~ase, there are extraordinary circumstances
to warrant this protrusion. Further, the location of the building
will not encroach within the 40-foot sight distance triangle which
is required for safety.
Comm. Blaine was concerned whether the shrubbery would create visibility
problems around the corner. The Assistant Planner said the City has
the power to require that the hedge be trimmed if it becomes ,a problem
in this respect. The Assistant City Engineer said we can go down to
36' or less in cul-de-sacs. Comm. Gatto suggested we might be able
to get along with a 4-foot wide sidewalk here.
Mr, Marty Hall, 21060 Homestead Road, Cupertino, said he offered to
speak for the applicant who used to be associated with him. He said
this is a very lovely home and it would be a shame to have to move it.
It costs as much to move a house 3 feet as 300 feet. The shrubs
should be cut very low so view will not be obstructed. Mr. Alvarez
wants to add one bedroom and a new family room.
Mr. Hall answered Comm. Markkula that the kitchen is in that part
of the house that requires moving.
Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved
by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Blaine to close the public hearings.
Motion carried, 5-0
Comm. Markkula was answered by the Assistant Planning Director that
the setback will be 18 feet from curbline to wall of the house.
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEEtING
Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Gatto, to recommend to
the City Council approval of application I-V-77, with the follow-
ing findings:
1) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applying to the building referred to in the appli-
cation as it is an existing structure which through minor
modifications will substantia~ly conform with the setback
requirements of the Rl zone. Additional modification to forc
complete compliance with the side setback requirements would
impose an undue hardship on the property owner.
2) That the granting of the variance application is necessary
to preserve the substantial property rights of the petitioner
to reasonably utilize and improve an existing single-family
without unnecessary or undue personal expense.
3) That the granting of the application will not materially
adversely, affect the health, safety or welfare of persons
residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of
the, applicant. That the location of the building will not
encroach within the 40-foot sight distance triangle which is
required to ensure safe vehicular ingress and egress between
public streets.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, ~..arkkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
Chairman Adams called a recess at 9;28 PM. The meeting recon-
vened at 9:38 PM.
8. Application 6-U-77 of GATEWAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: USE
PERMIT to allow erection of a 48-foot high receiving antenna
in a Planned Development Zoning District. Said property is
located easterly of and adjacent to Stevens Canyon Road,
approximately 200 feet southerly of the intersection of
Riverside Drive and Stevens Canyon Road. First Hearing.
The Assistant Planning Director reviewed the April 7,1977, staff
report. Per the Height Ordinance, all PD structures shall be
reviewed by the City via use permit application. The burden has
been placed upon the applicant to explain the options open to him
There has to be some practical solution to allow TV reception for
the people living in this development.
The Assistant Planning Director answered Comm. Koenitzer that a
single-family homeowner could put up such an antenna tower under
like conditions.
PC-251
Page 9
I-V-77
approved
1'C-251
Page 10
MINUTES OF APRIL ll, 1977 P~~NING COMMISSION MEETING
Attorney Gary Gamel, 2600 EI Camino Real, Palo Alto, introduced
Mr. Jim McBride, a technician with Hertlein Electric, Inc., 19101
Lake Cabot Road, Castro Valley, CA 94548, who offered to answer
any questions of the Planning Commission. There were no questions
at this time. Mr. McBride said he made surveys of the project.
He said the apartment house structure next door is all blank walls.
He also said a couple of houses in the immediate area have masts
on their antennae. He said the adjacent 30' high house with 30'
high antenna will be higher than this proposal. He answered
Comm. Koenitzer that the readings are lower here than at any other
place where readings were taken on the property. To put a 120'
tower down at the knoll would cost between $25,000 and $35,000.
Mr. McBride answered Comm. Markkula that coax cable is already in,
in case cable TV does come in. He said he designs and installs
systems. He assured the Commission that this proposed antenna
will be equal to the one on the apartment complex.
Attorney Gamel cited the difficulties due to the topography of this
area. He advised that the residents within the Association will be
affected in that this tower is proposed to go at the entrance to the
development. They would like to see the antenna approved and at as
low a price as possible.
Chairman Adams noted that Mr. McBride had stated there still may
be ghosts in the TV reception with this antenna.
In answer to Comm. Markkula's questions, Mr. McBride said that in
order to get an excellent picture the tower would have to be 70' high.
With the 49' high tower the picture will be good, but not excellent.
Mr. M. Hugh, of Creekside Drive, asked what the effect would
the tower were put at the southeast corner of the property.
said it would have to be higher than the 49' .
be if
Mr. McBride
Mr. Henry Severin, 22570 San Juan Road, said he lives across from
the entrance to this project. He presented colored pictures of the
view from his home and showed how the proposed tower would affect
his view. The location of the tower will be at the northeast corner.
Mrs. Lillian Severin, 22570 San Juan Road, suggested they can go on
top of the hill, where they could get up about 100 feet. This would
get it out of everybody's view of it. It is available, if the developer
wants to negotiate with the owner of the hill. She said there are
windows in the apartment building next door. The tower would be
right in front of the kitchen and living room windows of that apartment.
MINUTES OF APRIL II, 1977 PLA1~NG COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Charles Knox, 22415 Rancho Deep Cliff Road, said he is a new
homeowner here. When you come down into Rancho Deep Cliff, his
is the first home. He said nobody else has been required to go
to the expense of a TV antenna. Further, if this tower is built
it will avoid having 49 other TV antennae on the homes.
Ms. Glory Brattan, 10965 Miramonte Street, feels there should be
no permanent granting for this tower. She said the contractor
has made it clear they are not going to abide by the City
requirements. They have commenced grading for Unit II prior to
City approval. They have not adequately protected the oak trees.
They used heavy equipment rather than light equipment. She said
the grading is more severe than allowed. She said there is no
follow-up by the City to see if they abide by the rules.
The Assistant Planning Director said there is a Stop Work Order
on this project now, as to the grading.
Attorney Gamel said there is the understanding the fence is
according to approved plans. Their intent is not to damage the
trees. They saved every tree on the property that they possibly
could. They have an agreement with the golf course. He said he
will be happy to look into each of the complaints.
Comm. Blaine said she is concerned about
clients since this is not the first time
about the way this development is going.
the first incident regarding severing of
oaks.
the integrity of his ,
there have been complaintJ
- I
She said this is not I
I
the roots of some of the I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Assistant Planner said the grading operations were brought to
the attention of the staff last week. They have been allowed to
complete the fence with the understanding they will come to
H-Control with a revised plan for review.
The Assistant City Engineer said that as of the morning of this
meeting, Phase II has been completely shut down.
Mr. Parvis Nambar said he has a common fence of about 2 acres.
He is not happy with this fence. He said they chopped a dead oak
to within 3 feet of the ground and built the fence over the stump.
He said the stump must come out. He said he measured 9" to 10"
of the roots of oaks that have been cut. He said he has had a
problem with the telephone company in regard to a large hole they
dug on his property by mistake. Since he owns the back hill, if
the developer is willing to negotiate with him, they can put the
antenna on the top of the hill.
PC-251
Page 11
PC-251
Page 12
MINUTES OF APRIL ll, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Earl Brandt, San Juan Road, said 61 expensive homes were built and
those people were satisfied with their TV reception without the antenna.
Mr. Jack Bates, 22586 San Juan Road, said he also lives in this area.
He said he has heard this evening testimony by neighbors who feel the
developer has done a good job; others question his integrity. He urged
attention be given to the statements made by the people already livi~
in the area.
Mr. McBride said he is asking for only 2 feet higher than the telephone
pole already there.
Attorney Gamel advised that individual units can now put 40' antennae
on their roofs or we can have one tower. A cable system is not available
at this time. He answered Mr. Bates that that is the only alternative.
Mr. McBride cautioned that this was not his comment.
The Assistant Planning Director answered Comm. Blaine that this is the
first planned development where this question has come up. Chairman
Adams reminded the Commission that if this were a single-family develop-
ment, each homeowner could put up a 49' antenna without a use permit.
Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved
by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Blaine to close the public hearings.
Motion carried, 5-0
Comm. Markkula said if there is going to be any kind of system it should
be done properly; put it on somebody else's hilltop, or go to a 90' tower,
and add the necessary channels. He said he has friends living in a canyon
area and their TV reception is terrible. Either do it right or not at all.
Comm. Blaine was concerned about the possibility of the tower being
located right outside somebody else's windows. She believes the people
living in this development should be able to have TV reception.
Comm. Gatto said the idea of a planned development is to optimise a
development. He agreed with Comm. Markkula's statements. There might
be a location up there for a tower that would serve some 500 homes.
In answer to Chairman Adams' question, the Assistant Planning Director
said he believes there are some other alternatives that can be explored
at this level before sending a decision to the City Council.
Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to reopen the public
hearings.
~otion carried, 5-0
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PIJL~ING COMMISSION MEETING
Chairman Adams asked the applicant, after hearing the previous
discussion, whether he wanted a continuance of this application.
Attorney Gamel indicated he would prefer this.
Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to continue
application 6-li-77 to May 9, 1977.
Motion carried, 5-0
The staff was instructed to gather more data about the reception I
from the tower and the location of the tower in relation to the
windows on adjacent building. The applicant was requested to pro- I
vide a complete report on the site survey work including readings
taken at all the locations tested.
9. Application l-li-77 of VALLEY CHURCH: MODIFICATION OF USE
PERMIT to modify Condition 15 to permit an existing trailer
to remain on the church site throughout the remainder of the
spring semester. Said property is located on the west side
of Stelling Road approximately 200 feet northerly of Inter-
state 280. First Hearing.
The Assistant Planner said the staff has inspected the trailer
site and found the applicant has complied with the requests in
the staff report. The staff recommends the applicant be allowed
to continue this use to September 1977. However, they have
indicated they would like to have it longer, if possible.
Mr. Tom Patterson, Business Manager of Valley Christian Schools sai
this site has' the largest Valley Christian School. They hope tOŒv a
junior high school built by 1980. They need to raise another
$3 million, however. This trailer contains no electrical nor
water service. The children just go inside it to change to their
PE clothes. This trailer has been on the property about 2 years.
There are no other rooms available in which the children can
change to their PE clothes. About 1/3 of the trailer is being
used for storage.
The Assistant City Attorney advised the Ordinance has enough
flexibility to allow this temporary use until 1980.
Mrs. D. R. Russen, 10855 North Stelling Road, said she O'JnS the
property adjacent to this trailer. This is the first time she
has received any notice of renewal request for this use permit.
The Assistant City Attorney advised the public notice is misleading
in that it says If . . for the remainder of the spring semester".
PC-251
Page 13
6-U- 77
continued
to May 9th
PC-251
Page 14
l-U-77
conC inued to
May 9th
4-TM-75
excended 1 yr
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Koeniczer to continue applica-
tion l-U-77 to the next general meeting (~1ay 9, 1977) and Che modifica-
Cion for this application shall be readvertised.
Motion carried, 5-0
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
10. Application 4-TM-75 of LAMONT WILLIAMS - Request for extension
of Tentative Map.
It was noted by the staff that the applicanc's reason for not acting
on his tentative map is that he is awaiting the City's position
regarding the issue of septic tanks versus sewers.
Realtor Herb Marcus, 928 Olympus Court, said the new owner of this
property would like to develop along with the new owner of the
~djacent property and would like to have access through this adjacent
property rather than through Lindy Lane. They are asking for a
90-day extension beyond the date the City Council reaches a decision
on the sewer versus septic tank issue. The reason for continuance
of this tentative map is to follow the downhill pattern of the road
layout on this tentative map in case sewers are going to be required.
Chairman Adams asked for comments from che audience. There were none.
Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Gatto to recommend to che
City Council extension of application 4-TM-75 for one year from
the 14th of February 1977.
,AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Gatto, Koenitzer, Chairman Adams
Comm. Blaine, Markkula
Motion carried, 3-2
NEW BUSINESS
,
,
11. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District discussion.
Mr. Herb Grench, ¡1anager of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,
wanted to discuss 63 acres within the Regnart Canyon. He said the
District is currently negotiating with the Nellis' in regard to ,mecher
or not the City will transfer two units from this open space to the
developable property. If the Planning Commission finds chis cransfer
of development rights acceptable they must also comply with the slope/
density formula.
MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 1977 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Comm. Gatto is concerned about the public actually benefiting
from this transaction with transfer of density. He is concerned
about the mechanics of how this can be accomplished.
Mr. Grench said that in effect, they feel the District is getting
more acreage for the money. They are satisfied. They do not
want to be in the position of simply buying open space. He said
the original site is 334 acres, Unit II is 218 acres and the
Kettie Ranch is 200+ acres.
Mr. Robert Nellis, 22322 Regnart Road, said the total property has
the potential of 34 units. The property the Open Space District
is interested in would yield 14 units, leaving 20 units. They
are negotiating to transfer three of the 14 units. The total
piece is 157.5 acres. There is a P.G. & E. easement on that
long, narrow piece with two towers on it.
The Assistant City Attorney wanted to know if
to file a tentative map on this new proposal.
direct answer to this question at this time.
Mr. Nellis planned
There was no
Mr. Grench answered the Assistant City Attorney that a portion of
the Fremont Older open space was purchased by the District.
Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine to concur with
Mr. Grench that the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
purchase of 65 acres from the Nellis' is in concert with the
General Plan.
AYES:
NOES:
Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
MINUTE ORDER: Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine to
express to the City Council the Planning Commission's support
for the concept of using density transfers for the purpose of
lowering the price fór open space purposes.
AYES;
NOES;
Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Markkula, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
PC-251
Page 15
Nellis' 65
acres to MPROSD
OK w/GP
Minute Order
endorsing
density transfer
in some
instances