PC 09-27-76
CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: 252-4505
PC-237
Page 1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLfu'rnING COMMISSION HELD ON
SEPTEMBER 27. 1976 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO,
CALIFORNIA
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairman Adams with
the Salute to the Flag.
OATH OF OFFICE
The City Clerk administered the oath of office to the newly appointed
Planning Commissioner Sharon Blaine.
ROLL CALL
Comm. present:
Comm. absent:
Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams
None
Staff present:
Director of Planning and Development Sisk
Assistant Planning Director Cowan
Assistant City Attorney Kilian
Assistant to Assistant City Attorney Foster
Director of Public Works Viskovich
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 13, 1976
On page 6, paragraph 7, and page 8, paragraph 2, the speaker's name
should be Ms. O'Patti Brisco.
On page 6, last paragraph, the R3 and Rl should be reversed.
On page 12, under Report of the Planning Director, the sentence
should read, "..... to San Diego which the Commissioners would be
attending."
Comm. Koenitzer moved to approve the Minutes of September 13, 1976 as
corrected. Seconded by Comm. Gatto.
Motion carried, 4-0-1
Abs tain: Blaine
PC-2 37
Page 2
17-U-76 and
18-U-76
postponed
8-Z-76 and
8-TM-76
NOORUDIN A.
BILLAWALA
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
POSTPONEMENTS:
Item #9 - Application l7-U-76 of CONRAD L. SINCLAIR
and NUNZIO CICERO - Withdrawn
Item #6 - Application l8-U-76 of ARNOLD FLUCKIGER -
Continuance to October ll, 1976 requested
by staff.
It was so moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Gatto.
Motion carried, 5-0
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1.
Applications 8-Z-76 and 8-TM-76 of NOORUDIN A. BILLAWALA:
REZONING of 13.53 acres from RI-lO (Residential, single-
family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) and Al-43 (Agri-
cultural, residential, single-family l-acre lots) to Rl-25
(Residential, single-family, 25,000 sq. ft. per dwelling
unit; 2.20 acres from RI-IO (Residential, single-family,
10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) to Rl-50 (Residential,
single-family, 50,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit; 4.75 acres
from Al-43 (Agricultural, residential, single-family, I-acre
lots) to Rl-70 (Residential, single-family, 70,000 sq. ft.
per dwelling units); 6.44 acres from Al-43 (Agricultural,
residential, single-family, l-acre lots) to RI-IOO
(Residential, single-family, lOO,OOO sq. ft. per dwelling
unit) or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the
Planning Commission, totaling 26.92 acres; TENTATIVE MAP
(8-TM-76) to subdivide 27.l9 acres into twenty-one (21)
single-family residential lots. Said property is located
westerly of Rainbow Drive and southeasterly of Regnart Road.
Second Hearing.
The Assistant Planning Director pointed out the property as exhibited
on transparency slide. He explained the scope of the application.
Slides were shown of the property taken from different vantage points
and compared with viewline diagram and site map.
Mr. Cowan noted the property involved is designated by the Hillside
General Plan for residential uses with a land use intensity to be
determined based upon the application of the Foothill Modified Formula
for the portion of the land area containing an average slope of 10% or
less and by the Foothill Modified ~-acre formula for land area greater
than 10% in average slope.
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-237
Page 3
Staff member Cowan pointed out the project may need further study
due to fault and landslide setback zones. Staff would like additional
work on this, with a written report, before going on to Council. He
referred to an exhibited map showing these areas.
A map showing the proposed roadways, driveways and location of houses
was exhibited. The Central Fire District desired to see additional
turn around space for the lots at the end of private driveways. In
view of the need for off-street parking, staff was in agreement with
this recommendation.
Mr. Cowan referred to Hillside Policy No.6 of the general plan which
stresses the importance of minimizing ridgetop building which allowed
the houses to be silhouetted against the skyline. He pointed out,
however, that the ridgetops in the case of the subject property
represent the most stable land area for building.
Mr. Cowan referred to Midpeninsula Regional Park District
suggestion that an equestrian trail or easement through the site
onto the park preserve be considered.
Mr. Cowan answered Comm. Gatto that utilities would be built to
standard hillside requirements. The lots would be sewered. San
Jose Water Works could not service entire development which would
require some type of booster pump facility. PG&E will underground
utilities. Corom. Gatto ascertained the developer would prefer a
simultaneous grading program to obtain a cut-fill balance of dirt
on the property. Mr. Cowan explained this application approval
would be a conceptual grading plan approval.
Carom. Koenitzer asked about slides taken from De Anza Blvd. and
Stevens Creek Blvd. Mr. Cowan said there were no slides taken from
these intersections, but there waS no question but that the site
would be highly visible from them. Mr. Cowan answered Comm. Koenitzer
that septic tanks and wells could serve the extension lots being
considered for additional development.
Chairman Adams ascertained this would be the first equestrian trail.
He noted this would require easements. Mr. Cowan explained the
suggested condition was to explore possibility of trails before the
recordation of final map. With regard to liability for the trails,
Mr. Kilian answered Chairman Adams that both easement holder and
underlying fee owner would be responsible. However, the ultimate
responsibility would be with the one who had control of the easement
itself .
PC-237
Page 4
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Cowan answered Comm. Blaine that they would defer to the applicant's
engineer to decide which units would be deleted from the ridge line.
The possibility of houses being visible against the skyline was
discussed.
Mr. Bill Henry, Garcia & Henry, Civil Engineers, l7550 Monterey St.,
Morgan Hill, said their feeling about silhouetting of houses was that
concern should be for those that can be seen from Cupertino proper.
After reading staff report, they had deleted units on southerly slope
by one but did not want to delete from ridge since this is more stable
portion of property to build on.
Mr. Henry said the grades on roadways are basically between 9-16% and
easily accessible by emergency units.
The applicant is provided 300-400 feet of retaining walls along roadway
to reduce cut slopes.
They would propose to provide the access roads to pads and do the
minor grading on pad sites to use the dirt. They would provide a
definitive site plan.
Mr. Henry said the applicant had no objection to equestrian trails.
They would prefer a strip dedication and would see it going along
the property line.
With regard to two sites on Regnart Road, these could be served by
septic tanks or a sewer line could be brought down to Regnart by
easements. A pump facility is perceived for the project.
Mr. Bill Cotton, 14 Glenridge, Los Gatos, answered Comm. Blaine they
were not sure what a safe setback from a potentially active fault
would be. They tried to locate fault and characterize it. They had
a hard time locating this fault but felt sure there was one on this
site. He explained process used for this operation. The State
guidelines show a 50 ft. setback zone.
Comm. Blaine asked what the City's liability would be in allowing
buildings near this fault. Mr. Kilian said one mitigation would
be by requiring a condition whereby perspective owners would be
given a written notice of geological reports filed with the City
or given a copy of the reports. This would aid the City in defending
any suit for this regard. He would suggest some condition that would
put prospective owners on notice that a potential geological hazard
does exist.
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-237
Page 5
Mr. Henry said that on the front of tract map would be a reference
to geological soil report which is on file with the City of Cupertino.
They had no objection to taking those lots that are critical and
filing notice with the County Recorder which would automatically
show on any title report.
Mr. Henry answered Comm. Woodward that a potentially active fault
meant one that had not moved in the past 10,000 years. He described
the direction of possible land slide activity.
Comm. Woodward referred to a situation in the San Jose hillside area
in which a city street was destroyed and the residences could not be
reached. Mr. Cotton said with careful supervision of every step
along the way the potential for grading and cutting causing a land
slide could be avoided. He said a more detailed study was needed.
They then could design to correct or avoid hazards.
Mr. Henry said there are posts going 8 feet to 10 feet in the ground
which would tend to solve problem of slide on southerly side. He
also stated that all house pads will be in cut and not in fill.
Mr. Henry answered Comm. Woodward that there would be no cuts in the
slide area. They are proposing a drainage system that will be piped
along the drive and picked up in the bottom Rainbow Drive area.
It was noted one driveway waS in the land slide setback area and would
have to be eliminated and added somehow to adjacent driveway.
Chairman Adams then opened the meeting for public comments.
Ms. JoAnn Gholson, 22125 Regnart Road, Cupertino, asked if there waS
a proposal to continue Rainbow into Regnart. This would open up the
whole canyon to a loop. Mr. Cowan said there would be no more
extension of Rainbow Drive.
Ms. Gholson questioned how a house could be planned for such a steep
area. She wondered if it would endanger the creek. She referred to
fault at Candy Rock and wondered if this was the same fault.
Mr. Henry explained the proposed drainage system, pointing out that
the houses on Rainbow Drive would not be affected. Mr. Cotton said
they did not know if this was the same fault as at Candy Rock.
Mr. Steve McCarroll, 21584 La Playa Court, Cupertino, said his
concern was visual effects. It was hard for him to visualize a
development on this steep slope. Some consideration should be given
to the view of the existing residents. He would not like to see
another Candy Rock.
PC-237
Page 6
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Henry pointed out the roadway would not be seen as it was at a lower
grade in the canyon.
A resident of Regnart Road asked if there
Creek because of houses on westerly side.
Road area would remain as it stands. The
its natural state.
would be any change of Regnart
Mr. Henry said the Regnart
canyon area would be left in
Planning Director Sisk clarified the other ten acre site is not a part
of this application. The reason for including in discussion was that
it would have to have access from this site.
Mrs. Rose Cassisi, 21623 La Playa Court, Cupertino, said she owned property
on Rainbow Drive and asked about water going on it. Director of Public
Works Viskovich explained all water would be intercepted by master storm
drains so there should not be any overflow into any yards.
Mr. Billawalla answered Comm. Woodward that vegetation being proposed for
planting would conserve the hillside better than what is there now. He
also pointed out that most owners would be planting trees.
Chairman Adams referred to staff's recommendation to delete two units.
Comm. Gatto referred to question of sight line and visibility against
sky line. The prime concern was that view from valley floor would not
reflect any silhouettes. He noted it was a matter of degree in each
case.
Comm. Gatto said he appreciated the developer's wish to grade the whole site at once
but if the lots didn't sell quickly the City wou1d.be le£t with graded
hills and erosion and scarring would be experienced: He suggested
the spline roads be built and the secondary roads be put in when
development occurred. This body would not be forced now to approve
specific sites. Staff would approve each individual application.
Mr. Cowan clarified that applicant would probably build ¡he' majority of the lots
himself on pads as proposed.
Mr. Billawalla said he felt Comm. Gatto's suggestion was a good one. He
answered Chairman Adams that he hoped they would be building within l~
years.
Comm. Gatto clarified that it WaS his understanding that the roads and
grading would be basically that of this application; but the grading
and secondary roads would be built only at time of development.
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-237
Page 7
Mr. Billawalla said regarding view from De Anza Boulevard, the houses
would be on the slope. They have cooperated with staff over the last
seven months to get requirements of City geologist and staff.
Comm. Woodward said one thing that tends to bury dwelling units into
the natural surrounding is the existence of trees. Planting of more
trees by the developer needs to be encouraged. He also pointed out
that every house didn't have to go exactly on the spine of the ridge.
Connn. Blaine said she would not be happy in seeing these homes silhoue ttld
against the sky. She noted that trees sometimes are not planted because
they block the view of the homeowner.
Comm. Koenitzer agreed. He favored not putting the houses on the ridge
:H,,,e' b\:it' rathèi", "off' t<> One side. ''I:he' pcoperty' owneTS:; can still get the
~ïew tRey 4rè payìng forøut tbe houses are not as conspicuous.
Mr. Henry said the houses could be placed on one side or the other.
One reason for this location had been to 'minimize cuts and fills.
The individual grading plans for lots would be more definitive.
Comm. Woodward questioned having a patio above grade level when they
are on a higher slope anyway. Mr. Henry agreed that any home on the
hillside could be the yellow colored' plan displayed; on the board, Mr;
agreed that any home on the hillside could be yellow, which was the
single story.
,
Henry
I
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
,
I
I
I
Comm. Gatto pointed out the volume of the structure has to be considered!
with the grade also the method of conatrulttion. H-Control should limit:
their review to that degree. Building style and method of landscaping
should be left to the individual building home.
Comm. Woodward suggested that in hillsides where there is no planned
development, there should be a requirement that H-Control review
grading, architecture, etc. on a one by one basis. Chairman Adams
felt this responsibility could be left to staff with guidelines from
this body through conditions of approval.
Conditions 16 through 25 were discussed. Public Works Director
Viskovich read two conditions regarding water service to be added.
Mr. Henry agreed to the added conditions, but asked if condition 25
calling for the deletion of two dwelling units could be changed to
allow the units to be built on other locations within the site. The
consensus of the commission was that the homes could be built as long
as they were not visible from the ridge line.
Referring to written report and/or r~cording of same with County, Comm.
Woodward felt it fair that buyers of property above and below these
lots should be alerted also. Mr. Henry said this could apply to all
lots. Mr. Kilian said notice should be submitted to City Attorney
for review.
PC-2 3 7
Page 8
Public Hear-
ing closed
8-2-76
approved
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
After further discussion, Comm. Gatto moved to close Public Hearings,
seconded by Comm. Woodward.
Motion carried, 5-0
Carom. Gatto moved to recommend to the City Council approval of
Application 8-2-76 in the following manner: Lots 5 and 6 to be
designated Al-lOO, Lots 7 and 8 to be designated Al-70 and the balance
of the property to be zoned R70 as established in Exhibit A 1st Revision.
Seconded by Carom. Woodward.
AYES:
NOES:
Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
Comm. Gatto moved to recommend approval to the City Council of
Application 8-TM-76, with standard conditions 1-14 and the following:
15. The approval is granted based upon Tentative Map Exhibit A,
2nd Revision and B, 1st Revision.
16. The grading concept and building location for each lot shall
substantially reflect the grading plan labeled Exhibit B,
lst Revision except as modified to avoid geological hazard
areas and/or by H-Control.
17. In order to permit migration of wildlife and to retain the
natural open character of the hillside area, solid fencing
shall be limited to the final building envelope. Fencing
may be permitted outside of the building envelope subject
to approval by the Architectural and Site Approval Committee.
18. The grading for the public street, driveways and sites shall
be substantially as shown on Exhibit B, 1st Revision except
as modified to avoid geological hazard areas and/or by H-Control.
Architectural plans including proposed lot grading, drainage,
and building morphology shall be submitted to the Architectural
and Site Approval Committee for review prior to issuances of a
building permit for any construction on each individual lot
within the subdivision. H-Control to consider the above siting
in relationship to Hillside Policy #6 to minimize ridge line
exposure.
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-237
Page 9
19. The developer shall dedicate and improve an equestrian/hiking
trail connecting Rainbow Drive to the Midpeninsula Regional
Park District's Fremont Older Preserve. The location of and
degree of improvement shall be reviewed by the City after
consulting with the Midpeninsula Regional Park District.
Said fee dedication shall be defined and approved by the City
within a reasonable amount of time prior to recordation of the
final subdivision map.
20. A minimum of 15 feet of slope rounding shall be provided at
the top 0 f all cut banks.
21. That the applicant shall retain a registered landscape
architect to review the proposed grading and submit a plan
to replant all cut and fill slopes, preferably with indigenous
vegetation, on both public and private right of ways.
22. Adequate turn around spaces and four off-street parking
spaces shall be provided on each lot to compensate for the
lack of public street parking and provide space for emergency
equipment.
23. The applicant shall record an appropriate deed restriction and
covenant running with the land subject to the review and
approval of the City Attorney for all parcels which share
a common private drive or private roadway with one or more
other parcels as displayed on Exhibit B, lst Revision. Said
deed restriction shall provide for the necessary reciprocal
ingress/egress easements to and from the affected parcels.
Said easements shall be recorded at such time as interest in
one or more of the affected parcels is initially sold or trans
ferred to another party.
24. A reciprocal maintenance agreement to be reviewed and
approved by the City Attorney, shall be required for all
parcels which share a common private drive or private roadway
with one or more other parcels within the tract. Said
agreement shall be recorded in conj unction with recordation
of the final map.
25. The developer shall dedicate to the City all water lines and
appertenances installed to City standard and that the City
shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Works for water
services to said development.
PC-2 37
Page 10
8-TM-76
approved w/
conditions
22-TM-76
SOBRATO-BERG
PROPERTIES
MINlITES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
26. The developer to grant to the City a ten (10) foot easement for
water line purposes to be determined prior to recordation of
final map for future expansion of water system to Regnart and
Seven Springs areas.
27. Geological statement to be given to perspective buyers and/or
recorded with County pertaining to potential hazard of fault
and landslide areas.
28. Written reports from geologists, pin-pointing of fault and
slide setback areas and final grading solution to two drive-
ways to be added as addendum to report prior to submission to
City Council.
Seconded by Comm. Woodward.
AYES:
NOES:
Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, 5-0
Chairman Adams advised this would be heard by the City Council on
November 1, 1976.
Chairman Adams then announced that after a break the meeting would
continue until l2:00 midnight at which time the meeting would be
adjourned to a special meeting on Wednesday, September 29, 1976,
at 7:30 p.m.
At 10:15 p.m. a break was taken with the meeting reconvening at 10:26 p.m.
2.
Application 22-TM-76 of SOBRATO-BERG PROPERTIES: TENTATIVE MAP
to divide 53± acres into four parcels. Said property is
located easterly of and adjacent to North De Anza Boulevard
and extending southerly from the intersection of North De Anza
Boulevard and Route 280 for a distance of approximately 2500 ft.
First Hearing.
Planning Director Sisk referred to staff report and recommendations for
Application 22-TM-76. He noted this is the final step in the approval
process of this application. Mr. Sisk referred to Condition 16 which
related to retaining trees. A map was displayed showing location of
existing trees.
Mr. Sisk referred to Condition 18, noting there should be an addition of
Mariani Avenue and also provision for bike path. He noted a request
would be filed to abandon existing right of ways for Mariani Avenue and
Lucille Avenue. He suggested the Commission could recommend this abandon-
ment to City Council who would then hold a hearing on it.
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-237
Page 11
Comm. Gatto asked about public dedication joining Mariani and Merritt
Avenues. Mr. Sisk said this was still before H-Control but there
would be access through Marimi Avenue to Collins School. Comm. Gatto
said if he were the developer he would be concerned about the liability
inherent in having school children go through his property daily.
It was noted the City could take a dedication for the easement.
Comm. Koenitzer noted there might be a problem of having unused cars
collect on the Lucille and Mariani mini cul-de-sacs.
Director of Public Works advised that abandonment was recommended
with the retention of interest in all existing easements.
Comm. Blaine asked if any decision had been made on retention of trees
on parcel D. People on Larry Way were concerned that dust and dirt
would be a problem if the trees were cut down. Mr. Sisk said he did
not think H-Control had resolved this as yet.
Mr. Carl Berg, Palo Alto, referred to Condition 16. Their major
concern was large group of Pepper trees on parcel A. These are not
a very effective tree under any circumstance. They will endeavor to
keep eucalyptus trees but do not want to keep these pepper trees.
These trees would limit anything they are able to do on this whole
project.
With regard to Condition 17, Mr. Berg said they would like easement
to run to the length of parcel B. He indicated area on map. There
might be a need for a future tenant to this area.
Mr. Berg then indicated a 10 feet strip on Larry Way that is not a
part of the Mariani property. It is owned by three people. They
have offered to buy it and have received verbal acceptance of their
offer. Two of the people have been divorced and one has had a stroke.
It might be impossible to clear title on this strip. They would like
approval of tentative map subject that if they are unable to purchase
this strip they would like to remove it from the parcel. This strip
is important as to where they will build their sound wall, and could
hold up the whole development.
Planner Director Sisk noted it was part of tentative map. He suggested
it should be left on map and if the applicant was unable to resolve
this, they should come back and talk to the City again.
Mr. Berg said that the trees on parcel D would be removed. There is
a difference of 20 ft in grade so they need to move dirt to fill pads.
PC-237
Page 12
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Sobrato gave background information on this strip of property. He said
if they cannot get moving within the next 2 or 3 weeks, they will have to
wait until after the rains. They have paid double for EIR and made every
conceivable effort to buy the strip. The money will be in escrow. They
would like staff to have latitude to adjust property line.
Mr. Berg answered Comm. Gatto that home owners on Larry Way were contacted
about having an 8 or 9 foot sound wall on their property. Most were
agreeable.
Comm. Gatto noted a 10 foot corridor could create all kinds of problems.
Assistant City Attorney Kilian advised the City cannot condemn because
it is not for public purposes.
Comm. Gatto noted that if development was to be as approved, the fence
had to go on that common property line. A 10 ft. corridor should not
be created.
It was clarified that the wall had to be built before construction could
be started.
Mr. Sobrato suggested building wall on their property line. They have
done everything in their power to get this strip. He said they would
be willing to give this property to the owners on Larry Way if it was
eve r settled.
Mr. Kilian suggested the applicant talk to attorney about adverse possession.
Mr. Berg did not think there WaS much hope of getting a judgment on this.
Comm. Gatto said the alternative would be to remove wall from the use
permit condition and allow it to be built at a later date. Mr. Sisk
advised this would entail another hearing.
Comm. Gatto suggested they put up a temporary wall that would allow them to
resolve situation,' or the City to open hearings and remove the condition.
Comm. Blaine suggested building on home owners' property. Mr. Berg
questioned liability of having their wall on private property but said
they would be willing to do this if application could be approved while
this procedure was followed. He asked what happened if one or more 0 f
the owners would not agree to it.
Mr. Berg answered Chairman Adams that they had every intention of starting
the fence by the lSth of October.
Comm. Gatto said he felt the best way out of this box was to relook at the
condition requiring fence and seeing if there could be another way to
minimize sound.
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
PC-237
Page 13
Mr. Berg said the accoustical engineer said there was no other
satisfactorily controlling sound other than the wall. He then
they would be willing to put up a temporary wall and moving it
when the other situation was resolved.
way 0 f
said
if and
Mr. Kilian advised the commission they could condition the approval
that the additional parcel may be included at a later date.
Mr. Mike O'Hearn with architectural firm of Avantek, Santa Clara,
described a permanent wall that could be erected and then moved to
permanent location.
It was the consensus of the commission that they persue the temporary
wall at the 10 ft. line and reopen public hearings.
Comm. Gatto noted with regard to Condition 17, that limiting access
to east/west would not speak to their intent. He thought there should
be a reciprocal easement between parcels C and D also. Mr. Berg said
this could create possibility of problems in the future. Comm. Gatto
stressed it was a condition on use permit so should reflect on the
tentative map.
Chairman Adams opened the hearing for public comments.
Mr. Mario Rinaldi, l06lS Larry Way, Cupertino, said he would hate to
see a 10 foot strip behind his property. It would be a hazard. He
answered Comm. Koenitzer he would be interested in a gift of that
strip if that was the solution.
Comm. Gatto moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Comm. Woodward. Public Hear-
ings closed
Motion carried, 5-0
A discussion was held on the
temporary wall was erected.
unfavorable situation.
possibility of closing off corridor after
It was decided this would create an
Comm. Gatto questioned if applications required signatures of all
property owners. Mr. Sisk explained procedure. Comm. Gatto suggested
the applicant contact his attorney about the feasibility of erecting
wall based on the contract ural agreements he had received.
PC-2 37
Page 14
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Comm. Gatto moved to recommend approval of Application 22-TM-76 to the City
Council subject to the 14 standard conditions and the following:
lS. That approval is based upon Exhibit A 1st Revision of
22-TM-76.
16. That all non fruit trees with a trunk diameter of 12 inches or
greater shall be retained. Although it is desirable to retain
all trees, a request for removal of any of said trees may be
submitted and evaluated in conjunction with a more definitive
use permit plan for said parcel.
17. The applicant shall submit an appropriate legal document providing
for a reciprocal ingress and egress access easement between Parcels
B and C and Parcels C and D in order that patrons of future uses
located within Parcel B shall have access to a joint ingress and
egress driveway serving Parcel C from De Anza Boulevard. Said
easement shall be located substantially as shown on the approved
Architectural and Site Approval Committee exhibit for the
Sobrato-Berg industrial development.
18. The applicant shall provide an easement adjacent to and parallel
to De Anza Boulevard and Mariani Avenue with an adequate depth
to provide for a meandering sidewalk and bicycle path as described
on the approved Architectural and Site Approval Committee and use
permit exhibits. An easement shall additionally be provided for
a bus turn-out based upon design standards prepared by the Santa
Clara County Transit District as approved by the City.
19. The applicant shall sign a written agreement agreeing to join an
open space maintenance district when such district is formed to
provide cammon landscaping maintenance for the SO ft. landscape
setback area adjacent to De Anza Boulevard. Until such time as
said district is formed, the applicant shall be responsible for
maintaining the landscaped area in a manner acceptable to the City.
20. That permits staff to make minor modifications to the tentative
map prior to final recordation specifically to move the easterly
property line ten (10) feet to the west. Interpretation being
that original use permit which required wall on easterly line
be held in effect, that the wall be installed in such a manner
that it can be relocated subsequent to the final recordation.
22-TM-76
approved wi
conditions
Seconded by Comm. Woodward.
AYES:
NOES:
Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams
None
Motion carried, S-o