HomeMy WebLinkAboutHunter Hill 80-25 Annexation AN[�XATION HUNTER HILL 80-25
1980
good Apety Peron aawlil tswn
C*Vnq AdMinittrttlon Building
! 78 Watt Madding St►oet,�
Wunty of Santa Clara O® ��® �0� 1(9M.gifts c0 a am
♦/6�t �qMM 'r g�rsa Cow�
ca6ff®� is
203 City of Cupertino
PAWS Local Agency Formation omission
i
SM :TECP= Hunter Hill No. 80-25 `
This is to advise that documents associated with the above change of
organisation have been found to be in order and the necessary filings
have been made with the County Recorder, State Board of Equalization
and County Assessor, as required by law.
Enclosed is an endorsed copy of the Certificate of Completion v'.,ich
was recorded with the County Recorder on Nov. 19, 1980
if the above change of organization included detachment from a fire
district, ,It is raquir d by law that detachmentho�ust be effected within
one year, owever, c etion of the detachmentg'by January lot will
prevent t e property om being taxed by both,,}he City and the fire
district. ou ar herefore, encouraged t -6borplet* the detachment by
this date.
ram
After the territory bas
please complete and return the form below. iFire District%
thank you,
Paul a. Sagers
Assistant Executive Officer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local Agency Formation Oamission
9d; Hest Redding Street, Bast Wing, loth Floor
;an Jose, California 951110
• Detachmentt of f
(Annexation) `Fire District)
has been completed the of
on
date)
S gnature •
6
p
CO fl6Mg dit�i�$tGgiitO G�B,to
tooUgeY St mi6 qp8
AM
01
COW _.
a ��,� _ate
Cp faces o Ce�re��' 'ert
CEgT;� �C�,•P Xecat o�• sa'�°f the G® e .
istart i8ei �35351 a coarg
tt,e Ae etl0r� ti�or fog tt,is
. racl encY Sectiol% toe sea o$a ®rW tood ncY ariZatz°r.
seal focal sit t° maned eto an ado@te aI ��e geog9
sa Coa tl r Vag&,a 1 have fed a eoYlat coartY Zat'aor og
®f Comple fY that tfi tt►e Clag it oggari
ti c vai ant arge
oeg etl,,r% om4loarbY 9 said ch
oggsla to e i 3 �8 0`�i eg no
o r a'P'Pg Ca t
doC` ersPr Co ex AslO itY i$ Claga CO Y r is
F0-1 a � /C led in Santa ti10 n ot9aniZat�o
f t-n loca reAa a of
+the 'name o /CitY is d i$ a% tre coarg
late es o .
i
the ertige we riZat�o the oanda o. 8fl,.25 e�,s
ogga or °f ill � o rg t
charge aescgipti i�Nift I; tje foll wi
Aoe and etp. t
Q@riled oeg goceedir`� lsy ea evb�ect t0
a� s p del
ills of thi lion was os
,bet Of oggari%a
charge ions: oneZat
ahi
:
and co''d�t change �f f a t Q
4
the 'n an
ogdeging wit
tat�'on
of th�exel`� lbeo12:o1 a,m. !,/,
tlor �oVem i.or to "" ffice
date of ado ogga",- Sxecv ntY n CommisSior
'Tt'e ergs of seista lags Co ofi'at,0
6 Cr
� C
tri 1� � 1g�� ��� A9encY
�yov e x
Dated
RESOLUTION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OFDESIGNATEDANTAER HPLL ®O SANG TERP.ITORY
DESIGNATED AS
TO THE CITY, 3 OF WPIWINO
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 35150(f) OF
THE MUNICIPAL ORGANI?K►TX®N ACT OF I977
WHEREAS, the Board of Superviso�,s of the County of Santa
Clara has held a duly noticed public hearing pursuant to the
Municipal Organization Act of 1977 on the proposed annexation
of territory designated as HUNTER HILL 80-25
to the City/2-:► of CUPERTINO
and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors is authorized by the
Santa Clara County Local Agency Formation Commission to order
annexation of this territory without an election pursuant to
Government Code Section 3515u (f) of the Municipal Organization
Act of 1977 :
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Santa Clara does hereby resolve, determine and order as follows :
1 . The territory described in Exhibit A is annexed to the
City/%"Pm of Cupertino A map of this territory
marked Exhibit B, is attached.
Npt} 2 s t980
2 . The annexation is effective on
3 . The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is directed to
make the filings neceaAary to complete the annexation pursuant
to Government Code Section 35350.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County
of Santa Clara, State of California, on ) �� 1 ' i98Q
by the following vote:
AYF : Supervisors McCORQUOUALE, STEItlr'i;G, L;i-li J'1,
NOES: Supervisors 7;1F
ABSENT: Supervisors
Chairperson, Board of Supervisors
ATTEST: D0WUM M. RAINS , Clerk
., Board of Supervisors
City of Cupertino
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
.June 2, 1980
As provided by the Environmental Pssessment Procedure, adopted by the City
Council of the City of Cupertino on March 27, 1973, as amended, the follow-
ing described project was granted a Negative Declaration by the City Council
of the City of Cupertino on June 2, 1980.
Pro'e� ct Description and Location
4 Application 21-EA-80 Applicant: C{ty of Cupertino (Hunter Hill/Carolyn Gardens
Subdivision)
o Location: Southwest quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard
and Foothill Boulevard northerly of Stevens
Creek Boulevard between California Oak Way
and Foothill Boulevard.
Discretionary Action Request: Prezouing approximately
27.8t acres from Santa Clara County. R1-10 (one family
residence, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone plus
.4t acres from Santa Clara County R2 (two family
residence - duplex) to City of Cupertino R1-10
(Residential, Single-family, 10,000 sq. ft . minimum
lot size) zone and .3t acres from. Santa Clara County
CN (Neighborhood Commercial) to City o[ Cupertino CG
(General Commercial) zone and annexation of said property
into the City of Cupertino.
Findings of Decisionmaking Body
The City Council granted a Negative Dec16 - ion since the project is consistent
with the General Plan and has no signific?uc environmental impacts.
James H. Sisk
Planning Director
1'his is to certify that the attached Negative Declaration was filed in the office
of the City Clerk of the City of Cupertino ou
ate
A(
City Cleric
F
' , ,111 No
SUMMARY
CA/-
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER— AGENDA DATE June 2. 1980
SUBJECT AND ISSUE - Applications 13-Z-80 (Creston Subdivision) ; 14-Z-80 (Homestead
Villa Subdivision) ; and 15-Z-80 (Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Kill Sub-
division) - City of Cupertino
The Planning Commission is recommending prezoning approval for three uninccrpora.ted
County islands (see attached exhibits) , commonly known as the Creston Subdivision
located in the southeas,: quadrant of Highway 280 and Foothill Boulevard; the Homestead
Villa Subdivision located in the southwest quadrant of Highway 85 and Homestead Road;
and the Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Hill Subdivisions located in the southwest quadrant of
Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard.
All of the proposed prezonings would be fro- `Tanta Clara County R1-10 to City of Cupertino
Pre- RI-10, with the exception of several lots in the Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Hill area.
The lots are denoted on the prezoning plan and designated presently under the County
zoning for R2 (in the case of two lots on the northeast corner of California Oak Way
and Stevens Creek Boulevard). The existing Bateh Brothers Liquor Store, located on
the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard, is zoned Santa Clara
County CN (Neighborhood Commercial). The prezoning actions propose to rezone the
"R2" lots to P1-10, thus rendering; them non-conforming upon future annexation, and the
CN lot to CG which will be consistent with the present use. The non-conforming status
for the two "duplex" lots would require compliance upon rebuilding of the existing
structures.
Many cf the lots in the various subdivisions are slightly less than 10,000 sq. ft. ;
however, they would remain buildable under the City of Cupertino R1 zoning district.
The setbacks for the City of Cupertino have been shown to be equal to or for the most
part slightly less stringent than County setback requirements. Hence, it is not
anticipated that there will be major problems with non-conforming status due to non-
compliance with City setback restr: -tions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration and approval
of the above-referenced applications with no special conditions. The resolutions are
attached.
Enclosures:
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 2073, 2074 and 2075
Staff Report of May 6, 1980
Creston Homeowners Association Letter dated May 11, 1980
Carole Coito Letter dated 'May 7, 1980
Richard A. Paulsen, Jr. Letter dated May 8, 1980
Central Fire Protection District Letter dated May 7, 1980 (13-Z-80)
Cupertino Sanitary District Letter dated May 6, 1980
Central Fire Protection District Letter dated May 8, 1980 (14-Z-80)
Santa Clara Valley Water District Letter dated May 8, 1980 (15-Z-80
Recommendations of Environmental Review Committee
Environmental Assessment Worksheets
Minutes of Environmental Review Committee
Exhibit A of Applications 13-Z-80 , 14-Z-80 and 15-Z-80
13-Z-80
RESOLUTION NO. 2073
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING :,?PROVAL TO ?REZONE APPROXI"LATELY 55
GROSS ACRES FROM SANTA CLARA COUNTY RI-10 TO CITY
OF CUPERTIFO R1-10.
APPLICANT: City of Cupertino (Creston Subdivision)
ADDRESS: 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
SUBMITTED: March 26, 1980
LOCATION: Southeast quadrant of the intersection of Highway 280 and Foothill
Boulevard.
CONDITIONS:
None
---------------------------------------------------•------------------------------
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of May, 1980, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Adams, Blaine, Claudy , Johnson, Chairman Koenitzer
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVED:
/s/ R. D. Koenitzer
R. D. Koenitzer; Chairman
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
4t'w'
" ,
Robert Cowan
Assistant Planning Director
• City of Cupertino
California
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMEND-
ING THE GRANTING. OF A ZONE CHANGE
WHEREAS the attached application has been submitted to the City of
Cupertino requesting a change of zone in the zoning regulations of the
City, as stated on Page 2; and
WHEREAS the Planning Commission has held at least one public hearing
in regard to the application on the date as noted on said application;
and
WHEREAS the Planning Commission has duly considered and heard all
evidence submitted in regard to said application; and
WHEREAS the necessary public notices have been given as required by
the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cupertino;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the Planning Commission finds that the proposed zone change:
a) Encourages the most appropriate use of land,
b) Conserves and stabilizes the value of property,
c) Provides for adequate open spaces for light and air,
%) Permits adequate control of fires,
e) Promotes the health, safety and public welfare,
f) Provides for the orderly development of the City,
g) Is advantageous to the property and i,aprovements in the zoning
district and neighborhood in which the property is located.
That said Planning Commission, therefore, reports favorably to the City.
Council in the matter of granting said zone change.
-1-
14-Z-8.0
RES(".UTION NO. 2074
OF THE. PLANNING COr'IISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECONI*IENDING APPROVAL TO PREZONE APPROKI*1ATELY 29 t
GROSS ACRES FROM SANTA CLARA COUNTY RL-10 TO CITY
OF CUPERTINO R1-10.
APPLICANT: City of Cupertino 1;Barranca Drive Subdivision)
ADDRESS: 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014
SUBMITTED: April 1, 1980
LOCATION: Southwest quadrant of Homestead Road and Highway 85
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONDITIONS:
None
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of May, 1980, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the
fallowing roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Adams , Blaine, Claudy, Johnson, Chairman Koenitzer
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVED:
/s( R. D. Koenitzer
R. D. Koenitzer, Chairman
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Robert Cowan
Assistant Planning Director
i
-2- a"���
15-Z-80
• P
RESOLUTION NO. 2075
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO PREZONE APPROXIMATELY 28 z
ACRES FROM SANTA CLARA COUNTY R1-10 AND APPROXIMATELY
.4± ACRES FROM SANTA CLARA COUNTY R2 TO CITY OF
CUPERTINO R1-10; AND APPROXIMATELY .3± ACRES FROM
SANTA CLARA COUNRY CN (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) TO
CITY OF CUPERTINO CG (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) • ,
APPLICANT: City of Cupertino (Hunter Hill/Carolyn Gardens)
ADDRESS: 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
SUBMITTED: April 2, 1980
LOCATION: Southwest quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard
and northerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard between California Oak
Way and Foothill Boulevard.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONDITIONS:
None
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSED ARID ADOPTED this 12th day of May, 1980, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Adams, Blaine, Claudy, Johnsen, Chairman Koenitzer
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVED:
/s/ R. D. Koenitzer
R. D. Koenit: er, Chairman
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Robert Cowan
Assistant Planning Director
-2-• �/,'ate-'-�- .sue
Cif Of Cuprrti"®
City of Cupertino 10300 Torre: Avenue Cupertino, Colifornio 95014 (408) 252.4505
To: The Honorable. Chairman and Date: 'jay 6, 1980
Members of the Planning Commission
From: Steve Piasecki, Associate Planner
Subject: Prezoning Applications 13---80 (Creston Subdivision) ; 14-Z-80 (Barranca Drive
Sube iv-sion) ; and 15-Z-80 (Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Hill Subdivision) = City of
Cupertino.
Scone
Applications 13-Z-80, 14-Z-80 and 15-Z-80
were initiated by the City of Cupertino
to prezone unincorporated areas from County
zones to City of Cupertino zoning districts.
These prezoning actions are in anticipation
of efforts to annex islands of less than
100 acres. Annexation of unincorporated
islands is supported by Policy No. 1 of the
Implementation Section of the General Plan
which reads "The City should continue to
actively pursue, under the new MORsA legis-
lation, incorporation of 'islands' of less
than 100 acres."
More specifically, the applications are
described as follows:
13-Z-80 (Creston Subdivision)
Application 13-7-80 proposes to prezone
approximately 55 gross acres from Santa
Clara County R1-10 to City of Cupertino R1-10.
The subject property is located in the south-
east quadrant of the intersection of Highway
280 and Foothill Boulevard.
14-Z-80 (Barranca Drive Subdivision)
Application 14-Z-80 proposes to prezone approximately 29± gross acres from Santa Clara
County R1-10 to City of Cupertino R1-10. The subject property is generally located
in the southwest quadrant of Homestead Road and Highway 85.
15-Z-80 (Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Hill Subdivisions)
Application 15-Z-80 proposes to prezone approximately 28± acres from Santa Clara County
R1-10 and approximately .4- acre from Santa Clara County R2 to City pf Cupertino R1-10;
and to prezone approximately .3± acre from Santa Clara County CN (Neighborhood Commercial)
to City of Cupertino CG (General Commercial.) . The subject property is located in the
southwest quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard and northerly of
Stevens Creek Boulevard between California Oak Way and r,)othill Boulevard.
Prezoning Applications 13-Z-80 (Creston Subdivision) ; 14-Z-80 (Barranca Drive
'Subdivision) ; and 15-Z-80 (Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Hill Subdivision) - City of
Cupertino. - May 6, 1980
Lot Size
Almost all of the lozs involved in the aforementioned applications are proposed
to be prezoned RI-10. While many of the lots do not equal 10,000 sq. ft. , they
would still remain buildable. The R1 zoning ordinance contains a clause which
recognizes that a lot created by the County prior to annexation to the City
may be used as a building site even when it is of less area than required by
the zoning district.
Setbacks/Non-conforming Structures
Structures or portions of structures which do net meet the setback restrictions
would be considered non-conforming with Cupertino ordinances upon annexation,
and, if legal, could remain until a substantial modification or rebuilding of the
structure was requested. If any structure is illegal (i.e. constructed without
permits) it will remain illegal in the City of Cupertino. The setback provisions
between the City and County are not significantly different, hence it can be assumed
that moss: structures legally constructed in the County would remain legal in the
City. The County and City setbacks are st±mmerized below:-
Csunt City
Front: 25' 20'
Side: 10, S' single-story
10' two-story
Rear: 25' or 20% lot 20' single-story
depth, whichever ( 10')if rear yard equals
is lesser. 20 x lot width
25' two-story
Land Use
The area referred to as Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Hill ia_ludes several properties
which are not zoned R1-10 in the County. Two parcels of land located in the north-
east corner of California Oak Way and Stevens Creek Boulevard are presently zoned
County R2 and at least one of the lots appears to accommodate two units. The staff
is recommending that these parcels be rezoned R1-10. Upon annexation, the R1-10 zone will
render the present uses noa-conforming and will require compliance at such time
in the future as the structures substantially remodel or rebuild. A designation to
a higher zoning district, in the staff's opinion, would be inconsistent with the
City of Cupertino Genera? Plan and inconsistent with the character of the surround-
ing area.
Two parcels of land Located in the southwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and
Foothill Boulevard are presently zoned CN (Neighborhood Commercial) in the County.
This application would prezone these properties to CG (General Commercial). This
action would not alter the present status of the structure or uses on the property.
Prezoning Applications 13-Z-80 (Creston Subdivision) ; 14-Z-80 (Barranca Drive
Subdivision) ; and 15-Z-80 (Carolyn Gardens/Hunter Hill Subdivision) - City of
Cupertino. Mav 6, 1980
Recommendation
The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration.
The staff recommends approval of the above-referenced applications with no special
conditions. The approval resolutions are attached.
Enclosures:
Recommended Resolutions
Environmental Assessment Worksheets
Recommendation of Environmental Review Committee
Minutes of Environmental Review Committee
Exhibit A of Applications 13-Z-80, 14-Z-80 and 15-Z-80
Approved for Submittal
H. Sisk
armes
lanning Director
v s�_.j ' -ram.�► �.,�1 Y b
1 U31 j � i�: 4 ' kL4
Norio
a` ~
u `'� • $ LAAN i
xbvd
!, llr:1'���..�w
�
t w I' a °� $to AVASO" .
I% i ..rs. i•pT� _ ,.i
-AWVl Is
dp9l;� 14Ms�p ppY c
� r OWl
'1
v
s N1�
Ilk
do
�. ;•,: -i � �i��s 't� of � e '� � �, .. ,,�„� .
_i i
J � 4
OP
41
to
lb
t
e L � ♦ � a .
s,
�► rpA� b-
�
�t •CA'
{ f1a 9fN/
11601
C1l�� � •� 1 efY
i 14
,�
tpy f, tokot q
\ r
OF
• - ram. a s`
00-1
`Mama Co f a�
jqA
\} . � � • Qoft
...A
6
s:
O • �
• Oat O � w�/�/1 �\ ' _ ��l ( 1 ,:
Revd, P'c.
tv'o ,d t nn,, Q.Mt Cite •idol
�-� STf�Ve st�
ELEMENTARY; Eti
! •R oh;Ad. CNOi Gt l O�
C r
pokmot
• -06
' /1. Q09 e�lj�1
6` l { N� .wiN
_ s 4
suesTAnjo—
ea: _ S
f '�'•i- ! i r •_j QC�r� tL
I nLlNrfyoos8. _ - +�.. psthn• ',� �. t Rai t Cn
'
u v a So.
S.� 3 .
s
` 0• sae Oos- :G •i t [ + 1pa
i
f R 17765 O
*90M! Rd, a s O g,�,,C,
-
{ aft W"
ILa
Sows C f°• .. > , q = v t t E
a it• V• t
' t. • .i J R Ott
tati 4! T7
• r Ln., i murua vtS1A
1 ELEMENTARY • . • ,. of
samoo
+ y
.• ' PARK
t � • f v ¢ g
r► a ,o a Voss ` Ave ( .n, 1
� � •..� E v �O�1tn - ` � 11
t t a+t`
Ass � • a t •_� � � �� ;
4 r o sT 1 910
1\
s i4�• � +
S•ntp Poi
1
t � • t f
v
___I
t f
•tt io � � J536 ?
�,.• t l ` wys ' McC_ELLA• k.,45"
�_ fAf PARR
• �J a �` S v s ` ! r E`�PP\ • t.
A'C G�
s
pr
euir" loo4owweAte 44" � 4e•jgf
490ge•
REPRESENTING OVER 200 HOME OWNERS IN CRESTON. RIVERCREST, AND PRINGI-EWOOD SUBDIVISIONS
PRKSIO fT Nicholas Siabo x! �, et(ceroT Frank Deppong
"TANNING CON}�,�. fi��s��+
sa"rrnar Carol Andrews t'ai��tt)R
Dear Residents
1,mt1Y ly8(� May, 119 1980
The Association will hmld its annual meeting on TUESDAY, MAY 20 at 7:30 P.M. at
Stevens Creek. School. Because annexation is likely to be the dominant issue, and because
I am not affected by this matter, I feel that I should not seek reelection. I have
asked Frank Deppong to act as the nominating commissioner. Please submit nominations
for all officers him. He can be reached at 739-4876. To be able to vote you must be
a dues-paying member of the Association. Dues ($2 per member) will be collected at the
meeting.
'MXATION.' The principal concern of the residents is forcible annexation into Cupertino.
�� clarify this matter I have contacted three of the Council members: Mayor O'Keefe,
Barbara Rogers and John Gatto. All three have stated that they will not vote for
annexation against the will of the residents.
The real impetus for annexation comes feom -he State and-the County. The General
Plan of the County states that the County does not; want to be responsible for urban areas
and is not prepared to support these urban unincorporated areas with services. . Since the
crux of the problem is really the County policy, I have invited Mrs. Gerry Steinberg,
Supervisor of the Fifth District of Santa Clara County, to address our Association at its
meeting on the 20th. The meeting will start at 7:30 P.M. with Mrs. Steinberg's explanation
of the County's Annexation Policy. The election of officers and other Association matters
will follow directly after the discussion with Mrs. Steinberg.
Although I am not affected by the annexation issue, I strongly feel (as a result of
my experience with both the City and the County governments for the past five years) that
the residents would be much better off if the area is incorporated into a city--either
Cupertino or Los Altos (the latter would require a LAFCO boundary change). The re"on
.or this is that city government is far more responsive than the County government.
CuperLino, for example, there is one council member for each 8000 residents, whereas
the County Fifth c =aer-lzasial district has 250,000 residents. More important, however,
we as residents cat vote for only one member of the Board of Supervisors ,n.+ k re no voice
at all in the other four seats on the Board. In contrast all five seats on the City Council
are voted on directly by the 40,000 residents. There is a great difference not only in
the governing boards of these two governments, but also in the bureau;:racies of the County
and the City. The one administers an area of a peralation of 1.2 millions while the other
serves only 40.000. It is therefore not Surprising that during the past five years I
received excellent cooperation from the City, while I '-zve batted virtually zero with the
County. The fact is that while the City is ruled by the residents, the County power
structure consigts of large businesses, unions, and other special interest groups. A small
community like ours is disenfranchised in the County. I therefore urge you to explore
annexation to a city.
I will now report on some other issues that may also come up at the meeting.
TRUCK NOISE/KAISER PROBLEM. Jackie Hall and I, together with other representatives, were
appointed by the County Board of Supervisors to a committee to make recommendations for
the solution to this problem. The committee made a number of recomczendations, such as the
banning of night-time truck traffic and the use of rail for shipment of all cement. (This
would have resulted in only one additional train every ten days.) The committee's
recommendations were opposed by Raiser, 'the building trade unions, the trucking industry,
•and-the Teamsters Union. As a result of this opposition the Board of Supervisors did not
even hold a public hearing--despite the recommendation of its own committee. The then
chairman of the Board, Rod Diridon, ignored the request of the committee and of the
Cupertino City Council to hold a hearing in our area.
The whole issue is being allowed to die. The only possible improvement may be a
sound wall to be Installed along certain portions of Foothill. Even this will be of
dubious value, because the wall will be only 8 feet high, which is lower than the top of
the exhaust stacks on the trucks. The State Highway Department called such a wall useless.
We the residents and the City of Cupertino could not match the political power of Kaiser
and that of the unions. Certainly financially we were outclassed. The coalition consisting
of the building trade unions, Raiser, and Raiser's attorneys contributed over $11,000 to
Rod Diridon's recent senatorial election campaign. It is my understanding that even larger
contributions are being made to his June election.
TRAFFIC. I have received many complaints about speeding on Creston. I have called the
Highway Patrol several times and on occasion patrol cars were dispatched. I was told by
the duty officer that we cannot count on an improvement in traffic coverage for our area.
By state law the Highway Patrol is charged with traffic enforcement in unincorporated
areas, but the Patrol decided recently to concentrate its limited resources on freeways
and State highways. This will mean even gorse coverage of our area. The Patrol is also
handicapped by the fact that State law prevents it from using radar.
In the Cupertiao portion of Creston. tha Sheriff has issued a number of citations, j
with the use o': radar. Residents have also called Air. Ross Smith, the code enforcement
officer for Cupertino. If given the license number, he will write the registered owner
of the vehicle a letter about the incident. Such letters are helpful, especially in
curbing speeding by teenagers.
STEVENS CREEK FLOOD PLAIN. Several years ago the Federal Government listed many of the
houses on Creston as flood-prone. This declaration required new owners, as a condition
of the loan, to purchase flood insurance. The Association at that time hired a noted
hydrologist to examine the situation. Our consultant found that the calculations were
based on some rather pessimistic assumptions. We requested the City of Cupertino to appeal
the Federal Insurance Administration's decision on two grounds; 1) the predicted flow rate
under flood conditions was excessive, and 2) in many cases the calculated water level would
reach the lot, but would be much lower than the floor elevation of the house. Insurance
for these properties would be a waste of money. The City Council voted to file as anner1.
The first issue has been resolved. Engineers for the Government significantly lowered
the expected flood. flow. The second point is still under appeal. The City of Cuperttir• 11
has measured the floor elevation of all houses, including those in the County. This dacd t
has been submitted to the FIA, It' 1s -nt clear whether the City's appeal also applies
to the County portion of Creston.
. n
Nick Szabo
732-2341
PHILIP C. BARNEY, JR.
ATTORNEY AT LAW
STANFORD FINANCIAL SQUARE
a600 EL CAMINO REAL
PALO ALTO.CALIFORNIA 94306
(.Is>aae-ua
May 27 , 1980
I
City Clerk LAN �
City of Cupertino ui1�11iy� �, til;`;�SQ��j�1.�
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Attention: Dorothy Cornelius
Re: Creston County Pocket
Dear Ms. Cornelius:
It is my understanding from my telephone conversation
with you on Tuesday that the Cupertino City Council in their
next meeting, June 2, will not in any way be discussing the
possibility of annexation of the Creston county pocket. I
further understand that you will notify me of riy such annexa-
tion items which affe^t Creston as they might arise in the
future.
Many thanks for your kindnesses in this matter.
'PHILIP
your n
J 1
C. ARNEY, JR.
:PCBj r/Jsb
CC: Mr. Jerry Humpal
PLANNING COMMISSIOIN
10606 Creston Drive
Los Altos, CA 94022
May 7, 1980
Mr. Dan O'Keefe
Mayor of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Mr. O'Keefe:
As a resident and homeowner of a house on Creston Drive, Los Altos, I was
unable to attend your meetinyt in April concerning the annexation of our
area to the City of Cupertino.
I do not support annexation for several reasons. When we purchased our home
in 1977, we were given title to a home with a Los Altos address in an un-
incorporated rural area. As a taxpayer, we do not feel that the City of
Cupertino has a right to tell us that we must now change our address and live
in Cupertino. If we had wanted to live in Cupertino, we would have purchased
a house $n Cupertino. Secondly, the article in the Cupertino paper says we
can remaiA rural and do not have to have streetlights and sidewalks if we
don't want them. Well I don't want them and I also do not care to pay an
additional .041 per 100 assessed valuation for services I don't want, don't
need: and the City of Cupertino so gracefully agrees not to provide. It's a
ll great deal for the City of Cupertino.
1` Yes I am a snob and do love my Los Altos address and being a banker, I also
love my Lee Alres Zip Code, as it does a lot for my credit rating. As a
banka,, I cau ;1Iao tell you it also does not hurt the resale value of my
residence to have a Los Altos address. If you took the time to visit local
realtors and brokers in the area, the resale factor could easily be verified.
My husband aid I plan on attending the next meeting and promise to defend our
right to choose the city we wish to live in. We are prepared to support our
beliefs with m-iney for legal assistance if necessary and will work with other
homeowners in the area to defeat this attempted dictatorship by the City of
Cupertino-
I hope as an elected public official you will respond to the strong sentiments
against this annexation by the people who will be affected. The community of
Creston Drive has expressed an overwhelming desire to remain Los Altos.
e
J•
• A
• Q
Mr. Dan O'Keefe Page 2
MLyor of Cupertino
(continued)
As Mayor of Cupertino, T ask you to respond to the wishes, of the people
most affect,ad by this annexation.
We say b. x � annexation to the City of Cupertino.
Sincerely,
tt► ;� c ,,
Carole Coito
cc: James H. Sisk
Director of Planning
0
MAY
1n5?5 f7- +on --rive
ti, ni C,7..nrt,iC(,
"��ar �•S-e �iglr�
^'S�; •- 1.�+,ate.. :3 1.1 pX.,...nq.- L„ir ^--tr arc- , ^1ti on io t i .._
,.n yin..� ,�; i;�� ..1".)1 i n ^ic^^i n,J t'1"`l.t "`'". 1 'Q ".'.SJi.. ".-,'...-i r•,.
--nqr� rya�-,•,^ c•1r }n? ^rn^ncnr7 nrpY-;s _r„� a� }..tio -1, nc.
�'�r -,p�• .n--�c-� •;� •gal ..�: _,..,+ �-.,-}, ,;n _ _ ,,.-., -->
nP lnr -.l 0 =. -7^.i-`-• ;J:,�.� .•c aL' _ a'^ G -,inli .tom
�_a'.f rn,.r .,ham :il• ii _. +F•-,t;
s
-Cupertino planning Department N?R't
From CENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Ted Ga Fir Inspector _ ' - 3071 DRIFTWOOD DRIVE
Suo ect ` SAN JOSE. CA 95128
113 4-9Q " FOOTHILL BLVG (Creston Subd.
�. )SERVICE 7f"��"� <lNCE 1941 Jt'N 31R 4c l0
This will acknowledge receipt of the subject application by this office. A subse-
quent review of the infornation submitted revealed that satisfactory compliance can
be accomplished to the applicable codes and ordinances.
Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this application.
TG:jg
Dated 07 May 1980 Signe ��`c'�
G0701 Patersons
CUPERTINO SANITARY DISTRICT
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
DISTRICT MANAOER-CM01NEEi1 20063 9TEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BOARD OF DIRECTORS
JOHN E. FLEMING OF CUPERTINO.CA 95014 CURTIS B. HARRISON. Prat&
MARK THOMAS m CO. INC. (40111) 259-7071 DR.JOB.F. BROWN. StcY.
s ROY M. RUSHTON
DISTRICT COUNSEL MAURICE F. LA BRIE
PHILIP D. ASSAF OF RIC14ARD A. FELLOW.
WILSON. MORTON.A9SAF& '
McELLIGOTT
May 6 , 1980
File: CuSD - MOP
Planning Department
(Cupertino)
Department of Planning A, j ' : l
and Development
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: Applications No. 13-Z-30 ,
14-Z-90 and 15-Z-80 ,
City of Cupertino
Gentlemen:
The Cupertino Sanitary District has existing sanitary sewer
facilities to serve all of the parcels included in subject
applications. All of the properties in the three (3) areas
are presently within the boundaries of the Cupertino Sanitary
District.
Yours very truly,
MARK THOMAS & CO. INC.
J District Manager--"Engineer
by William E. McBee
WEMc:dh
SUPPLYING SANITARY SEWERAGE SERVICES FOR:
CITY OF CUPERTINO. PORTIONS OF THE CITIES OF SARATOOA.SUNNYVALE AND LOS ALTOS
AND SURROUNDING UNINCORPORATEO ARf*A /
a
1
To
Cupertino Planning DepartmentFrom
Ted Gaub, Fire Inspector " CENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
3071 DRIFTWOOD DRIVE
Su jest SAN .JOSE, CA 95128
14-Z-80 * BARRANCA DRIVE (Subdiv,) ��Rvicr:' •r.r „3, 40e37941,10
This will acknowledge receipt of the subject application by this office. A subse-
quent review of the information submitted revealed that satisfactory compliance can
be accomplished to the applicable codes and ordinances.
Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this application,
TG:jg
Dat 08 May 1980 SigneddL= —=` �f �
G370t Patersons
5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY
• • • a o • cpN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95118
TELEPHONE (408) 265.2600
!1�
May 8, 1980
Mr. James H. Sisk
Planning Director
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
Dear Mr. Sisk:
Reference is made to the prezoning map for
Hunter Hill/Carolyn Gardens File 14-Z- 0 ,sent
with your transmittal of April 25, 1980.
The site would not be subjected to flooding from a District facility
in the event of a to flood.
Proposed land use change would not directly affect any District facility.
In accordance with District Ordinance 75-6, the owner should show any
existing well(s) on the plans and inform us regarding their proposed use.
Please contact Mr. Zozaya at 299-2454 for information about well permits.
Since� t-ly yours,
Euge-,.e . Sullivan
Supervisor, Permits Section
Design Coordination Division
cc: Mr. Bert Viskovich
Director of Public Works
City of Cupertino
AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
EIMI8OMjM= DOLM=S - City of Cupertino EAP:170- 17-EA-80
Appl. No. 13-z-80
Date 3126180
ENVIROMENTAL ASSESSMENT a7OPMEF T
The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, requires public agencies to
evaluate public and private projects to detexine their potential impact on the environment.
This worksheet is intended to provide guidance for both you, the applicant, and City officials
in assessing a proposed project to dete=dme whether it may or may not have a significant
impact on the environment.
If, based upon the information provided below, the City makes a determination that your
project may have a significant impact on the environment, you will be required to prepare
as Environmental Impact Report as provided by State law and the City of Cupertino's
Environmental Assessment requirements.
Detailed information regarding the environmental assessment procedure is available from
the Director of Planning and '.Development.
game of Project
Location Creston Area (Refer to attached map)
Applicant City of runertino
Address of Applicant 1Q'100 Torre A3ze3mig. ru P� rtino- rA 95n14 Phone 252-65n5
Zoning at Project Location Santa Clara County R1-10
Fee Paid ($25.00)
General Description of Project
An application to consider prezoning approximately 150 lots comprised of approximately
55 acres from Santa Clara County R1-10 to City of Cupertino R1-10.
Specific Details of the Project (This section not applicable)
1. Size of Site
2. Intensity of Development
(a) Zf residential
(1) Number of units per gross acre
(2) Dwelling unit type Rental Ownership
(3) N=ber of bedrooms per unit type
-1- •
ASSESSZMrr WOK.SHM (continued)
(4) Percentage in area of building coverage
Percentage iz area of recreations` open space
(5) Parkins required Parking proposed
(o) Expected sale price or rental price of units or buildings
.(b) If commercial, industrial or institutional
(1) Building square footage
(2) Percentage of building coverage of site
(3) Estimate of maximum number of employees
(4) Parking required Parking proposed
uestions related to potential Impact of project
ERC
Yes No Comments
A. Primary General Plan considerations
(1) Zs the project in violation of the City of
Cupertino's adopted General Plan? X
(2) Will the project burden public utilities
and services? X
(3) Is the project side outside of the Urban Service
Area of the City as defined by Santa Clara County
Local Agency Formation Commission? X
a. Social/Cultural Impacts
(1) Wi11 the proposed project result in the
displacement of people? .�
(2; Will the project alter the employment
base of the Community?
(3) Will the project alter the housing
needs of the community? X
(4) Does the proposed project affect a
historical or archaelogical site? X
(5) Will the proposed project eliminate an
existing recreational use at the project
site? X
2_ ��
ASSESM= WOPM (continued)
EBC
Yes No CoUeats
(6) Does the proposed project decrease public
access to any public body of water or
recreational area? g
C. Physical Impact
(1) ,Does the project area serve as a habitat,
food source, nesting place, source of water,
etc. for rural or endangered wildlife or
fish species?
(2) Are there any rare or endangered species
in tite area? X
(3) Does the project result in significant
erosion? X
(4) Is the proposed project in a recognized
flood plain? X
(5) Is the proposed project within 100 feet of a _
known fault trace? X
(6) Is the proposed project in a location where
average ground slope is 30% or steeper? %
(7) Will the completed project cause onsite
generation of sound energy levels at the
property line to exeed ambient level in the
immediate vicinity? X
(8) If a residential project, will future residents
be subjected to excessive noise and air
pollution levels? X
(9) Will the project involve the approved use,
storage, or disposal of hazardous materials? X
(10) Does the project significantly change the
quality of air, water, or other natural
rebources of the-City? X
(11) Does the project significantly affect the
potential use extraction or conservation of
a scarce natural resource? X
If any of the answers to the foregoing questions is "yes" and it is still believed that
the proposed project will not significantly effect the physical and social/cultural
envirorent of the community, indicate the reasons below or on a separate sheet.
ASSESSMM WOBXSE= (continued)
1 -
I certify that the -s'Lave answeLs are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief, and I understand that subsequent action to rescind any pe=it based
upor, this questionnaire may be possible if evidence is; uncovered to the contrary.
4, atur
e of Applicant
-4- �� -
.MMM0KM"= DOLM=S - City of Cupertino EAP-2-73
" ZA No. 19-EA-80
. APPl. %1/8II'��
Date
ENMONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKS=
The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, requires public agencies to
evaluate public and private projects to determine their potential impact on the environment.
This worksheet is intended to provide guidance for both you, the applicant, and City officials
in assessing a proposed project to determine whether it may or may not have a significant
impact on the environment.
If, based upon the information provided below, the City makes a determination that your
project may have a significant impact on the environment, yoi will be required to prepare
an Environmental Impact Report as provided by State law and the City of Cupertino's
Environmental Assessment requirements.
Detailed information regarding the environmental assessment procedure is available from
the Director of Planning and Development.
Zane of Project Barranca Drive Prezone
Location Southwest quadrant of Homestead Road and Highway 85
Applicant City of Cupertino
Address of Applicant 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 Phone 252-4505
Zoning at Project Location Santa Clara County R1-10
Pee Paid ($25.00)
General Description of Project
Prezone 88± unincorporated parcels from Santa Clara County R1-10 to City of Cupertino
R1-10.
Specific Details of the Project
1. Size of Site 29± acres
2. Intensity of Development
(a) If residential
(1) Number of units per gross acre
(2) Dwelling unit type Rental Ownership
(3) Number of bedrooms per unit type
ASSESSHM WCRKSMM (continued)
(4) Percentage in area of building coverage
Percentage in area of recreational open space
(5) Parking required Parking proposed
(6) Expected sale price or rental price of units or buildings
.(b) If commercial, industrial or institutional
(1) Building square footage
(2) Percentage of building coverage of site
(3) Estimate of maximum number of employees
(4) Parking required Parking proposed
,uestions related to potential impact of project
ERC
Yes No Comments
A. Primary General Plan considerations
(1) Is the project in violation of the City of
Cupertino`s adopted General Plan? X
(2) Will the project burden public utilities
and services? X
(3) Is the project side outside of the Urban Service
Area of the City as defined by Santa Clara County
Local Agency Formation Commission? X
s. Social/Cultural Impacts
(1) Will the proposed project result in the
displacement of people? X
(2) Will the project alter the employment
base of the Community? X
(3) Will the project alter the housing
needs of the community?
(4) Does the proposed project affect a
historical or archaelogical site? X
(5) Will the proposed project eliminate an
existing recreational use at the project
site? X
-2-
A$SESSSHW WORKS (continued)
ERC
Yes No Comments
(6) Does the proposed project decrease public
access to any public body of water or
recreational" area? X
C. Physical impact
(1) Does the project area serve as a habitat,
food source, nesting place, source of water,
etc. for rural or endangered wildlife or
fish species? X
(2) Are there any rare or endangered species
in the area? X
(3) Does the project result in significant
eaosion? X
1
(4) Is the proposed project in a recognized
flood plain? X
(5) Is the proposed project within 100 feet of a
known fault trace? X
(6) Is the proposed project in a location where
average ground slope is 30% or steeper? X
(7) Will the completed project cause onsite
generation of sound energy levels at the
property line to eased ambient level in the
immediate vicinity? X
(8) If a residential project, will future residents
be subjected to excessive noise and air
pollution levels? X
(9) Will the project involve the approved use,
storage, or disposal of hazardous materials? X
(10) Does the pro;;ect significantly change the
quality of air, water, or other natural
resources of the_ City? X
(11) Does the project significantly affect the
potential use extraction or conservation of
a scarce natural resource? X1.-
If any of the answers to the foregoing questions is "yes" and '_.t is still believed that
the proposed project will not significantly Off_ct the physical and social/cul.'iral
environment of the community, indicate the reasons below or on a separate sheet.
f
ASSESSMENT WnRKSUM (continued)
� a _
I certify that the above answers are trim and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief, and I understand that subsequent acti`�n to rescind any permit base:'.
•ipon this questionnaire may be possible if evidence is uncovered to the contrary.
;'gVn�atu=re of Applicant
i
-4-
•ENVZRomM". I. DOL'D.*3h''vTS - City of Cupertino W-2-73
• EA No. 21-EA-80
Appl. No. 15-Z-80
Date 4/2/80
ENVIRONrD��AL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, requires public agencies to
evaluate public and private projects to determine their potential impact on the environment.
This worksheet is intended to provide guidance for both you, the applicant, and City officials
in assessing a proposed project to determine whether it may or may not have a significant
Impact on the environment.
If, based upon the information provided below, the City, makes a determination that your
project may have a significant impact on the environment, you will be required to prepare
an Environmental Impact Report as provided by State law and tLe City of Cupertino's
Environmental Assessment requirements.
Detailed information regarding the environmental assessment procedure is available from
the Director of Planning and Development.
Name of Project Hunter Hill/Carolyn Gardens Prezone
Location North and South side of Stevens Creek Blvd. west of Foothill Blvd. (see attached map
Applicant City of Cupertino y
Address of applicant 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 Phone 252-4505
Zoning at Project Location Santa Clara C-,unty R1-10 and R2
Fee Paid ($25.00)'
General Description of Project
Prezoning approximately 27.8t acres from Santa Clara County R1-10 and .4t acres from Santa
Ulara County R2 to City of Cupertino RI-10 and .3t acres from Santa Clara County CN to
C'.ty of Cupertino CG.
Specific Details of the Project
1. Size of Site 28.5 acres
2. Intensity of Development
(a) If residential
(1) Number of units per gross acre
(2) Dwelling unit type Rental Ownership
(3) Number of bedrooms per unit type
-1-
• -ASSESS!'F WORRU T (continued)
(4) Percentage in area of building coverage
Percentage in area of recreational open space
(5) Parking required Parking proposed
(6) Expected sale price. or rental price of units or buildings
-(b) If cc=arcial, industrial or institutional
(1) Building square footage
.(2) Percentage of building coverage of site
(3) Estimate of maximum number of employees
(4) Parking required Parking proposed
luestioas related to potential impact of project
EEC
Yes No Comments
A. Primary General Plan considerations
(1) Is the project in violation of the City of
Cupertino`s adopted General Plan?
(2) Will the project burden public utilities
and services? X
(3) Is the project side outside of the Urban Service
Area of the City as defined by Santa Clara County
Local Agency Formation Commission?
a. Social/Cultural Impacts
(1) Will the proposed project result in the
displacement of people? X
(2) Will the project alter the employment
base of the Community? X
(3) Will the project alter the housing
needs of the community? X
(4) Does the proposed project affect a
historical or archaelogical site? X
(5) Will the proposed project eliminate an
existing recreational use at the project
site? X
-2-
ASSESSMENT WOR&SEEET (continued)
ERC
Yes No Comments
r
(6) Does the proposed project decrease public
access to any public body of water or
recreational area?
C. Physical Impact
(1) .Does the project area serve as a habitat,
food source, nesting place, source of water,
etc. for rural or endangered wildlife or
fish species? X
(2) Are there any rare or endangered species
in the area? g
(3) Does the project result in significant
erosion? g
(4) Is the proposed project in a recognized
flood plain? g
(5) Is the proposed project within 100 feet of a
known fault trace? x
(6) Is the proposed project in a location where
average ground slope is 30% or steeper? .�..
(7) Will the completed project cause onsite
geaPration of sound energy levels at the
property line to exeed ambient level in the
immediate vicinity? X
v
(8) If a residential project, will future residents
be subjected to excessive noise and air
pollution levels? g
(9) Will the project involve the approved use,
storage, or disposal of hazardous materials? R
(10) Does the project significantly change the
quality of air, water, or other uatural
resources of the-City? g
(11) Does the project significantly affect the
potential use extraction or conservation of
a scarce natural resource?
If any of the answers to the foregoing questions is "yes" and it is still believed that
the proposed project will not significantly effect the physical and social/cultural
environment of the community, indicate the reasons below or on a separate sheet.
c7�
ASSESSM= WORS.SM= (continued)
I certify that the above answers are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief, and I understand that subsequent action to rescfnd any permit based
upon this questionnaire may be possible if evidence is uncovered to the contrary.
gaature of Applicant
City of Cupertino
RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
April 8, 1980
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City
Council of the City of Cupertino on March 27, 1973, as amended, the following
described project was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee cf the
City of Cupertino on April 8, 1980 at which time the Committee determined
that the project does not have a significant impact on the _nvironment and
therefore is recommending to the decisionmaking body that a Negative Declaration
be filed.
Project Description and Location
Application 17-EA-80 Applicant: City of Cupertino (Creston Subdivision)
Location: Southeast a;;adrant of Highway 280 and Foothill
Boulevard.
Discretionary Action Request: Prezoning approximately 55
gross acres from Santa Clara County R1-10 (one family
residence 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot area) zone to
City of Cupertino RI-10 (Rasident'al, Single-family,
10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone and annexation
of said property into the City of Cupertino. The
subject property consists of that unincorporated area
commonly referred to as the Creston Subdivision.
Findings of Environmental Review Committee
The Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration since the project
is consistent with the General Plan and has no significant environmental impacts.
gP1a—m —es Ei. f.is1:
aaain� Direc%�r
r
I
City of Cupertino
'ECCMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIE14 COMMITTEE
• April 8, 1980
A3 provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City
Council of the City of Cupertino on March 27, 1973, as amended, the following
described project was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee of the
City of Cupertino on April 8, 1980 at which time the Committee determined
that the project does not have a significant impact on the environment and
therefo-e is recommending to the decisionmaking body that a Negative Declaration
be filed.
Project Description and Location
Application 19-EA-80 Applicant: City of Cupertino (Barranca Subdivision)
Location: Southwest gv.ndrant of Homestead Road and
Highway 85 and encompasses those unincorporated
parcels fronting on Barranca Drive, Hibiscus _
Drive, Hibiscus Court, Wallace Drive, Peninsular
Avenue, Caroline Drive and Maxine Avenue.
Discretionary Action_Request: -Prezoning approximately
29± gross acres from Santa Clara County R1-10 (one
family residence, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size)
zone to City of Cupertino R1-.10 (Residential, Single-
fam:'ly 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone and
annexation of said property into the City of Cupertino.
Findings of Environmental Review Committee
The Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration since the project
is consistent with the General Plan and has no significant environmental impacts.
awes If. disk
Planning Director
City of Cupertino
RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RUILU COMMITTEE
® April 8, 1980
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City
Council of the City of Cupertino ou. March 27, 1973, as amended, the following
described project was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee of the
City of Cupertino on April 8, 1980 at which time the Committee determined
that the project does not have a significant impact on the environment and
therefore is recommending to the decisionmaking body that a Negative Declaration
be filed.
Project Description and Location
Application, 21-EA-80 Applicant: City of Cupertino (Hunter Hill/Carolyn Gardens
Subdivision)
Location: SouLhvest quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard
and Foothill Boulevard no-therly of Stevens
Creek Boulevard between California Oak Way and Foothill Boulevard.
Discretionary Action Request: -Prezoning approximately
27.8± acres from Santa Clara County R1-10 (one family
residence, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone plus
.t acres from Santa Clara County R2 (two family
residence - duplex) to City of Cupertino R1-10 (Residential,
Single-family, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone and
.3± acres from Santa Clara County CN (Neighborhood
Commercial) to City of Cupertino CG (General Commercial)
zone and Annexation of said property into the City of
Cupertino.
Findings of Environmental Review Committee
The Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration since the project
is consistent with the General Plan and has no significant environmental impacts.
apes 11. .".isk
Pla:u.ing Director
BRC-ilk+
z..l'VfVIRORMENTAL REVIE-7i COMMITTEE
a April 8, 1980
Conferenc Room, City Hall
Members Pres t: Robert W. 8,uinlaa, City Manager
Bert Viskovich, Director of Public Works
James H. Sisk, Planning Director
Members Absent: Jo M. Gatto, Planning Commissioner
Barbara, Rogers, Councilperson
Convened at 12:15 p.m.
Ap ii.cation 16-EA-80 - David C. Thim an - Jse Permit
i
The applicants proposal is a use Pqrxit to construct an office building equaling -
approximately 3,000 sa. . ft. The �s�'� ct property equals approximately .5 of a
gross acre located on the north sae o Valley Green Drive approximately 150 ft.
westerly of North De Anza Boulevard in a (Planned Development with industrial,
commercial, residential ( -- dwelling uni*U per gross acre) intent) zoning district.
The Committee determined that the proposal is consistent with the General Plan and
would have no significant impacts on the environment.
Member Viskovic' moved to recommend the granting of�a Negative Declaration to the
decisionmakir;g body on the basis that the Committee finds no significant impacts
which have of already been addressed by the General Plan. Member Sisk seconded.
Motion carried 3-0-0-2
Apnlication 17-EA-80 - City of Cupertino (Creston Subdivision) -_Prezonin` and
Annexation
This request is a City initiated application to prezene approxi=. ately 55 gross
acres from Santa Clara County R1-10 (one Tamily residence 10,000 sq. ft . minim,.
lot area) zone to City of Cupertino R1-10 (Residential, Single-family, 10,000 so.
ft. minimum lot size) zone and annexation of said property into the City of
Cupertinr. The subject property consists, of that unincorporated area commonly referred to
as the _:reston Subdivision located in the southeast quadrant of Highway 280 and Foothil'-
Boulevard. It was notea that this is an existing subdivision and would have no signifi-
cant impacts on the environment.
Member Viskovich moved to recommend--the granting of a :Iegative Declaration to the
decisionmaking body on the basis that the Committee finds no significant impacts
which have not already been addressed by the General Plan.
Motion carried 2-0-1-2
Member Sisk abstained since he represented the City in this application.
Ri,-_.L4
• l
---avironment Review '�o=ittee Meeting of April 8, i98o /
Annlication 18-EA- ,,- Itsuc Uenaka - Use Permit
The applicant's propos is to construct an � ustrial b uildiag consisting of
approximately 32,000 sq. The subject",property equals approximately 2.2 acres
located on the west side of and-ley Dri" approximately 200 ft. southerly of
Mariani Avenue in a P (Plana Deve�ment with industrial, commercial, residential
(4-10 dwelling units per gross a intent) zoning district.
Member Sisk noted that the D ;ect i in the trip constraint area. The Committee
determined that the propo is consist t with the General Plan and would have no
significant impacts on a environment.
Member Viskovich ed to recommend the grants of a Negative Declaration to the
decisionmaking dy on the basis that the Commit a finds no significant impacts
which haven already been addressed by the Gene Plan. Memmber Sisk seconded.
Motion carried 3-0- 2
Annlication 19-EA-80 - City of Cupertino (3arranca Subdivision) - Prezoninw
This City-initiated request is to prezone approximately 29± gross acres from Santa
Clara County R1-10 (one family residence, 10,000 sq. ft. mimimum lot size) zone
to City of Cupertino Rl-10 (Residential, Single-family, 10,000 so. ft. min-mum
lot size) zone and annexation of said property into the City of Cupertino. Said
property is generally located in the southwest quadrant of Homestead Road and High-
way 85 and encompasses those unincorporated parcels fronting on Barrance Drive,
Hibiscus Driue, Hibiscus Court, Wallace Drive, Peninsular Avenue, Caroline Drive
and Maxine Avenue.
Member Sisk stated that this is an existing'subdivision. The Committee determined that
theproposal is consistent with the,-General Plan and would have no significant impacts
^n the environment.
".!ember Viskovich moved to recommend the granting of a Negative Declaration to
the decisionmakirg body or. the basis that the Com=ttee finds no significant impacts
which have not already been addressed by the General Plan.
Motion carried 2-0-1-2
Member Sisk abstained since he represented the City in this application.
Annlication 20-EA,-80 - rabio PrinciDi - Tentati•re MaD
This request is a tenta 've map to moth*---the approved building site for a pro-posed
single-family hcme. Said operty is-located on the west side of Regnart Road
at the beginning of what is only known as Regnarr Canyon approximately 700 ft.
south-westerly of Lindy Lane in
R1-120 (Residential, Single-family, 120,000 so. ft.
minimum lot size) zoning district.`
it wa.s the consensus o:f'the Ccmmittee tit this request is consistent with the
General Plan and has-'no significant impact on the environment.
Member Viskov' h moved to recommend the granting of a negative Declaration to the
decisionm,�lzg body on the basis that the Co=ittee finds no significant imDncts
Environmental ronmental Review. Committee Meeting-of April 8, 1980
which have not already bee readdressed by the General Plan.
Motion�-carried 3-0-0-2
Apn_lication 21-EA-80 - City of Cupertino (Hunter Hill/Carolyn Gardens Subdivision
Prezcn*
This application is a City initiated request to prezone approx=ately 27.8 acres
from Santa Clara County R1-10 (one family residence, 10,000 sq. ft. minimlrm lot
size) zone plus .h+ acre from Santa Clara County R2 (two family residence -
duplex) to City of Cupertino RI-10 (Residential, Single-family, 10,000 sq. f°:.
minimum lot size) zone; and .3± acre from Santa Clara County CN (Neighborhood Commercial)
to City of Cupertino CG (General Commercial) zone and annexation of said property into the
,,tty of Cupertino. Said property is generally locatt.d in the southwest quadrant of
Stevens Creek Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard and northerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard
between California Oak Way and Foothill Boulevard.
The Committee concurred that the project is in conformance with the General Plan
and determined there are no significant impacts on the environment.
Member Viskovich moved to recommend the granting of a N.egative Declaration to the
decisionmaking body on the basis that the Committee finds no significant impacts
which have not already been addressed by the General Plan.
Motion carried 2-0-1-2
`!ember Sisk abstained since he represented the City in this application.
Applica on 22-EA-80 -Cupertino Senior Da Services (St. Jude P,piscopai Church)
• -
'Rezoning and Use Permit "
The applicant request is to rezone approximately 3 acres from R1-10 (Residential,
Single-family, 000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) , Al-43 (A,, 1 cultsral, Residential,
43,000 sq. ft. min . um lot size) and R1-10ag (Residential, Single-family agricultural
use allowed, 10,000 s . ft. minimum lot size)zone to 3Q (Quasi-Public 3uilding)
zone and use permit to nduct religious ac-tivities including a church and school
and allow a day care prog for elderly persons. Said property is located on
the southeast corner of McC 'Ian Road and Stelling Road.
The Committee determined that th project is in conformance with the General Plan
and would have no significant impa� s on the environment.
Member Viskovich moved to recommend the ranting of a Negative Declaration to
the decisionmaking body on the ba?is that '-he Committee finds no significant impacts
which have not already been addressed by thA_\General Plan. Member Sisk seconded.
:Motion carried .5 0-0-2
application 25-EA-80 - Regna.-t Creek _states - mendtent to_Tentati-re `Sap
This request iS a tentative mar revision to 'nod"r she e.{hi-c—s and ndiy-C^.S
oI' approval relating `..o a recently approved fl',re -lot s Ddi-`�si on. Said proper-Y
is located on the north side of Crogrande Place apnrcximate2?0 ft. westerly of
Stelling Road.
f
1
L
1
Q41't it VISiv VK
�`1 �y.
�o
�P
41'+vr�
1 I' Nca �i vcr,� w rcq- ,I i t'4h `✓{
6
�� I.pLA'fICN MAP
1
L12-Zd f Z•IL Z7. I 'it2-IZ'ZI IO
'rig-12 �t-11-lb �pLIZ-2V- '�A2-12•Z} %JLIL�Z!o 34L-11'Z'f 'S4 ii� '/1 34L• L'yt3 !g
n NNE�IAYIUN•�PEC'�M.o.N6NYfi 70-35"
(T(,I�MLV j'GR MP�IENSE N.O•' l l✓ Y r— / �r.�Fi Yl VL-U D
N � v
S
N 0Kfki
p U �
F 9
' a i
� p
' Pr^rvUP09EC� Ar.INE�.tailGN
%G Y�it
� Gtsi cF cureNTt�o
I >vµT,1 Lc v
. GGTG'O>;�1 'St,191'1 `GALL t"stOp'
-�. s
at
HnjNTER HILL 80-25
This Site Specific Plan has been prepared in response to LAFCO planning
requirements for evaluating annexation proposals under the Municipal Organization
Act of 1977. This plan is based upon the Master Plan for services which was
approved by the Cupertino City Council on March 19', 1979.
The City of Cupertino has planned its services so as to provide for the entire
area and population within the perimeter city limits. Therefore, there is ample
capacity to extend services to each of the island areas. Islands are currently
receiving benefits in the form of access to services provided by Lire City.
Advantages gained by residents who annex to the City include: increased
traffic enforcement; increased level of code enforcement, traffic complaints
and request for traffic control devices; City maintenance of streets; increased
access to City recreation programs; shorter distance between residents and
government service center; increased government representation (vote as both
City and County resident, opportunity to serve on City commissions or boards,
opportunity to run for Council; improved efficiency in delivery of services;
this is an opportunity to annex without paying processing-"fees.
I. Fire Protection and Prevention Services
There will be no change in agency upon annexation. This area is presently
part of the Central Fire Protection District, as is Cupertino. Annexation
would not affect fire prevention and protection service or funding.
II. Police Protection
The area designated Hunter Hill/ Carolyn Gardens upon annexation, would
receive traffic enforcement from the Santa Clara County Sheriff 's Department.
One car, 60 hours, two cars each 40 hours; three sheriff's vehicles patrol
Cupertino 140 hours per week for traffic enforcement. The Santa Clara County
Sheriff' s Department currently provides other protection services to the islan,'
area. This would not change.
Currently, the California Highway Patrol responds to accidents and special
needs on unincorporated roads and highways. Routine patrol on these roadways
was found to be poor economically. Patrol and enforcement is provided in areas
where such needs are clearly identified and called to their attention.
Cupertino's Code Enforcement Officer also responds to complaints of citizens
within the City. Annexed areas would have traffic and code enforcement extended
to them without lowering level of service to current City residents. The
Sheriff's services are funded through the General Fund.
III. Library Service
There will, be no change in library service. No library expansion or re-
organization will be required uport annexation of an island.
Page 2
IV. Parks and Recreation
The nearest park to Hunter Hill/Carolyn Gardens is the Monta Vista
Park and Community Center on Voss Avenue. The City has budgeted $150,000
for redevelopment of the park during the 1980-81 fiscal year. Plans
• enclude a parking area and neighborhood play equipment. The existing turf
and approximately 15,000+ sq, ft. of the communicy, center will be retained.
Supervised recreation programs for all ages will be conducted in the center.
Recreation and park facilities are available regardless of residency. However,
non-residents pay an additional $2.00 fee for programs held at City owned
facilities.
V. Streets - Substantially Developed or Developing Territory
Except in cases of further development or redevelopment, no upgrading of
facilities will be required. The City will maintain all public: streets as
required. Service level and funding will be in accordance with the Master
Plan for Services.
VI. Street Sweeping
The City of Cupertino provides regular street sweeping on all curbe-, and
guttered streets within the City. This island does not have curbs and gutters;
therefore, sweeping will be done once or twice a year, the service level
currently provided by Santa Clara County.
The City requires no improvements to be made because of annexation.
Municipal street sweeping is financed from the general fund and gas tax.
VII. Water Supply
This area is currently served by the City of Cupertino .later Utility. No
change cf agency or races will occur with annexation. Refer to Master Plan
for Services for City policy regarding hookup, the available capacity, and
costs of financing.
VII'. Gas and Electricit.v
Annexation will not affect Pacific Gas an"' Flectric Company rate structure.
IY. Garbage Collection
Los Altos Garbage Company provides rLfuse collection to unincorporated areas
in Santa Clara County at a rate of $4.50/2 cars. The same service is avail-
able to Cupertino residents for a rate of $3.50/�* cans for front yard pickup.
Cupertino residents also receive a free Spring and Fall pickup.
Page 3
X. Sanitary Sever
Service is provided by the Cupertino Sanitary District. This area is located
within Zone 2. Sewers are available and the area has been assessed previously;
annexation will cause no changes. Refer to Master Plan for Services for user
charge and capacity.
XI. Storm Drains
This island has surface drain into the storm drains along Stevens Creek
Boulevard, Foothill Boulevard, and Alcalde Avenue.
Annexation will not mean that storm drains are required. If residents andic,.
homeowners request storm drains or if storm drains, at some future point,
are deemed necessary to ensure safety, they will be financed by property owners
and/or the Master Storm Drain fund.
XII. Flood Control
The City of Cupertino participates in the National Flood Insurance Program.
This area is not in a flood plain.
XIII. Street Lighting
The unincorporated parts of the HuntE- Hill/Carolyn Gardens island does not
have street lights and the City will not require them as a result of annexa-
tion. if lighting is desired by area citizens, installation may be funded
by the property owne:-s.
XIV. Other Services
Cable television is not available in Cupertino at this time. However, several
proposals for this seri,ice have b.-,en received and reviewed and will be presented
to Council at their meeting of Tuesday, July 8, 1980.
XV. Special Assessment Districts
Special Districts within the area of proposes annexation include:
Cupertino Union School District
Fremont Union High School District
Foothill Community College District
Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District
Santa Clara Valley Slater District
Central Fire Protection District
Cupertino Sanitary District
XVI. Fiscal Implications
Under Proposition 13 the basic tax rate for all areas is $4.00 per hundred
dollars assessed valuation. The City has an additional .023 per S100
assessed valuation for 1980-81 for Park and City Hall Bonds. Other agencies
bonded indebtedness, ?.f any, would apply regardless of annexation.
1'`►.�'e 4
Loss Homeowner's Citv's Tax
,Market Value ,%ssessed Value -.xemption ($1750) �.023/$100 AV)
$ 60,000 $15,000 $13,250 S3. 05
40,000 20,000 18, 250 4. 20
100,()00 '25,000 23,250 5.35
120,0019 30,000 28,250 6. 50
The City requires every person engaged in business within Cupercino to pay a
license tax of $25.00 per calendar year unless otherwise specified.
Every person engaged in a business specified below sha1.1 pay a license tax as
set fortis. The license tax shall apply to each calendar year.
Apartment house or group residences--- - --- ---S 12.00
Plus S1.00 for each unit
Auto court, motor court or inn ----------------- 12.00
Plus $2.00 for each unit
Automobile sales (new) including repairs, services, - 50.00
accessories
Aggregates (Quarry Materials)--------------------- 100.00
Barber shop---------- __----- ----- -- 15. 00
Plus $5.00 for each employee over one
Bicycle and cyclery sales and repairs ------------- 25.00
Beauty shop-- ----- - -- ------- 15.00
Plus $5.00 for each employee
Hotel ----------------- 25.00
Plus $1.00 for each room
Industrial or light manufacturing----- ------------ 100.00
Mortician— ------ ---- 40. 00
Oil Companies-------------- 30.00
Planing will-------------- -- 25.00
Including lumber sales -- --- -- 50.00
Rooming house -------- - --- ---- 15. 00
Plus $1.00 for each unit
Restaurant-- 2 5.
Including creamery---- - ---- ~-- --- 37 . _
Shoe shine-------_----------- ----- - 5.00
Theater: Less than 500 seats ------- 100.00
More than 499 seats -- 150.00
Tractor sales, repairs, service, accessories -- 50. 00
Trailer. court----------------- 25. 00
Plus S1. 00 for each trailer space
Upholsterer -------- ---- ---- -- 25. 00
Vegetable truck making retail sales---- -------- 40.00
Amusement concession, when not connected with anv---------- 5.00 per day
fair, carnival or circus ; for each separate with a minirx=
activity requiring individual payment for of 550.00
participaticn _
Page 5
Auctioneer (excluding any real estate auctioneer---------- 50.00
whose business is limited exclusively to
auctioning real estate and whose permanent
place of business is outside the City who
shall be issued a license without payment
of the fee)
Billiard, poolroom or bowling alley------ 50.00
Bowling game, bat baJ.l or other similar device,------------ 15.0r
equiprseac or entertainment
Dance, public— 5.00 per day
with a cinimum
of S25.00
Dog or cat breeding or boarding kennels---------------- 100.00
Dog or cat E:o s p i t al----__—_____—__________—____—_—___g 25.00
Fire, bankruptcy or wreck 100.00
Itinerant vendors of goods u: srrvicf's------------------ 100.00
Handbilling---- -------_._---------..,___— —_—_-- 120.00
Junk collector or dealer, per vehicle------.--------- 1.00 per .day
Junk dealer------ ----- ------- -_-- 50.00
Occult science (including astrology, ralmistry,------------- 1.00 per day
prenology, life reading, furtime telling,
carto-ancy, .clairvoyance, crystal gazing,
hypnotization, mediumship, prophecy, augury,
divination, magic or when the person who
conducts same demands or receives a fee for
the exercise or exhibition of his art therein,
either directly or indirectly, or as a gift or
donation, or who charges admission)
Parade permits— -------- ------ 10.00
P.wnb coke r---- -- ------ — ------ 100.00
Private patrol--- — -- — --- --------- 25.00
Riding academy, club, corral or school •---•— 25.00
Shooting gallery--- --------- ---------- 25.00
Skating rink----- --- ------ ----. 100.00
Solicitor-------•-- ---- ----- ----._.- —__ 5 0.0 0
Used motor vehicle dealer------------------ ----• •----. 25.00
Wrecking. yard--- ----- ----------- 100.00
In addition, the City levies fees for certain services, including the processing
of planning applications, building permits, a plan checking fee, a charge for
blueprinting and other engineering services.
s
Page 6
!NII. Land Use Restulations
On June 17, 1980 this area was prezoned City of Cupertino R1-10 (Residential,
Single family, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) zone and City of Cupertino
CG (General Commercial).
Any parcel with an existing land use that is non-conforming to City zoning
regulations and/or the General Plan will be considered a, legal non-conforming
use under the following circumstances:
- The land must have been developed prior to City zoning.
- Land use must have been consistent with County zoning at the time of
development.
Incremental improvements are allowed up to 25% of the assessed value of the
structure. Any improvement in excess of 25% A.V. will require consistency
with City zoning regulations and the General Plan.
-d
HUt'TER KILL - ISLAND NO. 7
All that certain real property situate in the County of Santa Clara. State of
California. more particularly described as followst
Beginning at the northerly line of Permanence Road as shown on chat certain Record
of Survey, Property of Phillip Lombardo, the flap whiph was filed for record on
June 20, 1949, in Book 23 of Maps ac Page 22, Santa Clara County Records, said
point also being along that certain parcel of land annexed to the City of Cupertino
on October 18, 1971. by Resolution No. 3138 entitled, "?ermanence ' )-3B".
Thence S. 89a 39' E. along said northerly line of ?ermanente Road for a distance of
951.19 feet to a point on the westerly line of that terrain parcel of land annexed
co the City of Cupertino on August 16. 1977, by Resolution No. 4338 entitled,
"Permanence 77-7", said line also described as the westerly line in that certain
Deed to Catarino S. Hernandez, ec us, which deed was filed for record on June
1962. ii. Book 5596 of Official Records at Page 34, Santa Clara County Records;
Thence north along last said westerly line for a distance of 140.00 feet to a
point on the southerly line of that certain parcel of land annexed to the City-of
Cupertino on Dececber 9. 1969, by Resolution No. 1914 entitled, "'forth Foothill
69-8 thence N. 890 39' W. along last said southerly line for a distance of
950. 54 feet to a point on the easterly line of that certain parcel of land annexed
to the City of Cupertino on Septe=ber 7, 1971, by Resolution ' o. 3118 entitled,
"?err..anence 70-2A", said line also being the easterly line as described in chat
certain Deed to the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, which deed was filed For record
on June 11, 1946, in Book 1350 of Official Records at Page 485, Santa Clara Count:
Records; thence S. 00 16' W. along last said easterly line for a distance of 1-0.00
feet co the Point of Beginning;
Containing approximately 3.06 Acres more or less.
i d.P4 342-12.-21. 342-12-22. 3-2-12-23, 34.2-12-24, 342-12-25, 342-12-26, 342-12-27,
342-12-28, 342-12-36, 342-12-37, 342-12-38
bib\ t4 fig?• ,�1N�,� �
pkdYd� 7 ob stir
4Z. t
kA
r
, In Q.b4' "14
• .A Y �� O,.iOt Y,�,�,7h+ y
Fyc�
ono & �
� z
r 3y`h
s
HUNTER HILT.
ti
HUNTER HILL/CAROLYN GARDENS 80-25
All that certain real property situate •in the County of Santa Clara, State of
California, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northerly line of Permanente Road as shown on that certain Record
of Survey, Property of Phillip Lombardo, the Map which was filed for record on
June 20, 1949, in Book 23 of Maps at Page 22, Santa Clara County Records, said
point also being along that certain parcel of land annexed to the City of Cupertino
on October 18, 1971, by Resolution No. 3138 entitled, "Permanente 70-3B".
Thence S. 890 39' E. along said northerly line of Permanente Road for a distance of
951.19 feet to a point on the westerly line of that certain parcel of land annexed
to the City of Cupertino on August 16, 1977, by Resolution No. 4538 entitled,
"Permanente 77-7", said line also described as the westerly line in that certain
Deed to Catarino S. Hernandez, et ux, which deed was filed for record on June 1,
1962, in Book 5596 of Official Records at Page 34, Santa: Clara County Records;
Thence north along last said westerly line for a distance of 140.00 feet to a
point on the southerly line of that certain parcel of land annexed to the City of
Cupertino on December 9, 1969, by Resolution No. 1914 entitled, "North Foothill
69-8"; thence N. 890 .39' W. along last said southerly line for a distance of
950.54 feet to a point on the easterly line of that certain parcel of land annexed
to the City of Cupertino on September 7, 1971, by Resolution No. 3118 entitled,
"Permanente 70-3A", said line also being the easterly line as described in that
certain Deed to the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, which deed was filed for record
ca June 11, 1946, in Book 1350 of Official Records at Page 485, Santa Clara County
Records; thence S. 00 16' W. along last said easterly line for a distance of 140.00
feet to the Point of Beginning;
Containing approximately 3.06 Acres more or less.
APN 342-12-21, 342-12-22, 342-12-23, 342-12-24, 342-12-25, 342-12-26, 342-12-27,
342-12-28, 342-12-36, 342-12-37, 342-12-38
s+tj. o.1-
cc
IN
i
H 40 N
T
0
,,fit -OL 3iN3tQVV4 � „ N01I-V �NNV ®/:�� ^��a/ G
1.k w 1 ►.�.17
gel
s
P
ti
1Y
d *.